D&D 5E Great Weapon Fighting Style *Fix*

[DND_Reborn]

Let's be honest: Great Weapon Fighting Style sort of sucks.

The effective bonus to damage is a paltry amount and make the style hardly worth taking as it is written.
d10 => 6.3 average, 0.8 increase
d12 => 7.33 average, 0.83 increase
2d6 => 8.33 average, 1.33 increase

Considering the trade-off of either a worse AC (no shield) or losing an additional attack (no bonus action TWF attack), why would anyone bother? Every Great Weapon Fighter-type I've made I end up choosing Defense Style for the +1 to AC instead of GWF style! When you put it side-by-side with Dueling, for example, your damage increase is only decent for 2d6 weapons (8.33 GWF vs. 6.5 for d8+2 dueling), and that comes at the loss of the +2 AC bonus for a shield.

Am I missing something? Is it somehow "worth it" that I've overlooked? Frankly, I am just not seeing much of a benefit, especially if you are using a d10 weapon (reach weapons).

Spoiler: Fix

I've been considering a few options for fixes:
1. If you roll half the maximum on the die or lower, reroll the die. (e.g. roll 1-5 on d10 means reroll)
d10 => 6.75 average, 1.25 increase
d12 => 8.00 average, 1.50 increase
2d6 => 8.50 average, 1.50 increase

This yields a better increase overall, and keeps the "big weapons" (d12 and 2d6) at equal increases. It isn't quite the +2 damage for dueling, but an improvement.

2. You make damage rolls with advantage. (i.e. on 2d6, you would roll two sets of 2d6)
d10 => 7.15 average, 1.65 increase
d12 => 8.49 average, 1.99 increase
2d6 => 8.94 average, 1.94 increase

Obviously this gives a much better increase than RAW, and nearly matches Dueling's +2 bonus, but I am worried this is almost too much?

3. If you roll below average, the roll is treated as average. (e.g. a roll of 1-4 on d10 becomes 5; 1-2 on d6 becomes 3).
d10 => 6.50 average, 1.00 increase, minimum 5
d12 => 7.75 average, 1.25 increase minimum 6
2d6 => 8.00 average, 1.00 increase minimum 6

While the increase (on average) isn't as much, it has the benefit of raising the floor from 1 to 5 or 6, which is pretty nice in a way.

What do you think of those 3 options?

 

[tetrasodium]

Let's be honest: Great Weapon Fighting Style sort of sucks.

The effective bonus to damage is a paltry amount and make the style hardly worth taking as it is written.
d10 => 6.3 average, 0.8 increase
d12 => 7.33 average, 0.83 increase
2d6 => 8.33 average, 1.33 increase

Considering the trade-off of either a worse AC (no shield) or losing an additional attack (no bonus action TWF attack), why would anyone bother? Every Great Weapon Fighter-type I've made I end up choosing Defense Style for the +1 to AC instead of GWF style! When you put it side-by-side with Dueling, for example, your damage increase is only decent for 2d6 weapons (8.33 GWF vs. 6.5 for d8+2 dueling), and that comes at the loss of the +2 AC bonus for a shield.

Am I missing something? Is it somehow "worth it" that I've overlooked? Frankly, I am just not seeing much of a benefit, especially if you are using a d10 weapon (reach weapons).

Spoiler: Fix

I've been considering a few options for fixes:
1. If you roll half the maximum on the die or lower, reroll the die. (e.g. roll 1-5 on d10 means reroll)
d10 => 6.75 average, 1.25 increase
d12 => 8.00 average, 1.50 increase
2d6 => 8.50 average, 1.50 increase

This yields a better increase overall, and keeps the "big weapons" (d12 and 2d6) at equal increases. It isn't quite the +2 damage for dueling, but an improvement.

2. You make damage rolls with advantage. (i.e. on 2d6, you would roll two sets of 2d6)
d10 => 7.15 average, 1.65 increase
d12 => 8.49 average, 1.99 increase
2d6 => 8.94 average, 1.94 increase

Obviously this gives a much better increase than RAW, and nearly matches Dueling's +2 bonus, but I am worried this is almost too much?

