D&D (2024) Sharp shooter/Great Weapon Mastery

[Neonchameleon]

They don't give +1 to stat because they are lv1 feats. I don't think you're ever supposed to pick them with feat picks...

Why are they listed in feats, then? Uhhhhhh wizards

Because they are level 1 feats - and it might be (depending on timing) possible for a fighter to use their background feat to take one.

 

[Sacrosanct]

It's not a feat to TAKE, it's a fighting style you get FOR FREE for being a warrior-y class. I don't know why they chose to list them in the middle of the feats. Likely just because they could not bring themselves to make a separate section that would only be relevant to fighting men - this way they get one more page for spells!

Because they are level 1 feats - and it might be (depending on timing) possible for a fighter to use their background feat to take one.

Jeremy has said that warriors can choose additional fighting styles by using their ASIs just like any other feats. That's why they are feats now.

 

[Neonchameleon]

what is the point then of making feats that no one will take?
padding page count?
we did that in 2014.

People will take them. And making feats is the literal opposite of padding the page count. It means that when you have fighters, rangers, paladins, and various subclasses able to take a fighting style you can just say "Fighting style feat" rather than copy and paste everything into the class and possibly subclass.

Does this make this slight anti-padding worthwhile? Probably not. But it's not padding.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Jeremy has said that warriors can choose additional fighting styles by using their ASIs just like any other feats. That's why they are feats now.

What Jeremy hasn't added is that (unless something else is going on) these are trap choices. They don't give you an ASI and only the most powerful of them give you the equivalent of a feat. I mean which would you take between the protector fighting style or Sentinel even without the ASI.

Seriously, these are the equivalent of the 3.X Toughness feat if they are meant to be bought with ASIs

 

[Horwath]

What Jeremy hasn't added is that (unless something else is going on) these are trap choices. They don't give you an ASI and only the most powerful of them give you the equivalent of a feat. I mean which would you take between the protector fighting style or Sentinel even without the ASI.

Seriously, these are the equivalent of the 3.X Toughness feat if they are meant to be bought with ASIs

no style is equivalent of a feat.

archery comes close, but that is another problem.
I would say that archery is 3/4 of a feat, rest of them are around 1/2 feat, give or take and GW style is 1/4th or ever worse.

 

[Mort]

Most of the feat changes I like but:

Why would anyone take the new protection style?

Impose a -2 to 1 attack roll at the cost of a reaction? They could, at least have made it impose -proficiency bonus, so it has some bite beyond the first few levels. I get that -2 aligns with the shield bonus, but it's only to 1 attack and costing a reaction isn't a small thing.

 

[Horwath]

Most of the feat changes I like but:

Why would anyone take the new protection style?

Impose a -2 to 1 attack roll at the cost of a reaction? They could, at least have made it impose -proficiency bonus, so it has some bite beyond the first few levels. I get that -2 aligns with the shield bonus, but it's only to 1 attack and costing a reaction isn't a small thing.

with bounded accuracy it makes sense. and it's an equivalent of a shield.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Most of the feat changes I like but:

Why would anyone take the new protection style?

Impose a -2 to 1 attack roll at the cost of a reaction? They could, at least have made it impose -proficiency bonus, so it has some bite beyond the first few levels. I get that -2 aligns with the shield bonus, but it's only to 1 attack and costing a reaction isn't a small thing.

It's actually IMO an upgrade over the old Protection Style (which imposed disadvantage) because it's completely reliable and so can effectively give multiple allies +2AC across multiple attacks; it only needs to be triggered once.

Of course Protection Style was always bad.

 

[Mort]

with bounded accuracy it makes sense. and it's an equivalent of a shield.

It's not though.

A shield provides a +2 to all attacks, almost all of the time.

This provides a +2 against 1 attack and only at the cost of the warrior's reaction. That's WAY too big a sacrifice as levels get higher, attack bonuses get significant and multiple attacks become common.

I had a player who had the current version of this style, and disadvantage against 1 attack was ok, but above level 4 a -2 with these restrictions is not enough.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

no style is equivalent of a feat.

archery comes close, but that is another problem.
I would say that archery is 3/4 of a feat, rest of them are around 1/2 feat, give or take and GW style is 1/4th or ever worse.

Yes but if you have STR/DEX 20 they can be worth it. Particularly for Fighter that have more feat slots to play with.
They could also be very useful for classes that do not otherwise get a fighting style, to pick as their level one feat. A rogue or a Bladesinger might want it.

Edit: nevermind I forgot about the "Warrior" prerequisites for Fighting Style.