D&D General Actual Gish Fighting Styles

[doctorbadwolf]

Any "one hand free" option that isn't modifying an attack should probably have language to avoid two-handed weapon use. ie, +1 AC when weilding a onehanded weapon and a focus or with one hand free, which you lose if you weild a shield or use a weapon two-handed, and do not regain it until the end of your next turn.

 

[Silam]

Using Intelligence rather than Strength or Dexterity for attacks is more powerful than a fighting style design space.

Then you are adding a cantrip.

Is that right?

The Ranger can swap their FS for 2 Druid cantrips, which includes Shillelagh, essentially doing the same (and a tiny bit more base damage too). Granted the rest of the Druid cantrips are maybe not as strong as Wizard cantrips, but it’s a stretch to say they’re worthless. They do include Guidance and other decent options.

As I said in a previous post, I’m not in favor of giving the equivalent of Pact of the Blade as a FS, not because I think it’s too strong, but simply because you can already achieve it via cantrips (True Strike, Shillelagh) and it’s just not interesting enough.

 

[Minigiant]

Is that right?

The Ranger can swap their FS for 2 Druid cantrips, which includes Shillelagh, essentially doing the same (and a tiny bit more base damage too). Granted the rest of the Druid cantrips are maybe not as strong as Wizard cantrips, but it’s a stretch to say they’re worthless. They do include Guidance and other decent options.

As I said in a previous post, I’m not in favor of giving the equivalent of Pact of the Blade as a FS, not because I think it’s too strong, but simply because you can already achieve it via cantrips (True Strike, Shillelagh) and it’s just not interesting enough.

Shilleagh is borderline as it is limited to club and staff.

If you made a fighting style that let you attack with Daggers and Quarterstaff with INT, it'll be okay IMHO.

INT attacking rapier and scimatar or greatword is beyond the power balance.

 

[bedir than]

I'd want a gish to use their weapon stat as their cantrip casting stat from the style.

Channeling the raw power or deft precision of your weapon when you choose use a cantrip cast through the weapon you do so using Strength or Dexterity. You cast a cantrip through the weapon by replacing an attack with the cantrip.
You learn two cantrips, only one of which can be a combat cantrip.
You can use a shield or hold weapons in both hands while casting your cantrips.
The cantrip does not replace the Weapon Mastery (yes, this could mean two riders).

 

[Silam]

At the end of the day, the 5e design is heavily tilted towards SAD-ness. The MADdest classes, such as the Monk, aren’t even that mad, requiring only two stats (Dex, Wis). In 3e, a Monk required those + Strength. Of course, no matter the edition, everyone needs Con so I’m not counting that.

Anyway, what I’m getting at is that we may love or hate SAD-ness, but it is nonetheless a core design principle of the current edition. I personally think SAD-ness makes 5e a bit boring and that MAD-ness would spice things up a bit. But even though I think so, it’s hard to buck that trend just one houserule at a time. If we say Rangers get to swap their FS for Shillelagh + one more cantrip, but Fighters cannot swap theirs for True Strike, I don’t think we’re being very congruent…

We could say we’ll delete TS, and Shillelagh, and Pact of the Blade and the other stat-swapping abilities, and maybe that would be good actually, but then it’s a much bigger scope of change.

 

[Minigiant]

I'd want a gish to use their weapon stat as their cantrip casting stat from the style.

Channeling the raw power or deft precision of your weapon when you choose use a cantrip cast through the weapon you do so using Strength or Dexterity. You cast a cantrip through the weapon by replacing an attack with the cantrip.
You learn two cantrips, only one of which can be a combat cantrip.
You can use a shield or hold weapons in both hands while casting your cantrips.
The cantrip does not replace the Weapon Mastery (yes, this could mean two riders).

Yeah.

I'd be more okay with the Gish "casting" with Strength or Dexterity weapon attacks than swapping for Intelligence.

 

[bedir than]

Yeah.

I'd be more okay with the Gish "casting" with Strength or Dexterity weapon attacks than swapping for Intelligence.

then if they're later a EK, they'd be Int for their standard spellcasting still, but I'm OK with that.

My feeling is this keeps the Fighting Style for any Fighter rather than merely a buff for EK.

Also, casting Shocking Grasp through a dart would be fun

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Using Intelligence rather than Strength or Dexterity for attacks is more powerful than a fighting style design space.

Then you are adding a cantrip.

No, it isn't. It is the minimum to make the concept work properly. As it is they can get True Strike, but then still need something else after level 5. It makes int based fighters janky.

A fighting style would put them on the same level as a dex fighter, at best, except they'd still need Dex for AC. Especially if, as i suggested, the FS requires one-handed or ranged weapons and no heavy armor, no shield.

Shilleagh is borderline as it is limited to club and staff.

If you made a fighting style that let you attack with Daggers and Quarterstaff with INT, it'll be okay IMHO.

INT attacking rapier and scimatar or greatword is beyond the power balance.

It...is less strong than using dex and a rapier. Which doesn't even require a fighting style.

At best you are replacing strength with int while using a greatsword, assuming no weapon limitation.

I'd want a gish to use their weapon stat as their cantrip casting stat from the style.

Thematically I dig it, but absolutely not mechanically unless it aligns with a redesign of the EK and Psi Warrior to use Strength or Dex for their spells.

Channeling the raw power or deft precision of your weapon when you choose use a cantrip cast through the weapon you do so using Strength or Dexterity. You cast a cantrip through the weapon by replacing an attack with the cantrip.
You learn two cantrips, only one of which can be a combat cantrip.
You can use a shield or hold weapons in both hands while casting your cantrips.
The cantrip does not replace the Weapon Mastery (yes, this could mean two riders).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

then if they're later a EK, they'd be Int for their standard spellcasting still, but I'm OK with that.

Why? That would be a wild waste of character resources.

My feeling is this keeps the Fighting Style for any Fighter rather than merely a buff for EK.

So does using int for attacks (or AC, but not both). I would take it as a tactician build Battle Master, for instance.

Also, casting Shocking Grasp through a dart would be fun

This is true. Works either way though.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

At the end of the day, the 5e design is heavily tilted towards SAD-ness. The MADdest classes, such as the Monk, aren’t even that mad, requiring only two stats (Dex, Wis). In 3e, a Monk required those + Strength. Of course, no matter the edition, everyone needs Con so I’m not counting that.

Anyway, what I’m getting at is that we may love or hate SAD-ness, but it is nonetheless a core design principle of the current edition. I personally think SAD-ness makes 5e a bit boring and that MAD-ness would spice things up a bit. But even though I think so, it’s hard to buck that trend just one houserule at a time. If we say Rangers get to swap their FS for Shillelagh + one more cantrip, but Fighters cannot swap theirs for True Strike, I don’t think we’re being very congruent…

Yep and frankly TS conflicts later on with EK's cantrip in place of a single attack feature, which is why it ought to instead be able to just attack with Int in general.

We could say we’ll delete TS, and Shillelagh, and Pact of the Blade and the other stat-swapping abilities, and maybe that would be good actually, but then it’s a much bigger scope of cchange.

While i prefer SAD design like 4e where every character ideally had 1 attack stat that was also the stat for one of thier 3 defenses, i would be fine with all gish characters being MAD. The fact Wizards and Warlocks can easily be SAD but the warrior classes cannot is pure bunk.