3. If you roll below average, the roll is treated as average. (e.g. a roll of 1-4 on d10 becomes 5; 1-2 on d6 becomes 3).
d10 => 6.50 average, 1.00 increase, minimum 5
d12 => 7.75 average, 1.25 increase minimum 6
2d6 => 8.00 average, 1.00 increase minimum 6

While the increase (on average) isn't as much, it has the benefit of raising the floor from 1 to 5 or 6, which is pretty nice in a way.

What do you think of those 3 options?

We don't know what the new weapons will look like yet, instead of 2d6 a greatsword could be 3d4 or whatever

edit: I'd prefer if it was just a straight 1or 2=3 or something instead of the tiresome "lets all twiddle our thumbs & watch bob roll a few dice & redo math for each of his many attacks"

 

[cbwjm]

I think it would be better to make it a flat +2 damage (or something else more interesting) than the rerolls. It'd make it more worthwhile trading between 1 handed and 2 handed with a longsword, for instance.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think it would be better to make it a flat +2 damage (or something else more interesting) than the rerolls. It'd make it more worthwhile trading between 1 handed and 2 handed with a longsword, for instance.

And then just combine it with duelling style: +2 on melee weapon attack damage.

 

[Stoutstien]

Personally I make GWF +2 damage and duelist +1 attack.

 

[DND_Reborn]

We don't know what the new weapons will look like yet, instead of 2d6 a greatsword could be 3d4 or whatever

That would help with the greatsword and maul, but none of the other two-handed weapons. And I find rolling d4s annoying (the whole picking them up thing ).

edit: I'd prefer if it was just a straight 1or 2=3 or something instead of the tiresome "lets all twiddle our thumbs & watch bob roll a few dice & redo math for each of his many attacks"

That was why I added the third option about raising a low roll to half the die maximum. No rerolling necessary. Using a base 3 is too low, however.

Personally I make GWF +2 damage and duelist +1 attack.

I was actually thinking about going the other direction for a simpler GWF as well. Since you are using two-hands, you are more accurate with your strikes. I didn't include it in the OP since I was trying to keep the "better damage" concept.

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

I chose it for my first character ever - ages ago when I was a newbie. I enjoyed it a lot to reroll the dice and when a one was rerolled and became a six, it was cheers around the table. I hadn't done any math on all the builds (still haven't btw), so I did not feel underpowered (in fact quite the opposite) and I had a great time.

Just giving a different perspective.

 

[Stoutstien]

I was actually thinking about going the other direction for a simpler GWF as well. Since you are using two-hands, you are more accurate with your strikes. I didn't include it in the OP since I was trying to keep the "better damage" concept.

I went back and forth with it and just ended up with the bigger weapons hit hard troupe. It's rare you have a player looking to utilize 2hd weapons anywhere close to realistic roots nor should they.

In currently play testing 1d4 in place of the +2. Little bit more damage on average and feels a heck of a lot better on crits.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Personally I make GWF +2 damage and duelist +1 attack.

And with versatile weapons you can chose either? I'd like that.

It always hurts my brain that if you wield a verstaile weapon in two hands, that you downgrade your damage in 5e.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Just giving a different perspective.

Appreciated!

In currently play testing 1d4 in place of the +2. Little bit more damage on average and feels a heck of a lot better on crits.

I'm not a big fan of rolling more dice (especially d4s!). It is one reason I avoided the proficiency dice option over using a static bonus.

And with versatile weapons you can chose either? I'd like that.

It always hurts my brain that if you wield a verstaile weapon in two hands, that you downgrade your damage in 5e.

FWIW our Mod rule is a versatile weapon either gains increased damage OR you can gain a +1 on attack rolls. In addition, if you want to, when you go the increased damage route the weapon gains the heavy property, if you choose the +1 to attacks it gains the finesse property.