Them's fighting words

[8wGremlin]

How drastic a change would it be for any class that gets fighting style to be able to pick any fighting style listed.

So a Paladin could if they wanted pick Archery etc etc.

Thoughts?

[DracoKnight]

How drastic a change would it be for any class that gets fighting style to be able to pick any fighting style listed.

So a Paladin could if they wanted pick Archery etc etc.

Thoughts?

I'd totally play a TWF Paladin :smallbiggrin:

[Talamare]

It's unlikely to BREAK the game...

Since basically anyone can dip Fighter to pick up whatever Fighting Style they want. They can even double dip and pick up one of the strongest free actions available.

but it might cause some slight power shifts

[pwykersotz]

I see no reason not to allow it myself. Though neither I nor my table crunch numbers hard enough to see if it breaks down.

[MeeposFire]

Honestly I think the style choices per class were done more for theme than for "balance". THe only fighting style that would be an issue off hand is a UA one and it is probably too good to really be used as a fighting style for anybody (tunnel fighting).

[Waterdeep Merch]

Great weapon fighting might do wonders for the ranger. Their melee abilities actually synergize better with great weapons, especially hunters. I don't think anyone's going to argue that protection is broken.

TWF's good for paladins that want the ability to go ham and unload smites. It doesn't add a whole lot of extra damage and isn't something you'd want to be doing in every fight to begin with, so I'd say it's still balanced compared to other styles. Archery is un-synergistic with a paladin's abilities (can't smite at range, auras almost require being in the thick of things), letting them pick it isn't even remotely broken.

I see no balance issues. Go for it!

[stoutstien]

that was one of the first house rules I implemented. That and I went and made the weapon Mastery feat include the total list so somebody want to just a fighting style that didn't need to dip.

[MeeposFire]

Great weapon fighting might do wonders for the ranger. Their melee abilities actually synergize better with great weapons, especially hunters. I don't think anyone's going to argue that protection is broken.

TWF's good for paladins that want the ability to go ham and unload smites. It doesn't add a whole lot of extra damage and isn't something you'd want to be doing in every fight to begin with, so I'd say it's still balanced compared to other styles. Archery is un-synergistic with a paladin's abilities (can't smite at range, auras almost require being in the thick of things), letting them pick it isn't even remotely broken.

I see no balance issues. Go for it!

Even if I was a two handed ranger I would be honest I would still take defensive or even better mariner if it is allowed. Two handed style is just not that great IMO and just for me I really dislike rerolling damage rolls with a chance of dealing less damage than the initial. That really grinds my gears.

[stoutstien]

I've been working on a complete rework of the fighting styles hints another post I had about trying to get the protection style up to Snuff. Archery and duelist form my bar then try to bring all the other ones up to. Honestly dual whield just needs a rework from the ground up. I mean would it really break the game if they already have the modifier for their off hand without the style?

[Waterdeep Merch]

Even if I was a two handed ranger I would be honest I would still take defensive or even better mariner if it is allowed. Two handed style is just not that great IMO and just for me I really dislike rerolling damage rolls with a chance of dealing less damage than the initial. That really grinds my gears.
It's not a big jump in damage (about 1.3 damage on average with a greatsword, .8 with a greataxe), but it also evens out your average a lot. It's also the only fighting style that amplifies with a critical hit, adding its statistical benefit to all dice thrown this way.

The chances of you doing less damage than you initially have is really low- you must roll a 2, then reroll it into a 1. The odds on that happening on any given attack on a d6 are 1/36 or about 2.8% chance for the 2d6 on a greatsword, and on a d12 it's 1/144 or .69% than for a greataxe (one of it's oft-neglected benefits). It seems scarier when you've already rolled a 2, but even then it's a mere 16.6% chance that you'll do worse (8.3% for d12), versus a 66.6% chance you'll do better (83.3% for d12).

Not to poopoo defense, it's great on great weapon rangers. Mariner's literally just a better version for them.

