Versatile Weapon Fighting Style

Riffing off of a fighting style I posted in a different thread, I figured I would present a different version here. Notes on my design decisions will follow. This fighting style would be available to any class that grants fighting styles:


[sblock=NOTES

• First, some words about the intent of this fighting style. An astute observer will note that this fighting style does not actually require versatile weaponry for its use. Versatile Weapon Fighting is intended to encourage the use of versatile weapons by providing damage and defense comparable to other styles while synergizing with feats, other styles, and other class features without raising the maximum damage that those other options provide and without providing a defense bonus at no cost. And, also, to make spears and quarterstaves more attractive to martial types.
  
  
• Why would I want this style to synergize with other styles? With the trade-off costs inherent in picking up multiple fighting styles, why not? It is true that we have not (yet) seen (from WotC) any styles with overlapping damage benefits, but, in theory, at least, it should be possible to allow for such overlap to exist without increasing power beyond that represented by the trade-off spent in acquiring it. I'll explore the implications of Versatile Weapon Fighting's damage bonus in depth later.
  
  As for the AC bonus, Defense Style + Mariner already provides the ability to get a +2 AC with two styles. A theoretical +3 AC from three styles seems unlikely to be worth the trouble of attaining it.
  
  I will explore why I do not feel such synergies are problematic, but, if the idea doesn't sit well with folk, it is a simple matter to prohibit it by adding a clause that specifies that in order for the style's benefits to be gained, a versatile weapon must be used and may only be wielded two-handed, or one-handed with a second hand left free. This doesn't completely remove the overlap with the Duelist style, but does exclude the shield-wielding dualist. One could argue that the the synergy in such a situation is well-paid for by the AC gap.
  
  
• Let's look at Great Weapon Fighting + Versatile Weapon Fighting. First of all, this combination adds no damage to either one-handed or two-handed attacks. In fact, higher damage from heavy weapons is specifically excluded (as is the bonus damage from the Great Weapon Master feat). All you get is a situational AC bonus out of the deal. The only reason you would even want both of these fighting styles over Great Weapon Fighting + Defensive styles is if you actually intend to switch between one-hand and two-hand attacks. And don't like other combinations more.
  
  
• Okay. How about Two-Weapon Fighting + Versatile Weapon Fighting? This, at low levels, will boost the damage of a dual-wielder notcably. At higher levels, as extra attacks and extra bonus action attack options enter play, the value drops off, although not as much as without Versatile Weapon Fighting. I will point out that this combination requires a two-level dip into Ranger or Paladin, so Extra Attack and all non-variant-human ASIs will be delayed by at least two levels.
  
  Note that the AC bonus provided by the Dual Wielder feat and that provided by Versatile Weapon Fighting style are derived from mutually exclusive circumstances (unless the character in question has at least three functional hands). What the combination does do, however, is bump all successful non-crit attacks by 2 damage. Keep that in mind, as I discuss the damage potential of Two-Weapon Fighting + Versatile Weapon Fighting.
  
  Because Two-Weapon Fighting is at its strongest at low-levels, I'm going to assume a relevant attribute modifier to attack and damage of between +3 and +4. Let's say, +3.5. In addition, I will assume two attacks are made in a turn. Also, because I am only exploring damage potential, I will assume that all attacks hit.
  
  The dual-wielder does 6+3.5+6+3.5+other sources of damage. That's a solid 19 damage every turn at level 3, minimum. Since it will be useful to compare this number with another low-level high damage option, Great Weapon Master's damage bonus (which can't be used with Versatile Weapon Master) has the potential to deal up to 25.5 per hit and (with a greatsword) an average of 20.5 (21.3 with Great Weapon Fighting) per hit. Of course, the -5 penalty to hit weighs more at low levels, so take that into account.
  
  Without Versatile Weapon Fighting, that 19 + other sources represents a ceiling. The average being 14 and the floor being 9. And that's possible at level 1.
  
  Also available at level 1: dual-wielding with Versatile Weapon Fighting, but without Two-Weapon Fighting. Here, the damage output is 15.5, a mere 1.5 points above Two-Weapon Fighting's average and a full 3.5 points below its maximum.
  
