D&D 5E Non-Scaling Class Specialties: Why Choose Them?

[redrick]

So, I'm still learning D&D 5E, and I'm reading through the classes in the PHB again. As I do so, I'm asking myself what choices I would make if I were going to play a fighter, cleric, etc. This leads me to ask: what would be the reasoning for taking a non-scaling class specialty? Let's look at the fighter, for example. In looking at the choices in fighting style, there are some choices that give you an absolute, non-scaling benefit (like a +1 to AC with Defense, or a +2 to damage with Dueling). In the case of Dueling, +2 damage seems pretty impactful at lower levels, but when you've significantly increased in level, is that increase really going to be as beneficial as a fighting style that isn't so dependent on an absolute number? Other classes have similar options, so my question is intended to apply more broadly to them, too.

Please keep in mind, I am still new to this and not a tactician or well-versed on the mathematics of it all. Just honestly curious why a person would choose a specialty of this type.

Playing in a level 8 campaign right now, and the +1 to AC from defensive is still a big deal. As said below with varying numbers, +1 to AC is not easy to come by, and it ends up making a big difference in combat. We have two fighters in plate. One has the defensive style, and AC 19. The other does not, and has AC 18. (I guess he's great weapon fighter? Don't remember.) The AC 18 fighter always feels like "the squishy target" when the swords start swinging.

Similarly, things like duelist, archery, all these things scale because they are bonuses per attack, and fighters gain more attacks over time. That's how the fighter scales in power. When your attacks double at 5th level, your bonuses from Dueling, GWF, and Archery also effectively double. As discussed many times, the only style which does not scale much is TWF, which is why a lot of folks criticize it. While a fighter continues to gain more primary-hand attacks with the extra attack feature, there can only ever be one off-hand attack because the fighter only gets one bonus action. (It does scale a little, if the fighter raises his dexterity score. A 1st level fighter is doing +3 with TWF, a 4th level fighter can be doing +4 with TWF and a 6th level fighter can be doing +5, so long as they keep boosting their ability scores instead of taking feats.)

 

[spongebob1138]

I appreciate a lot of these replies. It's clear to me t I am still in the mindset of older editions of DnD. Clearly, a +1 to a stat does carry a lot more weight than I am accustomed to thinking it does!

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

In addition to what others had said, the +1 AC scales as well, just due to the nature of the game. At low levels, it is unlikely that someone from a fighting style is going to get surrounded by six opponents all getting an attack. At higher levels, each round the fighter is more likely to get hit multiple times due to hordes of opponents or creatures with multiattacks. That +1 may only help 5 percent of the time, but if it is five or six times per turn it is a lot more effective.

 

[Ashrym]

I find +1 AC is better than I had expected it to be. It's not immediately noticeable, but generally prevents about half a dozen hits over the day that adds up to a decent amount. As monster damage increases so does the amount of damage it prevents.

Dueling style let's me keep a shield while increasing a d8 damage weapon to d12 weapon averages. It's my go to back up on a DEX champion archer or if I want shield master as a feat. I don't have much to dislike on it other than not working with some damage feats.

TWF is a poor choice for a fighter with several attacks or someone already going polearm master but it's not bad if used on a MC that already has a lot of bonuses and will be using TWF anyway. Fighter / rogue, for example.

 

[aramis erak]

So, I'm still learning D&D 5E, and I'm reading through the classes in the PHB again. As I do so, I'm asking myself what choices I would make if I were going to play a fighter, cleric, etc. This leads me to ask: what would be the reasoning for taking a non-scaling class specialty? Let's look at the fighter, for example. In looking at the choices in fighting style, there are some choices that give you an absolute, non-scaling benefit (like a +1 to AC with Defense, or a +2 to damage with Dueling). In the case of Dueling, +2 damage seems pretty impactful at lower levels, but when you've significantly increased in level, is that increase really going to be as beneficial as a fighting style that isn't so dependent on an absolute number? Other classes have similar options, so my question is intended to apply more broadly to them, too.

Please keep in mind, I am still new to this and not a tactician or well-versed on the mathematics of it all. Just honestly curious why a person would choose a specialty of this type.

