D&D 5E Barbarian Fighting Styles

[Benjamin Olson]

I don't think it would make them too powerful. I do think that fighting styles lock characters in to a single weapon setup, and I do actually like having an option for a class that can alternate freely between the different types of (strength-based) weapon setups.

 

[Blue]

Barbarians have lots of unique and cool things they do that put them are the right power level. Making them play more like other martial classes, especially if you need to remove uniquely barbarian abilities to balance out adding in the sameness, just makes the classes all feel like one another.

Plus this does give reason to multiclass - different classes have different abilities.

TL;DR: Classes are different so they justify being separate classes.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

I'd love more 'fighting styles' that could be used to create a martial type that could go toe-to-toe with mages without all the 'adding chi/ki' like a monk. I'm thinking of an 'inigo montoya' type "I'm not left handed", or "you're using blah defense or offense because of terrain, armor, etc"


7th Sea does have some ideas about martial techniques. Always liked the idea of a fighter who eschews magic because he's just a badass... just them and a sword, or dagger...

I do like that in 2e &th Sea, it's the person that does the damage, not the weapon type.

 

[auburn2]

So, working through a bunch of homebrew rules and it got me wondering - why don't Barbarians get fighting styles? Would it make them too powerful (I can't see that being the case...). What fighting styles would work for them? What level would be good - 2nd, 3rd or perhaps 4th?

I'm thinking the following would be appropriate:
Two-weapon (hand axe and club)
Two-handed (classic Conan)
Archery (Possibly for a Native American-style hunter)
Thrown (spears, axes and the like)
Unarmed (bear wrestler, et. al)

Your thoughts?

I don't think there is a good thematic reason for it IMO and they already have plenty of melee power. I don't see Barbarians as characters who spend the time and practice necessary to master a fighting style, nor do I see their archetype displaying that sort of discipline in combat. I see them more as "Hulk smash" types and in that respect Reckless Attack is their fighting style. Logically it would make more sense to give a fighting style to hexblades, bladesingers and war domain clerics.

If I was going to give them one it would probably have them trade it for danger sense and I would use styles that are typical of a Barbarian:

Makeshift weaponfighting style: a Barbarian can add his proficiency bonus on attack rolls with makeshift weapons.

Grapplign and shoving style: When the Babarian is successful with a grapple or a shove the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to half the Barbarian's strength modifier. While grappling a creature the Barbarian can forego an attack to apply bludgeoning damage equal to half his strength modifier.

I think that would fit with the genre better than the other fighting styles in the player's handbook and would be a fair trade for dnger sense.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If there was a player who requested it... I'd have absolutely no issue letting them do a Feature swap of gaining a Fighting Style at 2nd level and losing Reckless Attack.

By the same token, I'd have no issue letting a Fighter and/or certain Paladin oaths take Reckless Attack as their Fighting Style. No feats for any of this necessary.

This would be the easiest / most effective way for a player to play a two-weapon fighting barbarian if they wanted to.

 

[Flamestrike]

If there was a player who requested it... I'd have absolutely no issue letting them do a Feature swap of gaining a Fighting Style at 2nd level and losing Reckless Attack.

By the same token, I'd have no issue letting a Fighter and/or certain Paladin oaths take Reckless Attack as their Fighting Style. No feats for any of this necessary.

This would be the easiest / most effective way for a player to play a two-weapon fighting barbarian if they wanted to.

I give them 1 less rage per long rest, but they get a F/S at 2nd (chosen from Dueling, GWS, Protection - because of those vikings and their shields - and TWF).

They dont get Archery or Defence
Rangers dont get GWS or Protection
Paladins dont get Archery or TWF.

 

[Earth2Carnifex]

This would eliminate one of the reasons to be a Fighter rather than a Barbarian, plus there are at least two ways to get a fighting style if you are not a fighter, 1 level dip into Fighter and the Fighting Initiate feat. Dipping one or two levels into Fighter would also give the character other abilities like Second Wind and Action Surge, the advantage to taking Fighting Initiate is it would cost only 1 ASI and would not otherwise slow down progression, both are good options that do not require house ruling anything. I see no compelling reason to give the Barbarian another ability.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I would allow a barbarian to select a fighting style instead of reckless attack.

 

[Earth2Carnifex]

I would allow a barbarian to select a fighting style instead of reckless attack.

My only concern with this is it opens the door to other swaps, like could a Fighter who just obtained 10th level substitute in Reckless Attack instead of taking a 2nd fighting style?

 

[fearsomepirate]

Where do Barbarians struggle compared to other martial classes? Offensively? Defensively? In my experienced, they are nothing less than a character sheet of raw butt-kicking. They don't need a buff.