On GWF and a versatile fighting style - Page 3
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50
  1. #21
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Jose/Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    15,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Toledo View Post
    What does that leave fighters if you take away their abilities to damage? ...
    In short, leave the fighters something that makes them great. They don't get high level spells or super nova strike capabilities. Just let them hit pretty hard (but not smite or assassin hard) when they use the tools they have (maneuvers, fighting spirit, familiars positioning themselves, etc.).
    Wow, when you put it that way, the fighter sounds, not at all great.
    XP Xeviat gave XP for this post

  2. #22
    Member
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)



    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Laurefindel View Post
    Nah, I moved away from the bonus-action power attack as soon as I got to the berserker barbarian, which is literally the first class/subclass presented in the PHB!

    It never was about hate; it was an exploration on approaching the Two-Weapon Fighting conundrum (which cannot do any of the things you mentioned above) from a different angle. (BTW, your Crossbow Expert ranger is also dependent on its BA, as it basically is TWF for ranged weapons). But posting here usually triggers new ideas, or at least brings me further, aside, or above my original train of thoughts.

    Nevertheless, in the present set-up, other combat styles have a hard time competing with GWM (and its little brother Sharpshooter), partly because it specifically doesn't monopolize your bonus action.
    I was just joking about the hater business, hope that came across well.


    I understand about the concerns for GWM and sharpshooter (which is actually the big brother when the Archery style is picked). The one handed close combat weapons (including the versatile ones) can't compete for damage with regards to GWM or SS, when those are functioning well.

    However, I think the GWM and SS bring the fighters/rangers/paladins (non-smiting)/barbarians into the damage range of mages and rogues. Therefore it isn't GWM/SS which are too weak, it's the fact that the one-handed versions are too weak to start with.

    How about this for versatile: "Versatile weapons when used two-handed become heavy weapons." That's it.

    This would allow a long sword to be used with a shield, or if the player wants to go for big damage, they could take GWM for damage. That would be D8+strength+10 if they wanted to hit hard. Still a bit less than 2D6+strength+10, but a noticeable bump. That would make Anduril and Aragorn swing very hard.

  3. #23
    Member
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)



    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    Wow, when you put it that way, the fighter sounds, not at all great.
    I found than fighters (assuming causing more than 10-12 points of damage is considered fun) need magical weapons and/or class features/feats to be fun in a fight. In my experience, the class features and the feats are needed together, or the fighter is kind of blah. I can't imagine having a non-feat fighter in a game with assassins and mages. Unless the fighter has a great (special) magical weapon, the fighter wouldn't have a chance to shine in the thing they are supposed to do well....fight.

    I mean look at a two-handed great sword at Level 11, with a Samurai. 7 points of damage for a sword (avg) with 5 for strength. 12 points of damage, maybe hitting three times a round. Great. That's kind of insignificant in the output I see elsewhere.
    Last edited by Toledo; Friday, 21st June, 2019 at 05:45 PM.

  4. #24
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Jose/Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    15,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Toledo View Post
    I found than fighters (assuming causing more than 10-12 points of damage is considered fun) need magical weapons and/or class features/feats to be fun in a fight.
    I'm not sure any particular range of integers is automatically fun.

    In my experience, the class features and the feats are needed together, or the fighter is kind of blah. I can't imagine having a non-feat fighter in a game with assassins and mages. Unless the fighter has a great (special) magical weapon, the fighter wouldn't have a chance to shine in the thing they are supposed to do well....fight.
    The fighter /is/ supposed to be "Best at Fighting" (with weapons) (without magic). Feats and magic items shouldn't be required for that. If that's the case, a tweak to the standard rules (before feats, w/o items) might well be in order.
    XP Xeviat gave XP for this post

  5. #25
    Member
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)



    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    I'm not sure any particular range of integers is automatically fun.

    The fighter /is/ supposed to be "Best at Fighting" (with weapons) (without magic). Feats and magic items shouldn't be required for that. If that's the case, a tweak to the standard rules (before feats, w/o items) might well be in order.
    I agree about integers; I was just using that to say that being outclassed in your primary skill isn't fun.

    I agree that if feats aren't considered/used, fighters could use a bump as written. Or other classes could get nixed a bit.