  
• Probably the most damaging synergy (in the long run), comes out of Dueling + Versatile Weapon Fighting styles. As previously mentioned, the AC bonus is inferior to using a shield, but a single low-level attack will do 8+3.5+2 (13.5) damage. When the attack attribute gets maxed, that becomes 8+5+2 (15). It gets better with extra attacks, but, remember, the combination is not possible (without going high level champion) without delaying those crucial extra attacks by 2 levels. Note that even the average of Great Weapon Master's damage potential--assuming a hit--is still 7 points higher (7.8 with Great Weapon Fighter).
  
  Dueling Style without Versatile Weapon Fighting keeps the same maximum as the two together have, but has an average of 10 damage per hit at low-level and 11.5 per hit with the attack attribute maxed. The floor is 6.5 and 8, respectively.
  
  Versatile Weapon Fighting without Dueling style will do 11.5 to 13 points of damage per hit, which is only 1.5 points higher than Dueling style's average and, of course, 2 points below its maximum.
  
  
• Whirlwind Attack + Versatile Weapon Fighting. At first glance, this looks to be a huge damage bump to the already potent-looking Whirlwind Attack. And it is, potentially (although, again, the maximum stays the same). The thing about Whirlwind Attack, however, is that, no matter which side of the "is/is not a single attack that does not/does allow movement in between targets" divide you are on, Whirlwind Attack's utility is highly dependent upon circumstances.
  
  In order to be more useful than an Attack Action, you must have:
  
  a) Multiple enemies within 5 feet at the moment of attack or sufficiently grouped together without interposing blocking, hindering, or hazardous terrain such that multiple enemies can be reached (depending on your interpretation of Whirlwind Attack) and
  
  b) those multiple enemies that can be attacked are each previously sufficiently weakened by AoEs or are each sufficiently weak enough out of the gate to drop in one hit.
  
  In these cases, Whirlwind Attack + Versatile Weapon Fighting is very nice, indeed. In all other cases, it would be better to Volley from safety, or focus fire with an Attack Action to drop a foe. And, note, also, that Wirlwind Attack will generally have diminishing returns as a fight progresses--and if it doesn't, that either means you are facing limitless hordes, or you really should be focusing fire!
  
  
• Why can simple versatile weapon users take advantage of both bonuses in one round? And why can't martial weapon users? Well, actually, martial weapon users can, up until the point where they make a one-hand attack. This means, for instance, that Versatile Weapon Fighting warriors may use a versatile martial weapon to attack at 1d10 + whatever during their own turns and gain +1 AC until they use an off-turn reaction to attack someone one-handed (say, with Sentinel).
  
  Limiting the AC bonus for non-simple weapons keeps things in check; you can't have that AC bonus without giving up some damage output--namely, 2 points per attack (the exact amount Dueling style would add, as it happens. And Dueling, of course, allows for the use of a shield.)
  
  With a martial versatile weapon (and a free hand), a combatant who doesn't do as described above may choose to make a 1d10 +ability mod attack (min. 4.5 to 6/ avg. 9 to 10.5/ max 13.5 to 15) per hit and gain +1 AC (no better than the Defensive style) or do a flat 11.5 to 13 damage with no AC bonus. The trade-off, here, is a higher ceiling on damage + better defense vs. a high consistent damage option.
  
  The simple versatile weapon user's choice is (appropriately) simpler. Do 1d8+ability mod (min. 4.5 to 6/ avg. 8 to 9.5/ max. 11.5 to 13) or a flat 9.5 to 11 per hit. And get a +1 AC bonus either way.
  
  Compare this with a shield-wearing Dueling style warrior's 1d8+2+ability mod damage (min. 6.5 to 8/ avg. 10 to 11.5/ max. 13.5 to 15) per hit + a +2 AC bonus. Numerically, this is clearly superior, but such is the price of versatility (and the ability to synergize).

[/sblock]

That's way too fiddly for my tastes.

Why not just say "when using a versatile weapon with two hands, you can reroll any dice that come up as a 1 (like gwf, but less powerful here), and while using a versatile weapon in one hand, gain +1 damage? (half the bonus that dueling gives you)"

Also, the maximize die thing seems kinda op for a fighting style, imo.

the Jester said:

That's way too fiddly for my tastes.

Click to expand...

It really only reads that way. In actual play, it would look like this:

If I am wielding a martial weapon, do I attack 1-handed or 2-handed? If 1-handed, max weapon damage on most hits, that + 1dWeapon on crits. If 2-handed, get +1AC.

This fighting style is no more complicated to use in play than the Protection style. And, if you're using a simple weapon, your choice is even simpler: maximize a small die or don't maximize a slightly larger die.

