Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7626447" data-attributes="member: 6795602">I could say sigh to.&nbsp; It's frustrating when you bring in an example that has nothing to do with the discussion.&nbsp; It's doubly frustrating when you try to say some other example is the same as that when it obviously isn't.No it wouldn't.&nbsp; A fighter/Paladin would already have the +2 to damage style.&nbsp; They would then pick up the +1 AC.&nbsp; Sure... but no one really takes defensive style as their first fighting style before picking up dueling style, right?+1 AC is not very valuable IMO - But suppose you think it is - you can at least admit that it's infinitely less valuable than action surge/divine smite/subclass features/hunter's mark?&nbsp; Right?&nbsp;+1 AC which is what the additional fighting style will be used for - IS inconsequential.&nbsp; In fact I think you actually agree with this assessment because the only counterpoint you actually bring up is that the +2 to damage fighting style is consequential.&nbsp; That's something I agree with.&nbsp; It's just that since we are talking only of the case where you can have 2 fighting styles then the consequential one will always already be chosen.
More importantly though, this discussion is supposed to be about whether disallowing 2 fighting styles will impact multiclassing.&nbsp; It won't.&nbsp; +1 AC isn't a feature that get's multiclassed for now.&nbsp; Nor is it such a strong feature in the packages it comes in that someone would forego going for that package just because it isn't present.
</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 7626447, member: 6795602"] I could say sigh to. It's frustrating when you bring in an example that has nothing to do with the discussion. It's doubly frustrating when you try to say some other example is the same as that when it obviously isn't. No it wouldn't. A fighter/Paladin would already have the +2 to damage style. They would then pick up the +1 AC. Sure... but no one really takes defensive style as their first fighting style before picking up dueling style, right? +1 AC is not very valuable IMO - But suppose you think it is - you can at least admit that it's infinitely less valuable than action surge/divine smite/subclass features/hunter's mark? Right? +1 AC which is what the additional fighting style will be used for - IS [COLOR=#222222][FONT=Verdana]inconsequential. In fact I think you actually agree with this assessment because the only counterpoint you actually bring up is that the +2 to damage fighting style is consequential. That's something I agree with. It's just that since we are talking only of the case where you can have 2 fighting styles then the consequential one will always already be chosen. [/FONT][/COLOR][LEFT][COLOR=#222222][FONT=Verdana] More importantly though, this discussion is supposed to be about whether disallowing 2 fighting styles will impact multiclassing. It won't. +1 AC isn't a feature that get's multiclassed for now. Nor is it such a strong feature in the packages it comes in that someone would forego going for that package just because it isn't present. [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT] [/QUOTE]

Verification