Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GlassJaw" data-source="post: 7904233" data-attributes="member: 22103">I'm all for more options in 5E. I like the simplicity overall but it the designers went a bit too far towards simple for my tastes.Anyway, anytime there is a discussion on expanding fighting styles, it becomes immediately apparent that the problem is the lack of distinction between a fighting style and a feat. Why are some abilities feats and why are some fighting styles? How did the designers make that designation?Fighting Style almost feels like an afterthought (+1 AC? Boring). They scale don't scale at all like almost everything else in the game and again, it feels arbitrary as to what is a feat and what is a fighting style. I also don't like that they are restricted to fighters. Why can't rogues get Two-Weapon Fighting?This is less of a problem with Fighting Styles and per se and more a flaw in the feat system.I want to blow up the entire feat system, make fighting styles into feats, and grant the fighter a bonus feat instead, perhaps classifying feats at the same time, thus restricting choices at times.</blockquote>