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

[Xeviat]

Duelist adds +2 damage. Gwfing adds +1.33 to greatsword, but less to Greataxe. Both are a lower gain. TWFing is a +3 gain at first level. Gwfing should likely be near TWFing, or at least even between the different weapons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Quartz]

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

I was evaluating the GWF style, not the -5/+10 from the GWM feat.

 

[Zardnaar]

Duelist adds +2 damage. Gwfing adds +1.33 to greatsword, but less to Greataxe. Both are a lower gain. TWFing is a +3 gain at first level. Gwfing should likely be near TWFing, or at least even between the different weapons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It picks up later when multiple attacks kick in.

Great weapons still get the 2d6/1d12 vs 1d8 or less thing though so it balances out IMHO without feats.

Add feats in and its all about great wepaons and missile weapons (SS, GWM, PAM)

 

[Quartz]

Gwfing should likely be near TWFing, or at least even between the different weapons.

I disagree: TWF needs the greater bonus because you have to use your bonus action.

 

[Arial Black]

Take i.e. longsword 1d8/1d10 in two hands.

you get 4,5dmg one handed, 5,5 damage two handed,

If you have dueling style you do 6,5 damage one handed. one more than with two hands.

Even if you have both styles, two handed longsword will deal only 6,3 damage on average. Still less then dueling style.

I want to emphasise a point here. If you choose a 2H weapon, you are sacrificing the things a spare hand could do (like, use a shield) in return for using a weapon that does more damage.

Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that, even after Fighting Styles are considered, 2H weapons should still be doing more damage. This does not need balancing in favour of 1H weapons!

This is illustrated by Versatile weapons themselves; a longsword (for example) does more damage when you use it in two hands than when you use it in one hand. This makes sense.

But with a PC who has both the 1H and 2H Fighting Styles, suddenly he does more damage using it in 1H than when he uses it in 2H. This does not make sense!

And to add insult to injury, the 1H guy can flip off the 2H guy from behind his shiny new shield!

In my games, Dueling Style does not work if you have a weapon or shield in the other hand (just like in the playtest). If you want sword and board, choose the style aimed at the shield!

Also, I use GWF as written, rather than as intended, i.e. reroll all dice of damage from that attack that come up 1 or 2, no matter the source of that damage (Sneak Attack, Divine Smite, Flame Tongue, whatever). It is still a worse style generally, but at least it has a niche where it can shine.

 

[Xeviat]

It picks up later when multiple attacks kick in.

Great weapons still get the 2d6/1d12 vs 1d8 or less thing though so it balances out IMHO without feats.

Add feats in and its all about great wepaons and missile weapons (SS, GWM, PAM)

No it doesn't. How? When you get multiple attacks, you get the duelist's +2 damage on each attack. You get the reroll 1s and 2s on each attack too. It's still +2 vs +1.33/0.833. The bonus is tiny on the greataxe even.

I'm not saying GWFing doesn't deal more damage than Duelist, we're saying the gain from Duelist is more than the gain for GWFing.

9.5 vs 12 is a 26% increase
11.5 vs 13.33 is a 16% increase.

9.5 to 11.5 is a 21% increase.
12 to 13.33 is an 11% increase.

Not to mention that greataxes are worse off.

That's what we're talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zardnaar]

No it doesn't. How? When you get multiple attacks, you get the duelist's +2 damage on each attack. You get the reroll 1s and 2s on each attack too. It's still +2 vs +1.33/0.833. The bonus is tiny on the greataxe even.

I'm not saying GWFing doesn't deal more damage than Duelist, we're saying the gain from Duelist is more than the gain for GWFing.

9.5 vs 12 is a 26% increase
11.5 vs 13.33 is a 16% increase.

9.5 to 11.5 is a 21% increase.
12 to 13.33 is an 11% increase.

Not to mention that greataxes are worse off.

That's what we're talking about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry I was comparing GWM against TWF.

Without feats personally I would use duelist and sword+board. Even with feats I would lean heavily towards sword+board depending on the class.

 

[Quartz]

Surely it's about choosing the right tool for the job? If you need to do a lot of damage, you use a big weapon. Each has its place.

 

[Zardnaar]

I disagree: TWF needs the greater bonus because you have to use your bonus action.

This some classes can use the bonus action to use spells like hex and hunters quarry with great weapons and that is a bit harder for a TWF class to pull off (great when you can though).

Without feats
TWF better level 1-4
Mostly a wash between level 5-10
Level 11 better with a great weapon (if a fighter or even a class with hex/hunters quarry).

If you are a dex based TWF you get a bit more utility in skills and ranged combat though as you can't use action surge and throw 4-6 spears/javelins/daggers etc but you can action surge with a bow.

With feats its all about the big weapons, heavy armor and sharpshooter due to bonus action Polearm Master/GWM or even the shield master feat.

 

[Dausuul]

Offense is always effective, but defense is only as effective as the amount of firepower aimed your way. If you're an untouchable tower of steel on the battlefield, smart monsters will look for ways to bypass you and go after the squishy guy throwing fireballs instead. When that happens, your high AC does nobody any good; what your fellow PCs need from you is damage output.

There's also the fact that AC doesn't protect you from everything. Spells and area attacks don't care about your shield*.

So, Duelist should be a little stronger than GWF; not a lot stronger, but a little, which it is.

[size=-2]*Unless you have Shield Mastery. But if you get a feat, then it's only fair to allow your GWF counterpart to take Great Weapon Mastery.[/size]