5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
So the argument is that for 5E balance is a matter of "close enough", with the implication that your homebrew is "close enough"? Because to look into that we could at least skip the whole "recalculate everything to points and do the math" rationale that doesn't hold water.
I'm ignoring your first two paragraphs there since the reasons you give for why the 5E designers did what they did are entirely speculative.
5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
A Fighter can spend a feat to get a Fighting Style.
A human Fighter can have two Fighting Styles at level 1, during character creation.
A Fighting Style is roughly equal to a feat in value.
The Archery Fighting Style is worth a feat. A flat +2 bonus to attack, especially within the 5e design constraint of bounded accuracy, is easily worth a feat, maybe more than a feat. If Archery is a primary weapon, then it would take two feats to improve Dex to equal this +2 bonus. But even if Dex is already max at a score of 20, granting +5 Dex, this +2 Archery bonus stacks on top of this, for +7, breaking bounded accuracy.
Character optimizers consider Archery a "no brainer" choice. The other Fighting Styles tend to come on line if optimizers are theoretically maximizing some method of damage output.
5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
A Fighter can spend a feat to get a Fighting Style.
A human Fighter can have two Fighting Styles at level 1, during character creation.
A Fighting Style is roughly equal to a feat in value.
That human fighter gives up quite a few things for that feat, and is rather unlikely to spend it on a Fighting Style. An archer in particular is always going to pick Sharpshooter over a second Fighting Style, but other types of fighters will likely pick an actual feat as well. Hence, in practice a feat is worth (more than) a Fighting Style but a Fighting Style is not worth a feat.
edit: to address the Archery Fighting Style further, keep in mind that most characters for who this is an appealing option can take this as a Fighting Style already - Fighter, Rangers, they don't need to spend a feat on it. It might be worth a feat for a Rogue, but most Rogues will have better feat or ASI choices. Characters from other classes are, perhaps some very niche options notwithstanding, not going to want to touch it if they're trying to optimize at least somewhat. So again, in practice a Fighting Style is not worth a feat - even if that Fighting Style is Archery, arguably the best one.
The Archery Fighting Style is worth a feat. A flat +2 bonus to attack, especially within the 5e design constraint of bounded accuracy, is easily worth a feat, maybe more than a feat. If Archery is a primary weapon, then it would take two feats to improve Dex to equal this +2 bonus. But even if Dex is already max at a score of 20, granting +5 Dex, this +2 Archery bonus stacks on top of this, for +7, breaking bounded accuracy.
Character optimizers consider Archery a "no brainer" choice. The other Fighting Styles tend to come on line if optimizers are theoretically maximizing some method of damage output.
5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
A Fighter can spend a feat to get a Fighting Style.
A human Fighter can have two Fighting Styles at level 1, during character creation.
A Fighting Style is roughly equal to a feat in value.
That human fighter gives up quite a few things for that feat, and is rather unlikely to spend it on a Fighting Style. An archer in particular is always going to pick Sharpshooter over a second Fighting Style, but other types of fighters will likely pick an actual feat as well. Hence, in practice a feat is worth (more than) a Fighting Style but a Fighting Style is not worth a feat.
A human Dex Fighter who chooses both Sharpshooter and Archery creates an exceptionally powerful Fighter at level 1.
5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
A Fighter can spend a feat to get a Fighting Style.
A human Fighter can have two Fighting Styles at level 1, during character creation.
A Fighting Style is roughly equal to a feat in value.
That human fighter gives up quite a few things for that feat, and is rather unlikely to spend it on a Fighting Style. An archer in particular is always going to pick Sharpshooter over a second Fighting Style, but other types of fighters will likely pick an actual feat as well. Hence, in practice a feat is worth (more than) a Fighting Style but a Fighting Style is not worth a feat.
A human Dex Fighter who chooses both Sharpshooter and Archery creates an exceptionally powerful Fighter at level 1.
