D&D 5E Fighting With Style, Fighting Styles as Level 1 subclass choices

doctorbadwolf · Jul 13, 2019

Mistwell said:
Except you're attempting to use the tool of "fighting style" for something it was not originally intended to represent, "subclass type". If you're going to use the tool for a new application, then it makes less rational sense to restrict it to the original theme of "fighting style" as you've already ditched that restriction. Eldritch Knights are magical fighters who start with no magic and all fighter. Allowing them to pick a cantrip which emphasizes MAGIC as opposes to emphasizes FIGHTING makes sense.

No. It’s still a Fighting Style. I’m not changing what Fighting Styles are, I’m adding one or more to the list that will allow any fighter to play like their planned archetype from level 1. That’s it. I haven’t ditched any restriction, nor have I actually made it a subclass choice. No one is locked in to any Fighting Style. An Eldritch Knight who would rather have +1 AC can choose that just as before, and take the subclass at level 3, and flavor that however they want.

The only difference is that someone who wants their fighting style (generic term usage) to match their concept from level 1 can have some magical juice, and can better represent the concept of someone whose martial practice is magical at all levels, by making their otherwise mundane Attack Action attacks somewhat magical, rather than purely going back or ignoring Extra Attack entirely.

If you want to pursue an entirely different goal with variant feature options go for it, but it’s not what I’m doing here in this thread.

Tony Vargas · Jul 13, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
An Eldritch Knight who would rather have +1 AC can choose that just as before, and take the subclass at level 3, and flavor that however they want.

I know 5e didn't emphasize foci much, but a Weapon & Wand or Sword & Athame* style for the proto-EK might be cool. You give up the shield, but gain a magical perk of some kind. Like most rounds you minor-action cast a lesser shield cantrip that's only about as good as a shield (it might be cute if it gave a better AC bonus vs cantrips, or negated one magic missile/rnd or reduced mm damage from d4+1 to d4 or something fairly trivial), or some rounds another cantrip, sacrificing the shield bonus.

* for those of you who don't know, I should mention that an Athame or black-handled knife is a dagger or the like used in rituals. For those who /do/ know, I'm sorry for even implying that a practitioner might so much as risk getting someone else's blood on one.

Xeviat · Jul 13, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
I know 5e didn't emphasize foci much, but a Weapon & Wand or Sword & Athame style for the proto-EK might be cool. You give up the shield, but gain a magical perk of some kind. Like most rounds you minor-action cast a lesser shield cantrip that's only about as good as a shield, or some rounds another cantrip, sacrificing the shield bonus.

Sounds like the starting of an interesting class or subclass design actually. A dual action character, with competing options for what to spend their action and bonus action on.

doctorbadwolf · Jul 13, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
I know 5e didn't emphasize foci much, but a Weapon & Wand or Sword & Athame style for the proto-EK might be cool. You give up the shield, but gain a magical perk of some kind. Like most rounds you minor-action cast a lesser shield cantrip that's only about as good as a shield, or some rounds another cantrip, sacrificing the shield bonus.

There it is! That’s (to quote Jerry Holkins) ballin’ outta control!

And if it requires a bonus action and the bonus is based on a secondary stat, it can be roughly equivalent to an off hand attack getting +stat damage. (Doesn’t have to be perfect, just within normal power levels)

So, “ while wielding a weapon in one hand and an arcane focus in the other, you can spend a Bonus Action to either gain a +2 bonus to AC, or to deal +Int Fire, cold, Lightning, Thunder, or Acid, damage on your next weapon attack.”

So, it’s like switching between TWF and sword and shield as a bonus action, with the added bonus of choosing what elemental damage your bonus damage is. I’d be fine with letting the whole weapon attack damage be that type, but I’m not 100% on the balance there.

So, you’re fighting like a Gish from day one of playing the character, but you aren’t overshadowing anyone.

There are MC concerns, but I don’t think it will be a real problem. Fighter is almost always a very good MC option anyway.

