Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 7406210" data-attributes="member: 20564">In general, I agree and disagree with your idea.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />The fighting styles as given make that weapon-focused characters are consistently better with weapons right out of the gate then non-weapon-focused characters.  A high STR cleric with martial weapons and heavy armor doesn't keep up with someone with a fighting style.But really, once Extra Attack comes in, that point is fairly moot.I like these in that they give flavor - they encourage certain tactics that would not otherwise be part and parcel of swinging your axe or twanging your bow.  Amusingly, I dislike some of them for the same reason - they lock you into certain tactics with golden handcuffs which discourages diversity in actions, much like previous edition weapon specialization locked you into a specific weapon.As most of these are not general like the original fighting styles and only apply in certain cases, my first throught is that I'd rather see these supplementing instead of replacing.  Alternately, allow pick of 2-3 of these instead of one of the always-on - this way they come up fairly often, and they don't lock a character into just one type of action.  This has an advantage over my first suggestion of requiring no changes to the class frameworks for a different category, and works well with subclasses that give more fighting styles, but might get to be too much with multiclassing since you could get multiple fighting styles working on the same attacks.Just a comment on one:This one is underwhelming for general attacks, and a must-have for stealth based rogues who would be rerolling sneak attack.  It's both too good for a specific case, and not competitive in general usage.</blockquote>

Verification