Yes, and he has just one Fighting Style, the one he got from the Fighter class. He did not use his feat to get a second one. His actual choice, the Sharpshooter feat, is much more powerful than adding a Fighting Style.
Archery is a no-brainer when picking a Fighting Style. Archery is arguably not even much of a consideration when picking a feat.
In other words, a Fighting Style is not equivalent to a feat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
5e has a design philosophy of "close enough" when it comes to balance. If the story is fun, then as long as options are in the same ballpark as each other, it is all good.
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
A Fighter can spend a feat to get a Fighting Style.
A human Fighter can have two Fighting Styles at level 1, during character creation.
A Fighting Style is roughly equal to a feat in value.
That human fighter gives up quite a few things for that feat, and is rather unlikely to spend it on a Fighting Style. An archer in particular is always going to pick Sharpshooter over a second Fighting Style, but other types of fighters will likely pick an actual feat as well. Hence, in practice a feat is worth (more than) a Fighting Style but a Fighting Style is not worth a feat.
A human Dex Fighter who chooses both Sharpshooter and Archery creates an exceptionally powerful Fighter at level 1.
Yes, and he has just one Fighting Style, the one he got from the Fighter class. He did not use his feat to get a second one. His actual choice, the Sharpshooter feat, is much more powerful than adding a Fighting Style.
Archery is a no-brainer when picking a Fighting Style. Archery is arguably not even much of a consideration when picking a feat.
In other words, a Fighting Style is not equivalent to a feat.
A feat that grants a stackable +2 bonus to the attack of a primary weapon, is worth a feat.
A feat that grants a stackable +2 bonus to the attack of a primary weapon, is worth a feat.
A feat that nobody takes is not worth a feat. If there was a feat that gave a +2 stackable bonus to the attack of a primary weapon, that would get taken. But such a feat doesn't exist, since Archery doesn't stack with itself or, for that matter, can't be taken twice and there is no separate feat that gives a +2 to ranged attacks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I agree, if players dont take the feat, then it is subpar compared to other feats.
If there was a feat that gave a +2 stackable bonus to the attack of a primary weapon, that would get taken.
Archery is that feat that would get taken, that gives a +2 stackable bonus to the attack of a primary weapon.
Archery stacks with everything: proficiency, ability, inspiration, magic spells. Likewise it makes advantage statistically better.
Of course, one cannot take Archery twice. Archery is already pushing the limits of bounded accuracy.
In my experience, Archery is a frequent Fighting Style choice. Only recently via Tashas is this now a feat choice, and we will see how many char op builds make use of it.
If there is an equivalent Fighting Style that gives a sword a stackable +2 bonus attack, we will more see of that as feat choices too.
If there is an equivalent Fighting Style that gives a sword a stackable +2 bonus attack, we will more see of that as feat choices too.
If such a FS gets created, Fighters and Paladins will more than likely be able to take it as a Fighting Style and won't need to spend an ASI on it. That changes things. I don't think it's a coincidence such a FS doesn't exist, not when we already have the Dueling Style. There are a couple of FSs that are somewhat complementary, but not to the point +2 to hit and +2 to damage with a sword would be - and I've never seen anyone spend a feat on a Fighting Style, never mind a second one.
Archery-the-feat doesn't stack with everything. That's the whole point: it doesn't stack with Archery-the-Fighting-Style, and thus it's immaterial for anyone who already has Archery-the-Fighting-Style. And in optimized terms, anyone who wants Archery gets it as the Fighting Style. Spending a feat on it is not an optimized choice. Which, again, indicates a feat is worth more than a Fighting Style.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
If there is an equivalent Fighting Style that gives a sword a stackable +2 bonus attack, we will more see of that as feat choices too.
If such a FS gets created, Fighters and Paladins will more than likely be able to take it as a Fighting Style and won't need to spend an ASI on it. That changes things. I don't think it's a coincidence such a FS doesn't exist, not when we already have the Dueling Style. There are a couple of FSs that are somewhat complementary, but not to the point +2 to hit and +2 to damage with a sword would be - and I've never seen anyone spend a feat on a Fighting Style, never mind a second one.