  6. #26
    Member
    Time Agent (Lvl 24)



    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,631
    Nice ideas!

    I do think that a versatile fighting style should focus on versatility: You have a weapon that you can wield in one or two hands, and you get different benefits depending on which you pick. Ideally this would be a round-by-round decision, where you flip back and forth between two hands and one.

    Maybe something like this:

    Versatile Fighting Style

    • When wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to damage rolls with that weapon.
    • When you take the Attack action with a versatile weapon wielded in one hand and nothing in the other hand, you can make a grapple or shove attempt as a bonus action.


    A versatile fighter just wanting to lay down DPR would go two-handed; you get 90% of the base damage of a greatsword specialist, which is decent. In exchange for that 10%, however, you also get the option to go one-handed and use a tactical maneuver (which competes for your bonus action, limiting use).

    The details would need testing and tweaking, but there's the basic idea.
    Last edited by Dausuul; Friday, 21st June, 2019 at 06:48 PM.
    XP Xeviat, 77IM gave XP for this post

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Toledo View Post
    How about this for versatile: "Versatile weapons when used two-handed become heavy weapons." That's it.
    This leaves small characters getting disadvantage when using a versatile weapon two-handed, but not one-handed which is a bit counter-intuitive.

    I like adding an extra property to versatile, but in the following way:

    quarterstaves, spears and tridents: gain reach when used two-handed

    longswords: gain finesse when used two handed ( meshes well with elven and rogue proficiency)

    battleaxes and warhammers: These weapons qualify for GWM -5/+10 when used two-handed.

  8. #28
    Member
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)



    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    somewhere in Canada...
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by Toledo View Post
    I was just joking about the hater business, hope that came across well.
    I imagined so. We're cool
    Quote Originally Posted by Toledo View Post
    However, I think the GWM and SS bring the fighters/rangers/paladins (non-smiting)/barbarians into the damage range of mages and rogues. Therefore it isn't GWM/SS which are too weak, it's the fact that the one-handed versions are too weak to start with.

    How about this for versatile: "Versatile weapons when used two-handed become heavy weapons." That's it.

    This would allow a long sword to be used with a shield, or if the player wants to go for big damage, they could take GWM for damage. That would be D8+strength+10 if they wanted to hit hard. Still a bit less than 2D6+strength+10, but a noticeable bump. That would make Anduril and Aragorn swing very hard.
    That was our de-facto "fix" for my Mad-Martigan inspired longsword fighter in my last game (actually we just added heavy or versatile to the GWM feat). I wonder if it would cause havoc in the hands of a spear-wielding monk or kensai? It would also make the finesse moonblade and sunblade mighty tempting too for dex-based fighters. It would allow small races to use GWM without disadvantage I guess.

  9. #29
    Member
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)



    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    somewhere in Canada...
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by snickersnax View Post
    This leaves small characters getting disadvantage when using a versatile weapon two-handed, but not one-handed which is a bit counter-intuitive.

    I like adding an extra property to versatile, but in the following way:

    quarterstaves, spears and tridents: gain reach when used two-handed

    longswords: gain finesse when used two handed ( meshes well with elven and rogue proficiency)

    battleaxes and warhammers: These weapons qualify for GWM -5/+10 when used two-handed.
    So "don't tweak the versatile style, tweak the versatile property". Interesting avenue

  10. #30
    Member
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)



    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    61
    I don't personally think the small races should have access to GWM or versatile weapons to start with. The Gnomes and Halflings are only 30-40 pounds as it is. I know it's a fantasy game, and the suspensions to disbelief are infinite, but this really bothers me. No way a little person who weighs 40 pounds should be able swing a blade effectively that is 50% larger than them.

    I generally have my characters dislike all gnomes in my campaigns for this reason. At least most halflings I see played don't go for big weapons, so they don't bother me as much.

Similar Threads

  1. New "Fighting Style": Versatile
    By JohnnyNitro in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: Sunday, 13th March, 2016, 11:07 PM
  2. Versatile Weapon Fighting Style
    By Rune in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Wednesday, 15th July, 2015, 05:45 PM
  3. New Fighting Styles (was: Berserker Fighting Style?)
    By The Shadow in forum *Pathfinder & Starfinder
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Wednesday, 29th August, 2012, 04:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •