New Fighting Style: Swift Striker

[Blue]

Interesting. I like the use of the fighting style because then you can give it something above par.

I had tried to widen the range of "acceptable" weapons with this once before, but from a design space it was only supposed to raise things to parity and there were a few cases where they went above.

When you gain proficiency with all Martial weapons, any simple weapons you wield gain +1 damage.

Now, martial still did better with crits, I could have increased the die size if I wanted that even. But there idea was mostly parity so you could take a simple weapon as a primary-weapon-combatant and use ti effectively.

 

[Staccat0]

That is an interesting idea. I like strategic actions outside of "I hit the monster again with my sword until it does." But I don't see it being enough of a draw to players, since in my experience at my table they prefer more simplicity, damage, and attacks.

For sure! Makes sense.

Just to be clear, I was suggesting an extra attack on a “1.” Probably not your thing but I wanted to make sure it came across.

Adding say your Str or Dex bonus to a 1 isn’t so powerful but it would give smaller lighter weapons the chance to occasionally nova with exploding dice.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

For sure! Makes sense.

Just to be clear, I was suggesting an extra attack on a “1.” Probably not your thing but I wanted to make sure it came across.

Ah! That does make more sense! My only concern with that is it is a 1 + mod and can continue into a long string of attacks. Its a neat idea, and would be cinematic, but probably more powerful than a fighting style. Maybe for a feat though. Also, maybe limit the number of potential attacks in a round to be equal to your proficiency bonus.

 

[TwoSix]

Thanks! And yea, free hand does allow for a shield, or could dual wield for another attack but without the strength/dex mod to damage. Would that change your calculation if you account for that possibility?

I prefer the shield option, so it was my first consideration. Compared to dual-wielding:

2 Short Swords + TWF: 2d6+6, 13 average damage.
2 Daggers + Swift Striker: 3d4+6, 13.5 average damage.

Pretty balanced, will stay roughly balanced with Extra Attack.

I'd also think through what a Fighter 1/Ranger (or Paladin) 2 could do with this + another fighting style, this style combines well with dueling and two-weapon fighting. And a sling user with this style, archery style, SS, and a sling would be very strong.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I prefer the shield option, so it was my first consideration. Compared to dual-wielding:

2 Short Swords + TWF: 2d6+6, 13 average damage.
2 Daggers + Swift Striker: 3d4+6, 13.5 average damage.

Pretty balanced, will stay roughly balanced with Extra Attack.

I'd also think through what a Fighter 1/Ranger (or Paladin) 2 could do with this + another fighting style, this style combines well with dueling and two-weapon fighting. And a sling user with this style, archery style, SS, and a sling would be very strong.

Thanks for that.

Also, yea. That would be interesting to have a sling user deal such massive damage, lol.

 

[Satyrn]

This looks good to me.

Of the sort where only playtesting will tell if its problematic.

 

[Tony Vargas]

But if I did that, why would you choose this over TWF?

You wouldn't have to be wielding two weapons with this, if I'm reading it right. So shield or free hand, I guess?

Conversely, if it's a free-and-clear additional attack, why not combine it with TWF?

 

[Hawk Diesel]

You wouldn't have to be wielding two weapons with this, if I'm reading it right. So shield or free hand, I guess?

Conversely, if it's a free-and-clear additional attack, why not combine it with TWF?

Considering that each weapon is limited to a d4 damage, I don't think that is sufficient when comparing to a d8 weapon with a +2 and shield or a main hand d8 and an off hand d6 weapon.

As for combining them, TWF requires a bonus action, off hand weapon, and doesn't grant modifier bonus to damage. If TWF just grants an additional attack, the what happens to the bonus action attack potential? It just makes things too messy.

 

[OB1]

Like the goal of boosting the d4 weapons. Not sure about the extra attack though. What about this?

Precise striker - You can use small weapons to their maximum effect. When wielding d4 weapons you always do the maximum damage possible with them when you hit.

So at first level
Dagger + shield - 7 damage (11 on crit) +2ac
2 daggers - 11 damage (if both hit)
Sword main hand dagger off hand - 11.5 damage (if both hit)

 

[Blue]

One concern I have is the saying that "weapon damage dice don't kill monsters, bonuses do". (Okay, that saying was from AD&D 2ed, and probably just one DM, but still.)

The base case works fine. But can this be abused?

A couple of things I can see:

A single level fighter dip can double a rogue's chances to land their sneak attack without taking up a second hand or using a bonus action (which has a good amount of competition for the rogue). And it's higher expected damage than TWF since the second one gets that ability score added to damage, even though is is superior to it except for weapon die size, and since TWF is restricted to light it's not far behind it.

A different way is if you start piling on bonuses, does it exceed? Barbarian rage bonus damage, a second fighting style to take dueling as well, just getting an extra use per round of a magic weapon. Something like the Holy Weapon spell from XGtE, or Hex / Hunter's Mark?

Hmm a Ranger 4/Fighter 1 with Swift Striker, Dueling Style, and Hunter's mark gets two attacks for d4+(STR|DEX)+2+d6 = average 8+S|D per hit, or 16 if all hit. A fighter 5 with traditional Dueling style would have 2 attacks with d8+(STR|DEX)+2 = average 6.5 per hit or 13 if all hit. But then at the next level the Swift Striker, which is already doing more damage, would get a third attack and blow other out of the water. (This doesn't require multiclassing, the Champion gains a 2nd fighting style natural, though it comes online later.)

This looks like those looking to optimize can squeeze a lot more out of it than an average users. That's might be something fine for a particular table though.