Archery-the-feat doesn't stack with everything. That's the whole point: it doesn't stack with Archery-the-Fighting-Style, and thus it's immaterial for anyone who already has Archery-the-Fighting-Style. And in optimized terms, anyone who wants Archery gets it as the Fighting Style. Spending a feat on it is not an optimized choice. Which, again, indicates a feat is worth more than a Fighting Style.
I can see some examples of it being a good feat to take:
Classes that want a fighting style but do not want to dip out of the class: Shadow Monk and Blind Fighting, Rogue and Archery Style (Especially with Cunning Action: Aim), etc...
V. Human fighters that want to start out with 2 fighting styles. Eldtrich Knight would love both Dueling and Blind Fighting if they pick up something like darkness (which is evocation!)
The Fighter class delays the choice of Archetype subclass until level 3. The delay is especially problematic for the character concept of magical warrior trained since childhood, when inexplicably there is no magic at level 1. Consider the high elven armies who train in magical warfare since birth. What is true for the Eldritch Knight is also true for the Psi Warrior.
Fighting Styles are available to the Fighter at level 1, and can easily offer magical features that represent a warrior of magic. The following is my creation that I originally intended for the Eldritch Knight, but it is equally suitable for the Psi Warrior in Tashas as well. I originally called it the Elven Chain Fighting Style, but rename it with the PsiWar in mind.
Mage Armor Fighting Style You swap out proficiency with Medium and Heavy armors. Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components. The armor appears in any style you wish, or as an invisible force around your body. According to high elf decorum, the Mage Armor appears as a fine-mesh chain shirt, worn over or under a fabric tunic of a solid bold color and intricate embroidery. In addition, you can use Intelligence instead of Dexterity for your AC bonus, and can use Intelligence instead for weapon attacks that rely on Strength or Dexterity. You know one cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can the cantrip at will as an innate spell without spell components.
Very interesting and playable, it's a bit overpowered, IMO. You take away armor proficiency, but make up for it with at-will Mage Armor, and only having one primary ASI stat to worry about is really powerful on an EK fighter. All those extra ASI bumps can go to weapons feats, defensive feats, tough, lucky, etc.
At level 6 you can have 20 in Intelligence, which would be the equivalent of having 20 into STR, DEX, and INT when it comes to weapons and spells, and you have the same AC as plate mail but without disadvantage.
The Fighter class delays the choice of Archetype subclass until level 3. The delay is especially problematic for the character concept of magical warrior trained since childhood, when inexplicably there is no magic at level 1. Consider the high elven armies who train in magical warfare since birth. What is true for the Eldritch Knight is also true for the Psi Warrior.
Fighting Styles are available to the Fighter at level 1, and can easily offer magical features that represent a warrior of magic. The following is my creation that I originally intended for the Eldritch Knight, but it is equally suitable for the Psi Warrior in Tashas as well. I originally called it the Elven Chain Fighting Style, but rename it with the PsiWar in mind.
Mage Armor Fighting Style You swap out proficiency with Medium and Heavy armors. Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components. The armor appears in any style you wish, or as an invisible force around your body. According to high elf decorum, the Mage Armor appears as a fine-mesh chain shirt, worn over or under a fabric tunic of a solid bold color and intricate embroidery. In addition, you can use Intelligence instead of Dexterity for your AC bonus, and can use Intelligence instead for weapon attacks that rely on Strength or Dexterity. You know one cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can the cantrip at will as an innate spell without spell components.
Very interesting and playable, it's a bit overpowered, IMO. You take away armor proficiency, but make up for it with at-will Mage Armor, and only having one primary ASI stat to worry about is really powerful on an EK fighter. All those extra ASI bumps can go to weapons feats, defensive feats, tough, lucky, etc.