[Requilac]

Even if I was a two handed ranger I would be honest I would still take defensive or even better mariner if it is allowed. Two handed style is just not that great IMO and just for me I really dislike rerolling damage rolls with a chance of dealing less damage than the initial. That really grinds my gears.

I dislike the great weapon fightin style too, but my main issue is the amount of unnecessary rolling involved, not the possibility of re-rolling damage and getting a lower number. If you are wielding a maul or great-sword that can only happen if you roll a 2 on the damage die and the re-roll turns out to be a 1, but that has a less than 3% chance of happening. A level 20 fighter that uses action surge to attack twice in the same turn has a chance of making a total of 40 dice rolls in one round (assuming they are wielding a great-sword or maul, every attack hits and they Always score a 1 or 2 on the damage dice). And aside form that the writing of great-weapon fighting also disincentivize the use of two-handed reach weapons and great-axes, as Great weapon fighting is far more superior when using mauls or great-swords as they have a much higher chance of rolling a 1 or 2.

Edit: oh, did I forget to mention that said fighter could also take the dual wielder feat to add more to it? How you may ask? It is rather simple actually. Using dual wielder they free one hand on the two-handed weapon and use the other hand to draw and attack with another one-handed weapon (unfortunately, this is legal, as releasing a hand on a weapon only takes a free action and the two-handed property only states that “this weapon requires two hands when you attack with it). That means they roll 43 times now.

Edit 2: the party wizard than casts haste on the fighter, allowing them to roll 48 times. nevermind, we already used our bonus action

Edit 3: a higher level wizard casts wish and requests that the fighter be able to take the attack action again. They now roll an extra 20 times, resulting in 63 dice rolls in one round.

Edit 4: the cleric uses divine intervention to request that the fighter can attack again. 83 dice rolls!

Edit 5: the cleric somehow compels an opponent to step out of the reach of the fighter and now 87 dice have now been rolled.

Edit 6: this continues until the DM brings back negative damage rules.

[MeeposFire]

It's not a big jump in damage (about 1.3 damage on average with a greatsword, .8 with a greataxe), but it also evens out your average a lot. It's also the only fighting style that amplifies with a critical hit, adding its statistical benefit to all dice thrown this way.

The chances of you doing less damage than you initially have is really low- you must roll a 2, then reroll it into a 1. The odds on that happening on any given attack on a d6 are 1/36 or about 2.8% chance for the 2d6 on a greatsword, and on a d12 it's 1/144 or .69% than for a greataxe (one of it's oft-neglected benefits). It seems scarier when you've already rolled a 2, but even then it's a mere 16.6% chance that you'll do worse (8.3% for d12), versus a 66.6% chance you'll do better (83.3% for d12).

Not to poopoo defense, it's great on great weapon rangers. Mariner's literally just a better version for them.

All true but even so it is the only style that can make you deal less damage and is the only one that only can up your average. The other ones also increase your actual maximums (AC, damage, attack) which also increases your average but two handed only improves the average. That is why I am not a fan of it. It is not useless and if you want to use two handed weapons and eke out every little bit of potential damage out of it then it works but for me it just is not impressive enough for me to take.

[stoutstien]

My great weapon fighting style just adds a d4 but only with the primary side of the weapon so no added dice on polearm mastery. A tad more swingy than a flat plus to damage

[Waterdeep Merch]

All true but even so it is the only style that can make you deal less damage and is the only one that only can up your average. The other ones also increase your actual maximums (AC, damage, attack) which also increases your average but two handed only improves the average. That is why I am not a fan of it. It is not useless and if you want to use two handed weapons and eke out every little bit of potential damage out of it then it works but for me it just is not impressive enough for me to take.
That's fair. Frankly, I prefer the flat +1 AC as well, as that's a statistic that is much harder to raise and is more likely to save your character's life. I don't usually use great weapons outside of barbarians either, who don't get access to fighting styles anyway.

I'd probably take the +1 AC on a polearm fighter/paladin/ranger as well, since I'm probably doing that as part of a PAM/Sentinel tank build.