D&D (2024) Greatweapon fighting style? Is this another joke? Did everyone at WotC failed elementary school math classes?

[TiQuinn]

And it’s always a little disheartening to see straight forward fighters or feats like this referred to as the ‘dumb’ option. I love playing fighters, and have played both the simpler options and the ones with more tactical choices, and enjoyed them all. I’m more than ‘not dumb’ enough to play more complicated classes, but I enjoy not always having to.

Yeah, this isn't a "smart" vs. "dumb" thing. Maybe complexity...but...I don't find spellcasting to be more complex than playing a battlemaster using action surge. I get it if you are a really brand new player, and want to really lessen that learning curve, but the last new player we had chose a monk, and was fine despite having ostensibly more options to choose from.

 

[Reef]

This all makes sense, but how would some more mathematical balance diminish the feeling of reliability? In addition to being simple, Dueling also feels pretty reliable!

Anyway, if they really mean ANY damage dice this time, the style will probably feel pretty good in play because there seems to be a lot of "extra" damage dice in this version of the game. The more and smaller damage dice you're rolling, the better it will feel. If it's a mechanic that feels good to the casual player who just wants to hit things hard with a big sword and let's the optimizers build to squeeze as much value from it as possible, it might even be pretty good game design.

Duelling definitely feels reliable! Other than the fact you can still roll a 1 .

As to why not make this a flat bonus, I’m obviously not privy to their thought process, but personally, I’d hazard it’s down to:

1) Duelling already exists. Adding another style that basically duplicates it, but with a different weapon group, seems like a wasted opportunity for differentiation. Which is obviously a goal this time around (with masteries).

2) with testing, they may have found the base reliability, and the joys of avoiding 1s was enough to make this an attractive choice to a large enough group. It may not need to be mathematically more optimal if it already is competitively attractive.

Anyway, I don’t mean to get down in the weeds with this. And I certainly don’t want to stomp on anyone who is having fun theorizing more powerful options. I’m just positing that this style existing is not proof that the designers are too dumb to do the math.

 

[Horwath]

Great Weapon Fighting should be the 3e rule

Add half your STR modifier to damage (rounded up, minimum+1).

oh, no no no, we can't have any that complex math in 5E,we don't know how to do that.

on more serious note;
that should be default 2Handed rule and style should be 2×STR on damage.

so starting default:
greatsword 2d6+4(1,5×STR mod of +3)
with GWF style; 2d6+6, 2×STR mod

 

[Horwath]

Does the paladin's Great Weapon Fighting style apply to the damage dice gained from Divine Smite?

D&D Sage Advice ·

www.sageadvice.eu

repeated question about a month ago...

 

[NotAYakk]

Make odd weapon damage dice be maximized.

d4 goes from 2.5 to 3.5 (+1)
d6 goes from 3.5 to 5 (+1.5)
d8 goes from 4.5 to 6.5 (+2)
d10 goes from 5.5 to 8 (+2.5)
d12 goes from 6.5 to 9.5 (+3)
2d4 goes from 5 to 7 (+2)
2d6 goes from 7 to 10 (+3)

Similar dice game, but competes well with duelist.

 

[Horwath]

Yeah, this isn't a "smart" vs. "dumb" thing. Maybe complexity...but...I don't find spellcasting to be more complex than playing a battlemaster using action surge. I get it if you are a really brand new player, and want to really lessen that learning curve, but the last new player we had chose a monk, and was fine despite having ostensibly more options to choose from.

while I am not in the dumb vs. smart camp per say, I would not equate; add some damage to attack and some minor rider to, I will distort the very fabric of reality to how I see fit.

on the monk case, you really cant go wrong with burning all your Ki on flurry of blows.

 

[Pauln6]

Could you not re-roll 1 or 2 on the weapon dice and if you roll 1 or 2 again, treat it as 3. Any other damage dice just treat 1 or 2 as 3?

 

[Horwath]

Could you not re-roll 1 or 2 on the weapon dice and if you roll 1 or 2 again, treat it as 3. Any other damage dice just treat 1 or 2 as 3?

I hate re-roll mechanics and I am happy that part of this change is that they removed it.
even if FS is possibly weaker for it.

I would remove every single re-roll from the game. It just slows things down.

Re-roll any d20 feature? add +/- 5 to the check. Done. Lucky, Silvery barbs, fighters saves, anything.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

while I am not in the dumb vs. smart camp per say, I would not equate; add some damage to attack and some minor rider to, I will distort the very fabric of reality to how I see fit.

I don't think deciding which spell to cast is more complex than choosing a battlemaster maneouvre.

 

[Horwath]

I don't think deciding which spell to cast is more complex than choosing a battlemaster maneouvre.

what?!?!?
I must have missed last 25 years of playing D&D then.

I have seen dozens of players playing spellcasters, myself included, and be paralyzed with making decisions of what spells to use in what situation.

And I have seen fair share of BM fighters(and variant rangers/paladins without spells) and no one took more than couple of seconds to use a maneuver. Myself included.