D&D 5E (2024) The Versatile STR Fighter: Melee with a Real Ranged Option

[Minigiant]

On GW Fighting Style:
I think it's better than most realize for Greatswords and Mauls. Probably overall on par with defensive in those circumstances.

No its bad.

On 2d6, its only going from a 7 average to 8 average.

On a unofficial 2d4 weapon, its decent. 5 to 6.5.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

No its bad.

On 2d6, its only going from a 7 average to 8 average.

i was gonna say on attacks with a lot of damage dice (e.g. smites) the reroll potential can be pretty good, and then i remembered this was 2024 and checked if it was changed and, lo and behold, the reroll is now just a floor of 3. ow.

 

[FrogReaver]

No its bad.

On 2d6, its only going from a 7 average to 8 average.

That's the average damage math, but that doesn't show it's bad.

The correct comparison is:
Defensive Style prevents 1 hit per 20 attacks
GWF adds ~1 damage per attack

The question is simply:
Does +1 damage per attack cause even 1 enemy to die a turn earlier on average over the same timeframe the Fighter takes 20 attacks?

If yes, the two styles are comparable. If no, Defensive is better.

That’s what marginal value actually means - you compare how many enemy actions each bonus removes, not how big the number looks in isolation.

 

[Minigiant]

i was gonna say on attacks with a lot of damage dice (e.g. smites) the reroll potential can be pretty good, and then i remembered this was 2024 and checked if it was changed and, lo and behold, the reroll is now just a floor of 3. ow.

The reroll is bad still. Just better for all dice but d4s.

GWF is only good it you have tons of little bonus dice. Like a UA Brute Fighter who can cast HM.

That's the average damage math, but that doesn't show it's bad.

The correct comparison is:
Defensive Style prevents 1 hit per 20 attacks
GWF adds ~1 damage per attack

The question is simply:
Does +1 damage per attack cause even 1 enemy to die a turn earlier on average over the same timeframe the Fighter takes 20 attacks?

If yes, the two styles are comparable. If no, Defensive is better.

That’s what marginal value actually means - you compare how many enemy actions each bonus removes, not how big the number looks in isolation.

I wasnt doing a comparison.

Personally, I think both fighting styles are bad.

GWF barely increases GW damage.
Defensive only gives 5% more defense.

Archery increases a GW Fighter's DPR by 10%. The extra damage at range likely prevents more damage with 5.5e easy weapon swapping.

 

[FrogReaver]

I wasnt doing a comparison.

Personally, I think both fighting styles are bad.

GWF barely increases GW damage.
Defensive only gives 5% more defense.

Archery increases a GW Fighter's DPR by 10%. The extra damage at range likely prevents more damage with 5.5e easy weapon swapping.

Well the post you replied to said GWF was "probably overall on par with defensive in those circumstances".
You replied with GWF "it's bad".

If your actual point is that both Defensive and GWF are bad, that’s fine - but then replying "GWF is bad" to a post saying "these two are comparable" is a strange way to communicate that.

My point was specifically about the relative value between GWF and Defensive styles. Whether you think both are weak overall doesn’t change the math on that comparison.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

The reroll is bad still. Just better for all dice but d4s.

GWF is only good it you have tons of little bonus dice. Like a UA Brute Fighter who can cast HM.

that's...what i said...?

 

[Charlaquin]

The concept
Build a STR‑primary, heavy‑armor, two‑handed Fighter who takes Great Weapon Master and the Archery Fighting Style, starting with 14 Dex. This creates a Fighter who is fully online in melee and has a real ranged damage mode without needing a Dex focus.

You get a legitimate ranged attack mode

• With 14 Dex and Archery Style:
• Attack bonus: +2 (Dex) +2 (Archery) + proficiency
  Damage: 1d8 + 2 (Dex) + proficiency (from 2024 GWM)
• This is real ranged DPR.

At level 5, your longbow attacks match a Dex dual‑wielder’s ranged accuracy
A Dex TWF build at level 5 typically attacks at:

• +4
• +3 proficiency
• no Archery bonus

Your damage bonus is higher thanks to GWM’s proficiency‑based rider.

