D&D 5E Buffing up Greatweapon fighting style a little


log in or register to remove this ad

Yes, a GWF 2d6 weapon does an average of 8 1/3 damage vs 6.5 for your Duellist's d8 weapon. Almost +2 damage. That balances against the +2 AC that the duellist gets and the extra damage that the TWF gets. No change is needed.

it works only against high attack opponents or you have a low AC
 
Last edited:

I don't like the Dueling and Archery Fighting Styles, they are obviously the most powerful choices and have forced me to homebrew around them. I like the idea of advantage on damage dice for Great Weapon Fighting replacing the reroll 1s and 2s which is fiddly. I also modify Two Weapon Fighting to be more in line with other choices.
 

In another thread I recently did an analysis of the different styles and found that two weapon fighting was best from levels 1 to 4, with two-handed close behind (when using a greatsword). But once you hit 5th level and get Extra Attack the Great Weapon Fighting style took the lead by a comfortable margin. Adding an additional die of damage is really not needed.

The only thing I might consider for my games would be to allow for re-rolls of 1 through 3 or 4 for weapons with a larger die (great axe, etc.). Hmmm... Now I want to see how well that would work. :) I might check allowing Advantage on the damage die, but that might be a little too good.
 

Archery is actually fine when you don't let a feat ignore cover and take advantage of the higher to hit.

My houserules where that is the case have archery valued around around 10-14% (results)

Dueling.. I have no idea what they were thinking. +3 when not wielding a shield and +1 when wielding a shield would be much better balanced.
 

It seems to me that that fighting styles were somewhat designed to compensate for differences in the fighting mechanics. I'd say that with no feats or styles, great weapons are better than sword and shield, because you anyway take less damage from an opponent you kill faster (and because if your AC is high, monsters can usually attack other party members.) So I don't mind if the nominal benefit from GWF style is lower than from dueling, since that just makes dueling competitive.

I don't totally understand how archery fits in, but it is harder to do an apples-to-apples comparison with archery. I think they may have settled on that value through playtest feedback more than anything else.
 

You're looking at the fighting styles in isolation, but they're balanced for the system as a whole. Two-handed weapons tend to gain more from feats, buffs and extra attacks, so it's fine if weapon styles are the one place where single-handed weapons can regain some ground.

If you don't think it's worth it, Defensive Style is a fine option for anybody.
 


You are still using the weapon one handed though. How does the shield change anything when discussing the difference between the styles?

Well, it gives a +2 AC heh. I'd just seen people thinking you couldnt have anything in your offhand, and denying the +2 damage with a shield, so wanted to make sure people knew. Carry on! :)
 

Well, it gives a +2 AC heh. I'd just seen people thinking you couldnt have anything in your offhand, and denying the +2 damage with a shield, so wanted to make sure people knew. Carry on! :)

When I first read the text on dueling style I thought it meant no weapon on shield in the off hand. I could see DMs that think it's too powerful saying that the off hand must be empty. Of course, then it would suck compared to two weapon fighting style that can add about 4-9 more points of damage per round at level one.

I could still see players who want to keep their off hand open for spellcasting or for switching to ranged weapons taking dueling style even if they could not carry a shield.
 

Remove ads

Top