Xeviat · Jul 13, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
There it is! That’s (to quote Jerry Holkins) ballin’ outta control!

And if it requires a bonus action and the bonus is based on a secondary stat, it can be roughly equivalent to an off hand attack getting +stat damage. (Doesn’t have to be perfect, just within normal power levels)

So, “ while wielding a weapon in one hand and an arcane focus in the other, you can spend a Bonus Action to either gain a +2 bonus to AC, or to deal +Int Fire, cold, Lightning, Thunder, or Acid, damage on your next weapon attack.”

So, it’s like switching between TWF and sword and shield as a bonus action, with the added bonus of choosing what elemental damage your bonus damage is. I’d be fine with letting the whole weapon attack damage be that type, but I’m not 100% on the balance there.

So, you’re fighting like a Gish from day one of playing the character, but you aren’t overshadowing anyone.

There are MC concerns, but I don’t think it will be a real problem. Fighter is almost always a very good MC option anyway.

It's weaker than using a shield (because of the action), and technically weaker than TWFing (You're spending a bonus action and an action to deal 1d8+Str+Int on 1 attack; TWFing would be 1d6+Stat and 1d6 as two separate attacks), so it's not going to be prime cherry picking material. If Int 14 is safe to assume, Duelist gives you both of those and no loss of bonus action.

doctorbadwolf · Jul 13, 2019

Xeviat said:
It's weaker than using a shield (because of the action), and technically weaker than TWFing (You're spending a bonus action and an action to deal 1d8+Str+Int on 1 attack; TWFing would be 1d6+Stat and 1d6 as two separate attacks), so it's not going to be prime cherry picking material. If Int 14 is safe to assume, Duelist gives you both of those and no loss of bonus action.

Few EKs or MC builds dipping for it are gonna be below 16 Int after level 4, 8 at the latest.

As as long as the +AC lasts until start of your next turn, it could be a +3 and be fine, OR it could stay +2 and be constant, unless you take a bonus action to add transfer the bonus to +Int damage. Either way, it doesn’t have to do the same numbers as other FSs when it adds versatility.

Tony Vargas · Jul 13, 2019

[MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION]... thanks, I think?

Xeviat · Jul 13, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
Few EKs or MC builds dipping for it are gonna be below 16 Int after level 4, 8 at the latest.

As as long as the +AC lasts until start of your next turn, it could be a +3 and be fine, OR it could stay +2 and be constant, unless you take a bonus action to add transfer the bonus to +Int damage. Either way, it doesn’t have to do the same numbers as other FSs when it adds versatility.

If I were building an EK, I'd be putting my 4th and 8th to Str or Dex and then Int after that. Probably Warcaster somewhere in there.

I wouldn't let them out AC a shield user, that just feels weird.

The choice between AC or damage is an interesting one, but it's not a choice when Duelist and a shield is as good as both. It has to be better than Duelist with a Shield in some instances. At 5th level, you'd need an Int of 18 to be equal to Duelist's damage. At 11th level, you'd be better off with duelist in every situation, and you'll probably have more bonus action spells to compete for the resource (and it won't work with Action Surge).

Mistwell · Jul 14, 2019

doctorbadwolf said:
No. It’s still a Fighting Style. I’m not changing what Fighting Styles are

You absolutely are. There is no "style" to adding energy damage to attacks. That's not a type of fighting like dual wielding or being more effective with a one handed weapon or being better at dodging attacks. All the others are mundane skills people learn as actual melee fighting tactics. You've completely altered the purpose with your suggestion. Why are you not owning it?

doctorbadwolf · Jul 14, 2019

Mistwell said:
You absolutely are. There is no "style" to adding energy damage to attacks. That's not a type of fighting like dual wielding or being more effective with a one handed weapon or being better at dodging attacks. All the others are mundane skills people learn as actual melee fighting tactics. You've completely altered the purpose with your suggestion. Why are you not owning it?

Nah. I’m done with this. The premise is what it is. Either engage with it, leave me alone, or get blocked.