Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Updating Fighting Styles (Work in Progress)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7908448" data-attributes="member: 6987520"><p>Thanks for all the feedback! Here we go...</p><p></p><p>First, I will probably update everything so that the bonus action and reaction features don't come online until the Extra Attack feature is gained. This prevents dipping into fighting style classes and getting a load of features. You really need to put in 5 levels to get these cool "extra" via Extra Attack being obtained. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>ARCHERY:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It could just as easily be advantage, <em>but</em> something I wanted to do was actually raise the ceiling on this attack roll, allowing for the character to hit really high ACs. With advantage, a better roll is more likely, but the maximum possible isn't.</p><p></p><p>In requiring Extra Attack, the fighter/rogue parity takes longer and won't be worth as much. It would require a lot of investing, and I don't think out of the question since the bonus action aim only applies to one attack.</p><p></p><p>What about if I included that if you aim, it is your only attack? So, you have Extra Attack feature, but you would lose those additional attacks if you had to hit a really high AC??? Would it be too much of a penalty though?</p><p></p><p>DEFENSE:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dodge as a bonus action is too strong. It would allow you to take all your attacks (up to 4 or more with haste, action surge, etc.) <em>and</em> impose disadvantage on anyone who attacks you until your next turn! That is CRAZY strong!!!</p><p></p><p>That is why I worked it the other direction. The Defense style teaches you how to be defensive (i.e. Dodge action), but allows you to try to get a strike in anyway.</p><p></p><p>Think of it this way: any other character (for the most part) who choses to Dodge, doesn't get <em>any</em> attacks. You get one while still being super defensive. With the updated Extra Attack requirement, that one attack would not have disadvantage anymore.</p><p></p><p>DUELING:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, pretty much. No one at our table has ever taken the feat.</p><p></p><p>GREAT WEAPON FIGHTING</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I like the reaction feature for OA more for versatile weapons. Imagine a MC character of Champion build with Dueling and GWF wielding a long sword. At the end of your turn you tell the DM you are switching to a two-handed grip. An enemy enters your reach, BAM! OA-city, sweet heart. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> This is VERY samurai-like to me.</p><p></p><p>POLEARM FIGHTING</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Like it? I do. For a couple reasons. First, it will encourage polearm use, a sorely unused category IMO. Second, it makes "reach" important and effective in combat, another thing that is <em>very</em> important IRL. Last, the weapon needs "reach" as a property, so many "polearm"-qualifying weapons (staff, spear) don't qualify.</p><p></p><p>Also, losing the shield IMO is a big penalty. Now, this make the whip a very interesting weapon, right? Low damage, but it qualifies for Dueling and Polearm fighting, and you can use a shield with it along with it being a Finesse weapon. Can you imagine the synergies with a Fighter/Rogue gaining advantage and sneak attacking? <em>DROOL, DROOL...</em></p><p></p><p>PROTECTION</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorry, the intent was <em>all</em> allies within 5 feet. I'll update the writing.</p><p></p><p>Hmm... my thought was with the bonus action you are spending some amount of effort defending yourself. It makes the style more useful for someone who wants an option for a small AC boost but isn't as concerned with being a "team player."</p><p></p><p>Already granting the +2 AC bonus to all allies is strong enough. <em>IF</em> I changed it, I would maybe make it that you grant the bonus to one ally, but can then use your bonus action to grant the +2 AC increase to ALL your allies. This would make it more situational. If you have more than one person to protect, you can do it with your bonus action. I like that, actually, and might go that route. What do you think?</p><p></p><p>THROW WEAPON FIGHTING</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, as I see it, Thrown Weapon Fighting is probably the hardest to write up well. There are a lot of variables. Are you a viking with a shield, tossing handaxes maybe? Or are you a dagger-tossing ex-circus-performer turned Fighter/Bard or something?</p><p></p><p>The reaction OA option was just something I was thinking about that was different.</p><p></p><p>I would like to make something really cool for this style... but nothing has come up yet that fits the bill for me.</p><p></p><p>TWO WEAPON FIGHTING</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is big, huh? But, TWF already uses your bonus action to make the second weapon attack, so the style <em>has</em> to offer something. An option I was considering, is that when you get Extra Attack, TWF <em>frees up</em> your bonus action instead of giving you more for it. This way, you don't get more attacks, but you gain the ability to use your bonus action for something else. In essence, you get the second weapon attack "for free." What do you think of that?</p><p></p><p>Otherwise, as it stands, you only ever get the additional (two total) second weapon attacks. Extra Attack 2 and 3 don't grant anything more.</p><p></p><p>UNARMED FIGHTING</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I kind of like the reaction to re-establish the grapple. It would totally frustrate the attacker because if you do re-grapple, they can't move still. