D&D 5E Passive or Active Fighting Styles?

Would you prefer passive or active styles?

  • Passive

    Votes: 17 41.5%

  • Active

    Votes: 10 24.4%

  • Passive to Active

    Votes: 9 22.0%

  • Other (please post what and why)

    Votes: 5 12.2%
  • Poll closed .
dnd4vr said:
I suppose my visual was more about using the bow as an improvised melee weapon to take down an opponent near you before you shoot or something, like we see in movies when it is better for the archer to attack with the bow in melee as they move out of range of the enemy's attack.

The weird behavior you speak of would be very strange since if they moved into melee to attack with their ranged weapon on their bonus action, they are now either engaged in melee and have disadvantage on ranged shot or must disengage to move away.

To me disengaging, dodging, etc. are too strong and steps on the toes of rogues and monks when done as bonus actions. Allowing the bonus action to be an attack when the style allows you to disengage is the same issue as with defensive style and dodging as the main action.

I am trying to come up with things that are useful, but not available elsewhere. For example, I would love Dueling to use your reaction to parry, but there is already a feat for that... to me that is the biggest issue in striking balance, not repeating features available elsewhere, etc.
Click to expand...
The chance for any one attack, especially an improvised attack with Str mod damage by an archer, to kill an enemy is pretty small. If they can't disengage, they pull out a melee backup weapon and do a real attack.

I think the primary sticking point here is that, to me, if the option you add doesn't make the style stronger, why would you add it? It's impossible to add an option that's both useful and balance neutral. Having options A and B is always better than just A, unless B is has absolutely no use.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

TwoSix said:
The chance for any one attack, especially an improvised attack with Str mod damage by an archer, to kill an enemy is pretty small. If they can't disengage, they pull out a melee backup weapon and do a real attack.

I think the primary sticking point here is that, to me, if the option you add doesn't make the style stronger, why would you add it? It's impossible to add an option that's both useful and balance neutral. Having options A and B is always better than just A, unless B is has absolutely no use.
Click to expand...

True, the bonus action attack is admittedly weak, but it was meant to be. It isn't of no use, but limited. It is a bonus action, after all.

Regardless, I am thinking since the non-passive voters are growing, my goal (to start) is to have this for each style and then pull back if things look OP:

Base feature
Bonus action option
Reaction option

From a design point, it might be best to give too much and then remove or decrease until a good point is reached.
 

@TwoSix :

How about something along these lines:

1580349076352.png


Notes:
bonus action is similar to aim ability in new UA for rogues, but basically offers "expertise" in doubling proficiency for the next shot made before the end of your turn. Also, I just added you can't be within the reach of a hostile creature to use it.

reaction is similar to skirmisher feature of rogue "scouts" but differs slightly in that the creature need not end its turn within 5 feet of you, but simply has to move close. also, you can still provoke OAs from other creatures engaged with you.
 
Last edited:



TwoSix said:
Heh. I think we might have differing opinions on the various strength of options if you feel like Disengage is too strong but +4 on your next attack is about right. :) Or are you saying that the bonus is like expertise, doubling the application of your proficiency bonus?
Click to expand...
Yes, basically taking aim is like expertise on your next shot before the end of your turn. It differs from the UA feature since that grants advantage instead.

Also, as I mentioned in the other post, at this point I am taking a different strategy, going for "more" instead of "less" and if more is too much, I can always nerf it. :)
 




I updated the OP with the following draft. Feel free to comment on any part of it. More will follow tomorrow as time permits. I've already updated Thrown Weapon Fighting wording to include you cannot be surprised if you will use the reaction feature in the first round.

1580359044621.png
 

Similar Threads

MrGrenadine
D&D 5E Feedback on a Feat for Blind PCs -- Sightless Warrior
2
Replies
19
Views
824
Horwath
Horwath
doctorbadwolf
D&D General Ranger as Nature Assassin?
2 3 4
Replies
30
Views
2K
doctorbadwolf
doctorbadwolf
W
D&D (2024) Beast Master attack sacrificed for beast attack and Dual Wielder
2 3
Replies
26
Views
2K
Fizbang
Fizbang
A
Unearthed Arcana College of the Moon (Bard)
2
Replies
16
Views
6K
Paul Farquhar
Paul Farquhar
J
D&D 5E Dread Farmer, a revamped class of a class that I made.
Replies
3
Views
786
Jaiken
J
Remove ads

Top