D&D 5E Fighting Styles seem to be an afterthought rather than integral..

[LapBandit]

GWF - reroll 1s and 2s for damage (why so fiddly?)
Dueling - flat + 2 damage (why a flat bonus when GWF gets less?)
Archery - flat + 2 to hit (why a flat bonus instead of ignoring 1/2 cover?)
Two Weapon Fighting Style - seems reasonable
Protection - rarely seems to be used
Defense - seems reasonable

Why in the world would you give flat bonuses to some, but make someone pick up dice and reroll otherwise? I think that is bad design.

My fix to this:

Great Weapon Fighting Style: add 2x STR to damage rather than 1x STR.
Archery Fighting Style: Ignore half-cover.

The resolves to:

A practiced archer can fire more freely into melee but doesn't get a bizarre bonus at other times.
Someone swinging a weapon with two hands should hit A LOT harder than someone using one hand AND requires the player to roll less dice.

What do you think?

EDIT (after discussion here and around the table):

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Turned Archery Style into Ranged Weapon Style: Now any ranged weapon attacks can get the +2 (to accommodate throwing weapons).[/FONT]

Great Weapon Fighting Style: Now does +3 damage flat.


Part of the reason I addressed Fighting Styles at all was my unhappiness with Fighters not being distinct enough early on and I fixed them with a couple of tweaks.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

There's a psychological component here. Players who go for heavy weapons are risk-takers who like to see big numbers, so they feel bad when they roll a 1, and this gives them another chance of rolling a 12 instead. Players with the duelist style are much more conservative, since they're probably using a shield, and would rather have a reliable bonus than a risky payoff.

If the archery bonus was only to negate half-cover, then it would be worthless in any situation where the enemy didn't have half-cover. That's way too situational for such a core class feature as a fighting style.

 

[Xeviat]

Protection is the only fighting style that I like. It's active. It gives a new option. It's not just a higher number. It's interesting. I thought they should have all been "bonus action" or "reaction" for something new. Archery could get "aim", great weapon could get "wind up", dueling could get "parry" (bonuses to face one opponent), two weapon lets you use larger weapons, and defense ... I don't know.

2x Str damage is too much for GWF. That's up to +5 damage, compared to Dueling's +2. GWF is fun, but you're right that it's not good enough. It is fun. Avoiding those low rolls.

Archery is too good. Ignoring cover would do what it's saying without being as problematic (or contributing to Sharp Shooter's -5/+10 too much).

So, what do I think? I'd like them all to be bonus action or reactions to use (I'd prefer all bonus actions, actually). Active, character defining, fun stuff.

 

[Tony Vargas]

GWF - reroll 1s and 2s for damage (why so fiddly?)

Because DoaM didn't go over well.

Dueling - flat + 2 damage (why a flat bonus when GWF gets less?)

Probably because GWF has higher base damage.

Archery - flat + 2 to hit (why a flat bonus instead of ignoring 1/2 cover?)

Simpler?

Protection - rarely seems to be used

Reactions are rather limited, yes.

Defense - seems reasonable

It's a flat bonus like Dueling & Archery.

Why in the world would you give flat bonuses to some, but make someone pick up dice and reroll otherwise? I think that is bad design.

Variety. Mechanical distinctiveness. 5e does a lot of that, differentiates things not so much by what they are, what they do or how well they do it, but by the mechanics they use to do it. Afterall, the mechanics are what we directly experience, a different mechanic feels different, even if it doesn't give particularly different results, it evokes that the fiction it's modeling so indifferently is different...
...or something like that.

What do you think?

I think combat styles could use some more options that build upon them. Feats or maneuvers or somesuch.

 

[Oofta]

GWF - reroll 1s and 2s for damage (why so fiddly?)
Dueling - flat + 2 damage (why a flat bonus when GWF gets less?)
Archery - flat + 2 to hit (why a flat bonus instead of ignoring 1/2 cover?)
Two Weapon Fighting Style - seems reasonable
Protection - rarely seems to be used
Defense - seems reasonable

Why in the world would you give flat bonuses to some, but make someone pick up dice and reroll otherwise? I think that is bad design.

My fix to this:

Great Weapon Fighting Style: add 2x STR to damage rather than 1x STR.
Archery Fighting Style: Ignore half-cover.

The resolves to:

A practiced archer can fire more freely into melee but doesn't get a bizarre bonus at other times.
Someone swinging a weapon with two hands should hit A LOT harder than someone using one hand AND requires the player to roll less dice.

What do you think?

GWF: it would be easier just to make it a straight +2, but rerolling is probably slightly better rerolling is slightly less average damage with certain weapons. I get that they wanted a different feel.
Adding double strength would be at least +5 damage per hit (much higher with magic), that' a significant increase.

Archery: ignoring cover is the sharpshooter feat schtick.

Protection: I had a character that used it for a while. I ended up not running the character long term, but I found it handy and it made sense for my character. A little fiddly though.

[EDIT: apparently rerolling 1s and 2s is worse average damage. ]

 

[dave2008]

I like both your fixes, but I do think it would really make GWM even more attractive. +20 to damage, sign me up!

 

[dave2008]

So, what do I think? I'd like them all to be bonus action or reactions to use (I'd prefer all bonus actions, actually). Active, character defining, fun stuff.

I agree, this sounds like a much better idea. Though I could see defense being a reaction.

 

[Xeviat]

GWF: it would be easier just to make it a straight +2, but rerolling is probably slightly better average damage with certain weapons. I get that they wanted a different feel.
Adding double strength would be at least +5 damage per hit (much higher with magic), that' a significant increase.

Archery: ignoring cover is the sharpshooter feat schtick.

Protection: I had a character that used it for a while. I ended up not running the character long term, but I found it handy and it made sense for my character. A little fiddly though.

Straight +2 would be better for GWF. 2d6 goes from 7 to 8.33 average.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Variety. Mechanical distinctiveness. 5e does a lot of that, differentiates things not so much by what they are, what they do or how well they do it, but by the mechanics they use to do it. Afterall, the mechanics are what we directly experience, a different mechanic feels different, even if it doesn't give particularly different results, it evokes that the fiction it's modeling so indifferently is different...
...or something like that.

Aha! Tony, I think you've put your finger on an issue that's been bothering me for quite some time: why 5E feels simultaneously oversimplified and cluttered compared to AD&D.

 

[LapBandit]

2x Str damage is too much for GWF. That's up to +5 damage, compared to Dueling's +2. GWF is fun, but you're right that it's not good enough. It is fun. Avoiding those low rolls.

A few people have highlighted this.

Let's examine it at a few levels before we judge it shall we?

1st level fighter with 16 strength:

Dueling 1d8 + 5, average 9.5 : GWF 2d6 + 6, average 13, Two-Weapon Fighting: 2d6 + 6, average 13

4th level fighter with 18 strength:

Dueling 1d8 + 6, average 10.5: GWF 2d6 + 8, average 15, Two-Weapon Fighting: 2d6 + 8, average 15

6th level fighter with 20 strength:

Dueling 2d8 + 14, average 23: GWF 4d6 + 20, average 34, Two-Weapon Fighting: 3d6 + 15, average 22

I like where it's beginning, perhaps not where it ends up. Of course, this is without considering feats yet.

EDIT: Perhaps dual wielders should hit with both weapons on the Bonus Action attack after 5th. That would change it to 4d6 + 20 for dual wielders at 6th. Also, I'd like to reform GWM/Sharpshooter to fit this new scheme.