The +2 damage with dueling DOES scale, as does the +2 to hit with ranged attacks for Archery, as does the reroll on 1 & 2 with Greatsword Style - in the same way that basic attacks with any weapon scale - you get more at levels 5, 11, and 20, and further, your proficiency bonus makes them hit more often.

Two Weapon scales VERY weakly - it doesn't benefit from extra attacks, but does increase in damage per round as proficiency increases.

As for the Defense style, it doesn't scale, but its utility is the same at all levels, and +1 to AC is VERY handy.

The protection style doesn't scale... and its utility isn't great. But it's thematic for some characters.

None of them, however, scale much with level. Each of those fighter options is roughly equal in value except the protection - and that's a great one for a sword-n-board fighter, because he's not getting much else.

 

[aramis erak]

I find +1 AC is better than I had expected it to be. It's not immediately noticeable, but generally prevents about half a dozen hits over the day that adds up to a decent amount. As monster damage increases so does the amount of damage it prevents.

Dueling style let's me keep a shield while increasing a d8 damage weapon to d12 weapon averages. It's my go to back up on a DEX champion archer or if I want shield master as a feat. I don't have much to dislike on it other than not working with some damage feats.

TWF is a poor choice for a fighter with several attacks or someone already going polearm master but it's not bad if used on a MC that already has a lot of bonuses and will be using TWF anyway. Fighter / rogue, for example.

TWF is going to add a good bit if someone's already focusing on two weapons, even if they aren't a multi-class. The extra attack still scales with level as proficiency applies and increases with level. Likewise, TWF fighters are likely to increase their primary attack stat (either St or Dx) until it hits 20 anyway... which also scales with level.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Two Weapon scales VERY weakly - it doesn't benefit from extra attacks, but does increase in damage per round as proficiency increases.

Two-Weapon Fighting scales as you improve your relevant ability score, gaining +2 damage as your score goes from 16 to 20. It's not much, but it's something.

 

[Unwise]

It is a quirk of the maths that Defensive Style is not as good for giving an otherwise vulnerable character some extra defense as it is for making a great tank even better.

In one of my games there is a Paladin with 20 AC who often fights hordes of low level things. They need a 16 to hit normally, with defensive style making his AC21 they need a 17. So the style alone makes him take 25% less damage from mooks. That's an extreme example of course, but it shows the workings. Defensive style really only lowers your incoming damage by 5% if you are naked and getting picked on by a fairly scary creature.

 

[Ashrym]

I find +1 AC is better than I had expected it to be. It's not immediately noticeable, but generally prevents about half a dozen hits over the day that adds up to a decent amount. As monster damage increases so does the amount of damage it prevents.

Dueling style let's me keep a shield while increasing a d8 damage weapon to d12 weapon averages. It's my go to back up on a DEX champion archer or if I want shield master as a feat. I don't have much to dislike on it other than not working with some damage feats.

TWF is a poor choice for a fighter with several attacks or someone already going polearm master but it's not bad if used on a MC that already has a lot of bonuses and will be using TWF anyway. Fighter / rogue, for example.

TWF is going to add a good bit if someone's already focusing on two weapons, even if they aren't a multi-class. The extra attack still scales with level as proficiency applies and increases with level. Likewise, TWF fighters are likely to increase their primary attack stat (either St or Dx) until it hits 20 anyway... which also scales with level.

It only ever applies to one attack for a small bonus. Other offensive styles include that same ability score boost on the main attack plus multiply their own bonus times the number of extra attacks. That same bonus to hit and damage using a bonus action is also available in feat form with polearm master and crossbow expert so those feats make the TWF style superfluous on the build and allow for the benefits of other fighting styles.

TWF is great on some classes. TWF style isn't bad on a ranger because he has less multiple attacks than a fighter but he would have the same benefit with a hand crossbow and the crossbow expert feat, and keep the archery style to go with it.

 

[DaveDash]

Bounded accuracy also works both ways. The gap between "optional" and "sub optional" choices isn't that high*. You don't always need to pick all the optional choices to be effective and have fun in 5e.

Also having everything "perfectly" balanced all the time like 4e, IMO, leads to a more boring game.

*There are a couple of exceptions to this. But for your average party who doesn't chose these particular feat/class combinations, the difference is minimal.