Your defenses remain excellent
With heavy armor:

• You sit 1 AC above a Dex dual‑wielder
• You sit 1 AC below a STR melee specialist in plate + Defense Style
• You lose nothing meaningful in survivability

You don't sacrifice your melee identity
You’re still a full STR/GWM greatsword or maul Fighter:

• high STR
• Graze mastery
• heavy armor
• strong melee DPR
• no feat tax for ranged competence
• Your melee mode is untouched.

It works on virtually every subclass
This is a framework, not a specific build.

I’m real late to this party, but I kind of love this idea.

With Point Buy and any Background that can boost Strength, you could start at Str 17 and Dex 15, take GWM at 4 and HAM at 6 to eke out an extra +1 to Initiative and ranged attacks and damage with the build, while also expanding your armor options without sacrificing AC.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The big difference between 3e and 5e is that the gap between the roleplay build, the popular decent powergame build, and high optimized build was bigger in 3e.

The 5e Cha Truestriking Elf Rogue is a high optimization build. However I doubt even more than 10% of the people who want to play Rogue desire playing a Cantrip spammed.

The STR/DEX greatsword/longbow fighter in 5e is not the tiptop of optimization but it is a strong versatile build with tons of roleplay options. It runs on 1 feat.

We are speaking of 3d6 damage at level 20.
Lower AC. Lower classical rogue skills. No way to dual wield. Which lowers the damage gap significantly.

So this whole optimizer thing is way overblown in 5e.
Good that people are doing the math. But even their conclusion is that every class is playable. Even when unoptimized.

 

[ECMO3]

IMO Blind fighting is by far the best fighting style. I used to believe in Dueling and Two-Weapon Fighting were and back then I would take defense if I did not want to lock myself into one of them. But after playing a PC with blind fighting I think it is clearly the best in effectiveness at the table.

I've now played 3 2024 campaigns with a PC with Blind fighting 2x1-20 and 1 playing now at level 12. It is so useful so often. Combine it with Fog Cloud or Darkness, find invisible enemies, bypass mirror image .....

 

[ECMO3]

We are speaking of 3d6 damage at level 20.
Lower AC. Lower classical rogue skills. No way to dual wield. Which lowers the damage gap significantly.

Charisma skills are classic Rogue skills but you don't have to give up your dex. You can push Dex first, go straight to 20 Dex first and Truestrike on a 16 will still outrun a Rogue who is making attacks using dexterity at most levels. Don't get me wrong, if damage is your priority you would go with the casting stat first, but you don't have to and you still stay near or above the Rogue baseline.

3d6 iat 20th level is nothing to sneeze at. It is 6 Rogue levels worth of dice. It is essentially a free Obscure every single turn or a free Daze+trip/poison/withdraw, it is half the cost of knock out.

3d6 is significant, but it is actually a lot more than 3d6 if you go hard into optimization. On a maximum optimized PC (Thief using ready action, fast hands and spellfire adept); at 20th level it is 2 extra Sneak attacks on the first round of combat (4 total) and one extra sneak attack per round after that with +3d6 on every one of those sneak attacks. Additionally, if you are going full Nova you add another 2d8 on every sneak attack from spellfire adept until you run out of hit dice. So in terms of base improvement on a full nova with all your hit dice it is an extra 32d6+8d8+2xweapon+2xcasting stat extra damage on the first round of combat and an extra 16d6+4d8+weapon+casting stat for the next 3 rounds and an extra 16d6+weapon+ casting stat every round after that as long as you have Cantrip Scrolls available (which you usually do at this level). That is an optimized single class build, but you can do even better than that with a 2-level Sorcerer or Warlock dip.

Dual Wielding does not lower the damage gap significantly in play because you get less out of Vex. You need to give up Vex on one of your weapons to take Nick, meaning you lose Vex entirely in melee or lose it entirely on ranged attacks. Further if you take it on a Short Sword you lose the advantage when you make the light attack. Often if you land Sneak attack with your sword it is often better to give up the paltry dagger or scimitar damage to keep the Vex until next round or for an opportunity attack. It does give you a second chance to land your sneak attack, so there is that, but that is not going to overcome the Cantrip damage boost and more effective use of Vex at most levels.