D&D (2024) Fighting Styles Are Not Worth a Whole Feat

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

How does that work exactly?

My personal preference would be for ASI's after racial/background/whatever bonuses to just go away. Make it feats only. Make items and special ways to get stat increases mean something again. Make 20s mean something again, rather than be common place for any mid or high level PC.

Or at least separate ASIs from feats. Right now, having to choose between ASIs and a feat seems an unnecessary dilemma. I guess the thought was that a character in a game that allowed feats would be more powerful than a character in a game that didn't? What difference does that make? As long as characters in the same game are comparable to each other, you're good.

Although a game that included both ASIs and feats though would have characters more powerful than the baseline game allowed for. But just up the challenge level of your encounters to compensate.

The mishmash of feats with ASIs has lead to these +1/feats which makes it that much harder to balance feats against each other IMO.

 

[Yaarel]

Some of the Fighting Styles in the 2014 Players Handbook are like half of a feat. Most of them are less than that.

If you had to choose between a cantrip and a Fighting Style, the cantrip is sometimes better.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

They're 1st level feats, not 4th level feats, so they shouldn't be compared to feats like heavy armor master or sharpshooter, but to feats like alert, savage attacker and tough.

I think some fighting styles are in need of a buff (protection, great weapon, two weapon), some are overall fine (dueling, defense) and then you have archery as the powerful outlier.

That's just a noob trap, and I'd prefer to leave system mastery behind in 3E. As it stands, it seems reasonable for a fighter to take another style feat later on, but under this they're just being short changed because a designer decided to put a class feature as a feat instead because they want to slightly save on word count.

 

[ECMO3]

nm

 

[Clint_L]

I use standard array because I work with a lot of new players and rolling just leads to trouble when one kid is super lucky and another in the same group is super unlucky. It just feels patently unfair that so much subsequent gameplay comes down to one set of dice rolls, so I prefer them to all start on equal footing, especially as they are learning the game.

That said, rolling is still the first method of stat generation described in the PHB, so I have to imagine lots of folks still prefer it.

As for fighting styles: they are okay compared to most of the new level 1 feats.

 

[ECMO3]

From the polls that I've seen online here and elsewhere, it seems that a slightly higher percentage of people use point buy/arrays than roll for stats, which leave nearly half of groups rolling for stats. WotC knows this and rolling is a default method of stat generation, so while your group doesn't roll, WotC clearly isn't trying to avoid people starting with 18-20 in a stat, because they use rolling as a default method.

I think here more use point buy, but I also think this sample is biased.

Your chance of getting an 18 by rolling using the PHB method is not great. The median is going to be very close to standard array: 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 I think.

 

[ECMO3]

it's a bad feat now, it will be a bad feat in 2024 if it stays a full feat, unless fighting styles get buffed a lot. Even archery.

I like fighting initiate (Superior Technique style) at 4th level on Human Arcane Tricksters after taking Martial adept at 1st level.

This gives you 2 battlemaster dice, which is usually more than 1 every battle.

For maneuvers I get quick toss, disarming attack and menacing attack.

Use quick toss so I can cast an action spell like tashas laughter or tashas mind whip and still get in a sneak attack (with an extra d6 damage) or alternatively use it if I miss with my attack.

Use disarming attack and then send in mage hand legerdemain to take the weapon or whatever you knocked out of his hand

I rarely use menacing attack, but I use it occasionally if I am not going to be able to get far enough away and want to get the bad guys off of me. Bad guy gets into melee with you and hit him with menacing attack and you can disengage and back up 10 feet and he can't come attack you in melee on his turn.

When you consider the effects or what amounts to an extra action and the extra damage I think this outruns an ASI at 4th level.

 

[Maxperson]

I think here more use point buy, but I also think this sample is biased.

Your chance of getting an 18 by rolling using the PHB method is not great. The median is going to be very close to standard array: 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 I think.

The chances of starting with one...

20: 9.34% (18+2 for race/background)
19 or 20: 30.07% (17-18+2 for race/background)
18-20: 56.76% (16-18+2 for race/background)

Nearly 1 in 10 PCs that roll can have a 20, and 56.76% of rolled PCs can have an 18+. Clearly WotC is not trying to avoid 18+ to a prime stat at 1st level if one of the default methods of stat generation generates 18+ almost 57% of the time.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

How does that work exactly?

My personal preference would be for ASI's after racial/background/whatever bonuses to just go away. Make it feats only. Make items and special ways to get stat increases mean something again. Make 20s mean something again, rather than be common place for any mid or high level PC.

Howabout you get +1 from class, +1 from race or background, and +1 from your "level 1" feat (but they are the same as the level 4 feats, or at least also have a +1 ASI). They can't all three be in the same ability. (Max +2)

 

[Maxperson]

Howabout you get +1 from class, +1 from race or background, and +1 from your "level 1" feat (but they are the same as the level 4 feats, or at least also have a +1 ASI). They can't all three be in the same ability. (Max +2)

I'm okay with that. I just want to see additional bonuses beyond that first +3 total be earned from the DM through items, rewards, etc., not from leveling up.