D&D General Fixing the Great Weapon Fighting Style


log in or register to remove this ad

longsword with versatile has same base damage as reach weapons(d10) that are Heavy 2Handed melee weapons.
so clearly, it was intended to be used with d10 base damage die.
No it isn’t, because D10 weapons are not the damage maximising choice. They are all added-utility options.

You can use duelling with a dagger, but you don’t because a rapier or longsword are better. Just because an ability technically works with something doesn’t mean it has to be a good choice.
talk about bad weapon balance, but that is another topic.
The weapons are balanced around a theoretical maximum damage output, so if you choose a fighting style that uses a smaller damage dice weapon you are given a larger boost. This is working as intended.
 

No it isn’t, because D10 weapons are not the damage maximising choice. They are all added-utility options.

The weapons are balanced around a theoretical maximum damage output, so if you choose a fighting style that uses a smaller damage dice weapon you are given a larger boost. This is working as intended.
ok,
even if you take best damage dealing weapon, greatsword, with GWF style, that is 13 damage.
longword with Dueling is 11,5.

is +1,5 damage worth losing on +2 AC?


or with just styles, is +1 damage worth losing +1 AC?
 


y'know what thought these kinds of discussions about fighting styles and the like always bring me back to?

'man, we could've actually had a halfway decent martial combat system in 5e if a whole bunch of the weapon feats and fighting styles were just part of the baseline combat rules instead of being nickled and dimed into a dozen different features you need to individually pick for your character'
 

One handed weapons get a +2 damage; that is what I'm competing with.

So we need at least +2, or even +2.5 on a d10 weapon. I also want to play dice games. I don't want endless rerolls.

On a d10, +2 is a total of +20 pips (increases to specific rolls). 9+7+5+3+1 is 25. So that is "If you roll an odd number on a weapon damage die when making a two handed melee attack, treat it as the maximum value on the die".

The changes on the average are:
1d10 gets +2.5
1d12 gets +3.0
1d6 gets +1.5, so 2d6 gets +3.0
1d8 gets +2.0 (greatclub)

This is right in line with what we want. 2d6 and 1d12 the "large rolls" both get +3.0 average, keeping their relative difference; they even play different, with 1d12 more likely to deal max damage, and 2d6 having a more consistent boost. The bonus on average is slightly larger than the dueling fighting style.

The "even numbers get maximized" gives +1.5 to d8s, +2 to d10s +2.5 to d12s and +2 to 2d6. This matches the boost of dueling style instead of exceeding it.

"X pips explode" produces E(X*dN) = E(dN) + X/N * E(X*dN), or E(X*dN) = N/(N-X) E(dN) = E(dN) + X(N+1)/(2(N-X))

N={4...12}, X={1..3} is
d4: +5/6 ; +2.5 ; +7.5
d6: +7/10; +1.75; +3.5
d8: +9/14; +1.5; +2.7
d10: +11/18; +1.375; +2.36
d12: +13/22; +1.18; +2.17
2d6: +1.4; +3.5; +7.0

bigger dice get less benefit, which sort of isn't what we want.

Having a fraction of dice sides explode or similar avoids that:

"odd (or even) numbers explode" produces E(dN*) = E(dN) + 0.5 E(dN*) = 2E(dN), which is too much.

"odd (or even) numbers explode once" produces E(dN$) = E(dN) + 0.5 E(dN) = 1.5 E(dN). d8 is +2.25, d10 is +2.75, d12 is +3.25, 2d6 is +3.5. That isn't bad.

"odd (or even) numbers add a constant bonus" produces E(dN!) = E(dN) + 0.5K. Problem here is that 2d6 gets twice the bonus of 1d12.

"odd (or even) numbers add a max die value" produces E(dN^) = E(dN) + N/2. d6 is +3, d8 is +4, d10 is +5, d12 is +6 and 2d6 is +6. This is similar to the "odd rolls are replaced by the max value" but larger in magnitude.

---

My favorite remains "odd numbers are replaced with the max value on the die".

d4 average becomes 2.5 (+1)
d6 average becomes 5.0 (+1.5)
d8 average becomes 6.5 (+2.0)
d10 average becomes 8.0 (+2.5)
d12 average becomes 9.5 (+3)
2d6 average becomes 10.0 (+3)
 

The houserule I use in my game (over 5-6 campaigns now I've used this rule).


GWF, TWF, and Dueling removed.

Offense (New Weapon Style).
All melee attacks gain +2 damage.


Helps sword/board, twf, and dual fighting. Simpel and easy, and if you switch weapons your bonus stays with you.
 

Unfortunately, I think this is still not worth it. Reach is very situational and seldom needed. Give it an additional +1 damage, and I would take it grudgingly as a two-handed weapon wielder if there were no other good options, but I'd still prefer Defense for +1 AC over this. I.e., Great Weapon Fighting needs to give +2 damage to be on par with the other fighting styles, in my opinion. Now if you gave me the reach +5' on my turn and +2 damage, I'd be very happy, but maybe that would be too good.
Great Weapon Fighting
Fighting Style Feat (Prerequisite: Fighting Style Feature)
When you make a Melee weapon attack that you are holding with two hands on your turn, you can increase your reach for that attack by 5 feet and you gain a +1 bonus to the damage roll. The weapon must have the Two-Handed or Versatile property to gain this benefit.

Better?
 

The houserule I use in my game (over 5-6 campaigns now I've used this rule).


GWF, TWF, and Dueling removed.

Offense (New Weapon Style).
All melee attacks gain +2 damage.


Helps sword/board, twf, and dual fighting. Simpel and easy, and if you switch weapons your bonus stays with you.
3e’s Weapon Spec feat was not crazy after all.
 

Great Weapon Fighting
Fighting Style Feat (Prerequisite: Fighting Style Feature)
When you make a Melee weapon attack that you are holding with two hands on your turn, you can increase your reach for that attack by 5 feet and you gain a +1 bonus to the damage roll. The weapon must have the Two-Handed or Versatile property to gain this benefit.
Sorry, I still prefer Defense and Duelist. IMHO, needs to be at least +2 damage to be comparable to duelist.
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top