At level 6 you can have 20 in Intelligence, which would be the equivalent of having 20 into STR, DEX, and INT when it comes to weapons and spells, and you have the same AC as plate mail but without disadvantage.
The funny thing is this already exists.....just take Defensive fighting style and studded leather suddenly becomes mage armor.
The part that really makes it crazy is the ability to get Eldritch blast or another cantrip from seemingly any class. Would you be able to cast it with INT? If so its just Defensive fighting style+
If there is an equivalent Fighting Style that gives a sword a stackable +2 bonus attack, we will more see of that as feat choices too.
If such a FS gets created, Fighters and Paladins will more than likely be able to take it as a Fighting Style and won't need to spend an ASI on it. That changes things. I don't think it's a coincidence such a FS doesn't exist, not when we already have the Dueling Style. There are a couple of FSs that are somewhat complementary, but not to the point +2 to hit and +2 to damage with a sword would be - and I've never seen anyone spend a feat on a Fighting Style, never mind a second one.
Archery-the-feat doesn't stack with everything. That's the whole point: it doesn't stack with Archery-the-Fighting-Style, and thus it's immaterial for anyone who already has Archery-the-Fighting-Style. And in optimized terms, anyone who wants Archery gets it as the Fighting Style. Spending a feat on it is not an optimized choice. Which, again, indicates a feat is worth more than a Fighting Style.
I can see some examples of it being a good feat to take:
Classes that want a fighting style but do not want to dip out of the class: Shadow Monk and Blind Fighting, Rogue and Archery Style (Especially with Cunning Action: Aim), etc...
V. Human fighters that want to start out with 2 fighting styles. Eldtrich Knight would love both Dueling and Blind Fighting if they pick up something like darkness (which is evocation!)
You're not wrong, but I think those are somewhat niche considerations. Enough to feel that in optimum conditions at least a Fighting Style is not quite worth as much as a feat. V. Humans give up a lot for that 1st level feat, for that reason alone they seem to be a special case from an optimization standpoint. Not wanting to dip out is a consideration, but given that a Fighter level would give a Rogue proficiency with longbows as well (if they don't have it as a racial proficiency of course) there's that to think of, and so on. An Eldritch Knight can choose to forego spells that allow saves in order to be able to dump Int but that is, particularly with Eldritch Strike at lvl 10, arguably not optimal - and if they can't dump Int then a straightforward ASI to buff their stat array gets really hard to resist. Lots to unpack.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The Fighter class delays the choice of Archetype subclass until level 3. The delay is especially problematic for the character concept of magical warrior trained since childhood, when inexplicably there is no magic at level 1. Consider the high elven armies who train in magical warfare since birth. What is true for the Eldritch Knight is also true for the Psi Warrior.
Fighting Styles are available to the Fighter at level 1, and can easily offer magical features that represent a warrior of magic. The following is my creation that I originally intended for the Eldritch Knight, but it is equally suitable for the Psi Warrior in Tashas as well. I originally called it the Elven Chain Fighting Style, but rename it with the PsiWar in mind.
Mage Armor Fighting Style You swap out proficiency with Medium and Heavy armors. Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components. The armor appears in any style you wish, or as an invisible force around your body. According to high elf decorum, the Mage Armor appears as a fine-mesh chain shirt, worn over or under a fabric tunic of a solid bold color and intricate embroidery. In addition, you can use Intelligence instead of Dexterity for your AC bonus, and can use Intelligence instead for weapon attacks that rely on Strength or Dexterity. You know one cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can the cantrip at will as an innate spell without spell components.
Very interesting and playable, it's a bit overpowered, IMO. You take away armor proficiency, but make up for it with at-will Mage Armor, and only having one primary ASI stat to worry about is really powerful on an EK fighter. All those extra ASI bumps can go to weapons feats, defensive feats, tough, lucky, etc.
At level 6 you can have 20 in Intelligence, which would be the equivalent of having 20 into STR, DEX, and INT when it comes to weapons and spells, and you have the same AC as plate mail but without disadvantage.
