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

[Maxperson]

I believe that it is to prevent PCs having an 18 in primary at 1st level.

Rolling is a default method and 57%(slight upward rounding) of PCs who roll will have a 16 to add the +2 ASI to. WotC doesn't have a goal to prevent 18's in the primary at 1st level, or even 20's, since rolling yields those as well. If they wanted to prevent 18+ at first level, rolling would go away or change to d4's or something.

 

[Maxperson]

I think that is bad design, and I don’t think I even agree that it’s the case. I think they fully intend people to consider and extra fighting style to be worth the same resource as magic initiate and other level 1 feats.

I agree. If they aren't intended to be something you would spend a feat on, then they should never have been converted from class abilities to feats. If that's the intent, then it wasted work.

More likely they are intended to be chosen as feats, but are just badly designed at this point. Either way it's just bad right now.

 

[Maxperson]

Not really. +1 AC can easily be better than 40hp at level 20. It is probably not worse at level 1.

I don't agree. That +1 AC is only going to turn 1 out of every 20 attacks(on average) against you from a hit to a miss. You may well be unconscious before you ever get to the attack that would miss, where that 40 hit points will make a difference far more often.

Same at 1st level. You only have 2 extra hit points at 1st level, but 20 attacks against you will take several fights, so the 2 hit points will be more useful.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

You are not meant to take them as regular feats (even at lv1). You take the freebies you get from your class... which may include multiple fighting style picks for Warriors.

I'm not happy about them being listed under feats, done that way just so they wouldn't have to make a separate page for fighting styles, like under the Warrior group entry.

When Jerremy Crawfor talks about the fighting styles he said they made them fests so any class could take them.
But compared to other feats that give a ASI in addition to the feats powers they feel underwhelming.
Yes having a fighting style on your mace and shield wielding cleric might sound like a cool concept but as the rules are now you you would have to chose a sub par feat for that concept

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

On another note the fighting styles should be one feat.

FIGHTING STYLE
1st-Level
Feat Prerequisite: Warrior Group
Repeatable: yes but you have to chose a different fighting style each time.

Chose one of the following fighting styles, if this fighting style was granted to you by the fighting style class feature you might be limited in the fighting styles you are allowed to chose see the fighting style feature description in your class details.

list styles here.

 

[Dausuul]

I don't agree. That +1 AC is only going to turn 1 out of every 20 attacks(on average) against you from a hit to a miss. You may well be unconscious before you ever get to the attack that would miss, where that 40 hit points will make a difference far more often.

Same at 1st level. You only have 2 extra hit points at 1st level, but 20 attacks against you will take several fights, so the 2 hit points will be more useful.

After crunching a few numbers, I have to agree. For +1 AC to match the value of +2 hp/level, you need an absurdly high AC, and you need to be almost exclusively facing enemies that rely on attack rolls to damage you.

Toughness has gone from a medium-quality feat in 5E to a top-tier pick in 1D&D. And Defense remains one of the weakest fighting styles.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't agree. That +1 AC is only going to turn 1 out of every 20 attacks(on average) against you from a hit to a miss. You may well be unconscious before you ever get to the attack that would miss, where that 40 hit points will make a difference far more often.

Same at 1st level. You only have 2 extra hit points at 1st level, but 20 attacks against you will take several fights, so the 2 hit points will be more useful.

Depends on your total armor.

Assuming enemies attack with +4 to hit, dealing 6 points of damage.
Your AC with chain + shield is 18 without defense style. 19 with defense style. 12 HP without tough, 14 with tough.

In that case, the tough character can withstand one more hit.

Hit chance for the enemy is 7 out of 20 attacka, 35%. Against defense it is 6 out of 20, 30%.

So on average it takes about 7 rounds to put you down to 0 hp with defense style and 8 to 9 rounds with tough. If you consider that tough is a once per day boost to hp and does not help you recovering, over the course of a day, you might get more out of defense style than you might think.

Of course, as all fighting styles, as I said already, it is a bit to weak to be considered a feat.

 

[cbwjm]

I believe that it is to prevent PCs having an 18 in primary at 1st level.

I agree with that. I would rather that 1st level characters get 2 feats without any ASI than one feat with +1 ASI.

an "18" can wait until 4th level.

Which is fair enough, but I honestly think it doesn't matter, besides, plenty of people roll and get that 18, or much more rarely a 20, at 1st level anyway.

 

[cbwjm]

You are not meant to take them as regular feats (even at lv1). You take the freebies you get from your class... which may include multiple fighting style picks for Warriors.

I'm not happy about them being listed under feats, done that way just so they wouldn't have to make a separate page for fighting styles, like under the Warrior group entry.

They are literally already a feat (fighting initiate from Tasha's), I think the intent is for people to take them.

 

[Horwath]

Which is fair enough, but I honestly think it doesn't matter, besides, plenty of people roll and get that 18, or much more rarely a 20, at 1st level anyway.

we haven't rolled for abilities since 2003, I think...