Note, also, that the specification that the die is maximized after the roll is made exists to enable the attacker to pick out which dice to reroll when multiple dice are involved. Practically speaking, the damage from most 1-hand attacks wouldn't need to be rolled at all, because multiple dice won't usually feature.

AlmirEldignor said:

Why not just say "when using a versatile weapon with two hands, you can reroll any dice that come up as a 1 (like gwf, but less powerful here), and while using a versatile weapon in one hand, gain +1 damage? (half the bonus that dueling gives you)"

Click to expand...

Well, broadly, neither of those options is worth a fighting style, even if you get to choose between them. In the two-hand case, the average bonus damage per hit for a 2d6 weapon (not versatile, but usable, as written) is less than +0.5. For all other weapons, it drops off sharply to less than +0.25 per hit. These numbers are terrible for a fighting style. In the best case scenario, it will take two hits just to almost make up a single point of the damage bonus that the under-par Two-Weapon Fighting grants. And all the other option gives you is half of Dueling style.

More specifically, though, I didn't want to have the one fighting style completely obsolete the other and I also wanted to actually encourage versatile weapon choice (and, further, to encourage otherwise sub-optimal choices, like spears and quarterstaves). These are both features that I don't see in your example. If you want more insight into my reasoning, I go into great depth in the collapsible "Notes" section of the original post.

Also, the maximize die thing seems kinda op for a fighting style, imo.

Click to expand...

I also covered this in (excruciating) detail in the original post. Including many rigorous comparisons between several different options. I won't rehash the numbers, but I will point to a general trend: the consistent maximum damage of non-critical hits that the style provides is only slightly higher than the averages provided by other styles and that is offset by those styles' noticeably higher maximums. In general, if you only want to do a lot of melee damage, you still want to go GWF+GWM and if you only want to deal decent melee damage while tanking, Dueling is still the better option. Versatile Weapon Fighting merely lets you hang with both.

Rune said:

It really only reads that way. In actual play, it would look like this:

If I am wielding a martial weapon, do I attack 1-handed or 2-handed? If 1-handed, max weapon damage on most hits, that + 1dWeapon on crits. If 2-handed, get +1AC.

This fighting style is no more complicated to use in play than the Protection style.

Click to expand...

That's clearly a matter of opinion. Multiple choice points, multiple things to keep track of- yeah, it's way too fiddly for my taste, just based on the fiddliness of feats, powers and such during 4e. I've come to learn that things that are too complex are just things that my players lose track of. Having to remember "I can use my reaction to help my pals" is far easier for many players than keeping track of a series "If-then" statements.

My point is, there aren't multiple things to keep track of and it isn't a series of multiple choices in play. It's one choice. And it's the exact same one that players already face by having a versatile weapon, in the first place.

If you already only use versatile weapons one way (most probably do), this style won't change that; you can still do that.

If you already switch between uses with versatile weapons, this style won't change that, either; you can still do that, too.

I suspect that a large part of the impression of fiddliness comes out of the last clause, which, as written, does allow for martial versatile weapon users to make an extra tactical decision (when, during a round, to switch from 2-handed to 1-handed). This is, by design, easily ignored (or easily pre-determined before play). It exists for two reasons: to reward simple weapons with simple effectiveness, and to reward martial weapon users with the entirely optional option of an extra tactical decision.

Fiddly, to me, would be a game element that asks for a player to make calculations, or keep track of things, or make multiple decisions during play. Versatile Weapon Fighting doesn't do any of those things (not even, really, outside of play). In all cases, this style's use can be as simple as the choice to pick up a versatile weapon and wield it already is.

It would be possible to come up with a fighting style applied static bonus that to all uses of a versatile weapon across the board (say, +half proficiency damage per hit (so, from +1 to +3) and a +1AC vs. melee attacks--that would probably stack okay with Defensive and GWF and Dueling. And Mariner. TWF is irrelevant until we start talking about feats, because there are no versatile light weapons); that would be simpler. It doesn't take anything away from the choice that a versatile weapon user already faces.

But, as I think I said at the outset (and, if I didn't, I'm saying it now), one of my design goals is to actually highlight and reward the versatility of a versatile weapon. And, especially (but not exclusively), the (thus far, probably rare) versatile weapons user who chooses to keep one hand free (and, thereby, make use of that versatility). After all, the very nature of a versatile weapon--the very point of one--is that, at some point, you have a choice to make. If the choice is between two things that are essentially the same, the choice is not meaningful.