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>However, changing it to something like "When a creature misses you with a melee weapon attack, you can use your reaction to attempt to grapple that creature." would probably work as well. Whether or not I would include the rider "If you fail in your attempt to grapple, the creature gains advantage on any attack it makes on you until the end of its turn." or not, I don't know. It makes sense, you are basically putting yourself in harms way.</p><p></p><p>The nice thing, is either way, if you succeed you deal the 1d4 blundeoning damage as well. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 7908448, member: 6987520"] Thanks for all the feedback! Here we go... First, I will probably update everything so that the bonus action and reaction features don't come online until the Extra Attack feature is gained. This prevents dipping into fighting style classes and getting a load of features. You really need to put in 5 levels to get these cool "extra" via Extra Attack being obtained. :) ARCHERY: It could just as easily be advantage, [I]but[/I] something I wanted to do was actually raise the ceiling on this attack roll, allowing for the character to hit really high ACs. With advantage, a better roll is more likely, but the maximum possible isn't. In requiring Extra Attack, the fighter/rogue parity takes longer and won't be worth as much. It would require a lot of investing, and I don't think out of the question since the bonus action aim only applies to one attack. What about if I included that if you aim, it is your only attack? So, you have Extra Attack feature, but you would lose those additional attacks if you had to hit a really high AC??? Would it be too much of a penalty though? DEFENSE: Dodge as a bonus action is too strong. It would allow you to take all your attacks (up to 4 or more with haste, action surge, etc.) [I]and[/I] impose disadvantage on anyone who attacks you until your next turn! That is CRAZY strong!!! That is why I worked it the other direction. The Defense style teaches you how to be defensive (i.e. Dodge action), but allows you to try to get a strike in anyway. Think of it this way: any other character (for the most part) who choses to Dodge, doesn't get [I]any[/I] attacks. You get one while still being super defensive. With the updated Extra Attack requirement, that one attack would not have disadvantage anymore. DUELING: Yeah, pretty much. No one at our table has ever taken the feat. GREAT WEAPON FIGHTING I like the reaction feature for OA more for versatile weapons. Imagine a MC character of Champion build with Dueling and GWF wielding a long sword. At the end of your turn you tell the DM you are switching to a two-handed grip. An enemy enters your reach, BAM! OA-city, sweet heart. ;) This is VERY samurai-like to me. POLEARM FIGHTING Like it? I do. For a couple reasons. First, it will encourage polearm use, a sorely unused category IMO. Second, it makes "reach" important and effective in combat, another thing that is [I]very[/I] important IRL. Last, the weapon needs "reach" as a property, so many "polearm"-qualifying weapons (staff, spear) don't qualify. Also, losing the shield IMO is a big penalty. Now, this make the whip a very interesting weapon, right? Low damage, but it qualifies for Dueling and Polearm fighting, and you can use a shield with it along with it being a Finesse weapon. Can you imagine the synergies with a Fighter/Rogue gaining advantage and sneak attacking? [I]DROOL, DROOL...[/I] PROTECTION Sorry, the intent was [I]all[/I] allies within 5 feet. I'll update the writing. Hmm... my thought was with the bonus action you are spending some amount of effort defending yourself. It makes the style more useful for someone who wants an option for a small AC boost but isn't as concerned with being a "team player." Already granting the +2 AC bonus to all allies is strong enough. [I]IF[/I] I changed it, I would maybe make it that you grant the bonus to one ally, but can then use your bonus action to grant the +2 AC increase to ALL your allies. This would make it more situational. If you have more than one person to protect, you can do it with your bonus action. I like that, actually, and might go that route. What do you think? THROW WEAPON FIGHTING Well, as I see it, Thrown Weapon Fighting is probably the hardest to write up well. There are a lot of variables. Are you a viking with a shield, tossing handaxes maybe? Or are you a dagger-tossing ex-circus-performer turned Fighter/Bard or something? The reaction OA option was just something I was thinking about that was different. I would like to make something really cool for this style... but nothing has come up yet that fits the bill for me. TWO WEAPON FIGHTING It is big, huh? But, TWF already uses your bonus action to make the second weapon attack, so the style [I]has[/I] to offer something. An option I was considering, is that when you get Extra Attack, TWF [I]frees up[/I] your bonus action instead of giving you more for it. This way, you don't get more attacks, but you gain the ability to use your bonus action for something else. In essence, you get the second weapon attack "for free." What do you think of that? Otherwise, as it stands, you only ever get the additional (two total) second weapon attacks. Extra Attack 2 and 3 don't grant anything more. UNARMED FIGHTING I kind of like the reaction to re-establish the grapple. It would totally frustrate the attacker because if you do re-grapple, they can't move still. :) However, changing it to something like "When a creature misses you with a melee weapon attack, you can use your reaction to attempt to grapple that creature." would probably work as well. Whether or not I would include the rider "If you fail in your attempt to grapple, the creature gains advantage on any attack it makes on you until the end of its turn." or not, I don't know. It makes sense, you are basically putting yourself in harms way. The nice thing, is either way, if you succeed you deal the 1d4 blundeoning damage as well. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Updating Fighting Styles (Work in Progress)
Top