D&D 5E PH(B) Tavern Brawler Feat

[lkj]

Okay, let's say the feat gives you 1d4 for unarmed and 1d6 for imp. weapons. What's nearly always the better choice now? Why not just increase versatility instead of make light weapons pointless?

Oh, I do see the mechanical issues if you make the improvised weapons too strong. I also realize that you want a brawler to be good with his fists. In short, I understand why the feat is as it is. I'm just thinking that if I were sitting at a bar and I was going to hit someone in the face, doing it with the glass mug I'm holding might seem a better choice than my knuckles. Or maybe slamming a chair over someone's back would have some smallish benefit over punching. But at the moment, it's all bludgeoning.

But don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. Heck, I don't even have a house rule in mind at the moment. Maybe I won't, and I'll just leave it up to style and fun (which it totally is!). On the other hand, if I can find some small flavorful way to distinguish between the different approaches, I might. Though in the end it might just end up being situational and I'll figure it out as a DM in the moment.

Shrug. I'm just brainstorming at the moment.

AD

 

[Agamon]

Shrug. I'm just brainstorming at the moment.

Yeah, that's cool. At first blush, I thought it looked a bit wonky, too. After some thought, it actually makes sense to me to do it the way they did.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Oh, I do see the mechanical issues if you make the improvised weapons too strong. I also realize that you want a brawler to be good with his fists. In short, I understand why the feat is as it is. I'm just thinking that if I were sitting at a bar and I was going to hit someone in the face, doing it with the glass mug I'm holding might seem a better choice than my knuckles. Or maybe slamming a chair over someone's back would have some smallish benefit over punching. But at the moment, it's all bludgeoning.

Well, if you're the right sort of fighter, it makes a difference if you're using a weapon two-handed, right? That doesn't help with the mug, but a chair...

It's only one case, I know, but it's an example.

 

[lkj]

Yeah, that's cool. At first blush, I thought it looked a bit wonky, too. After some thought, it actually makes sense to me to do it the way they did.

Well, if you're the right sort of fighter, it makes a difference if you're using a weapon two-handed, right? That doesn't help with the mug, but a chair...

It's only one case, I know, but it's an example.

Yeah. In the end it might just work itself out in combination with other abilities, as you say. And heck, for my players, it might be enough to be able to say: "I hit the guy in the face with my mug. Then I throw it at the guy behind me, pick up a stool and start slamming people.'

Cuz it's fun and there's no harm in it once you have the feat.

AD

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Had to look it up again to realize that they eliminated the higher damage for improvised two-handed weapons. Well that's getting house ruled back in.

 

[keterys]

By that logic, Toughness is a better feat than Cleave!

Toughness only matters when the 3 hp would make a difference in your condition.

So, the logic actually still works.

Personally, I think it's more that the feat should matter in most encounters, rather than each round.

 

[Ruzak]

Had to look it up again to realize that they eliminated the higher damage for improvised two-handed weapons. Well that's getting house ruled back in.

As written this doesn't let barmaid Tika use her frying pan effectively in battle.

 

[keterys]

I played and DMd 4e since it came out and enjoyed it but one failing it had was that when making build decisions they were almost always balanced very carefully. Which made the decision not a decision because whatever you did would work out about equally well. Having non-obvious non-perfect choices to make gives character building well.. character.

I only wish the system were as balanced as you think it was Boy did I get to see some crazy variance in build and choice.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

As written this doesn't let barmaid Tika use her frying pan effectively in battle.

Yeah, 1d6 for two-handed helps a lot with the feel too.

For a Tavern Brawler, the only difference between punching someone or slashing at them with a broken bottle is damage type and style. If there is no benefit for using a two-handed object, then that is also limited to style.

But if two-handed objects do a tad more damage, you are now encouraged to pick up the bar stool and smack someone over the head with it. And this really adds to style, because most objects of that sort break once you use them, so you will have to go back to one handed strikes or objects. Now that's the kind of fight scene I want to see!

And of course, if you are lucky enough to have a nice hefty frying pan at your beck and call, then you just have a leg up over those poor fools breaking your barstools.

As far as I can see it there is no drawback to having two-handed improvised weapons do 1d6 rather than 1d4. Not sure why the change was made. Seriously doubt they will ever change it back, because they won't consider it significant enough. As soon as it came up in any game I was in I'd ask the DM if he would consider allowing 1d6.

 

[ssvegeta555]

I can see a character bash a dragon over the head with a rock he picked up along the way and then wrestle it into submission. The young green dragon in the starter set won't know what hit him.