The funny thing is this already exists.....just take Defensive fighting style and studded leather suddenly becomes mage armor.
The part that really makes it crazy is the ability to get Eldritch blast or another cantrip from seemingly any class. Would you be able to cast it with INT? If so its just Defensive fighting style+
Not quite. That does nothing for weapon use or spell casting. With his homebrew once you get your INT to 20:
Spellcasting is +5
Your armor bonus is 13 + 5
All STR based weapons are +5
All ranged weapons are +5
This is all from a single ASI stat (intelligence). I like the idea, and the reasons behind it. But it is super strong.
Note, the current version is moreorless the same as as the original post, but repackages as:
Force Armor Fighting Style • Swap out proficiencies with Medium and Heavy armors. • Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components. • While using Mage Armor, you can use Intelligence for your AC bonus instead of Dexterity. • You know the Elf Sword cantrip [equivalent to the Shillelach cantrip but with longsword slashing instead of the d8 versatile quarterstaff bludgeoning] and one other cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can cast the cantrips as innate spells without spell components. Intelligence is the spellcasting ability.
Thus ranged weapon remains subpar, reflex save remains subpar, heavy weapon remains subpar, Athletics remains subpar.
The Fighter class delays the choice of Archetype subclass until level 3. The delay is especially problematic for the character concept of magical warrior trained since childhood, when inexplicably there is no magic at level 1. Consider the high elven armies who train in magical warfare since birth. What is true for the Eldritch Knight is also true for the Psi Warrior.
Fighting Styles are available to the Fighter at level 1, and can easily offer magical features that represent a warrior of magic. The following is my creation that I originally intended for the Eldritch Knight, but it is equally suitable for the Psi Warrior in Tashas as well. I originally called it the Elven Chain Fighting Style, but rename it with the PsiWar in mind.
Mage Armor Fighting Style You swap out proficiency with Medium and Heavy armors. Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components. The armor appears in any style you wish, or as an invisible force around your body. According to high elf decorum, the Mage Armor appears as a fine-mesh chain shirt, worn over or under a fabric tunic of a solid bold color and intricate embroidery. In addition, you can use Intelligence instead of Dexterity for your AC bonus, and can use Intelligence instead for weapon attacks that rely on Strength or Dexterity. You know one cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can the cantrip at will as an innate spell without spell components.
Very interesting and playable, it's a bit overpowered, IMO. You take away armor proficiency, but make up for it with at-will Mage Armor, and only having one primary ASI stat to worry about is really powerful on an EK fighter. All those extra ASI bumps can go to weapons feats, defensive feats, tough, lucky, etc.
At level 6 you can have 20 in Intelligence, which would be the equivalent of having 20 into STR, DEX, and INT when it comes to weapons and spells, and you have the same AC as plate mail but without disadvantage.
The funny thing is this already exists.....just take Defensive fighting style and studded leather suddenly becomes mage armor.
The part that really makes it crazy is the ability to get Eldritch blast or another cantrip from seemingly any class. Would you be able to cast it with INT? If so its just Defensive fighting style+
Not quite. That does nothing for weapon use or spell casting. With his homebrew once you get your INT to 20:
Spellcasting is +5
Your armor bonus is 13 + 5
All STR based weapons are +5
All ranged weapons are +5
This is all from a single ASI stat (intelligence). I like the idea, and the reasons behind it. But it is super strong.
Fair...you would get the same benefits from Hexblade with CHA sans the Dexterity but with medium armor thats hardly an issue as you can cap at 14.
Battlesmith also gets close as they can start with medium armor and 14 Dex and have INT for all their weapons.
But I agree you are basically making a fighting style that mirrors a 1 level dip in Warlock or a 3 level dip in Artificer lol.
Note, the current version is moreorless the same as as the original post, but repackages as:
Force Armor Fighting Style • Swap out proficiency with Medium and Heavy armors. • Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components. • While using Mage Armor, you can use Intelligence instead of Dexterity for your AC bonus. • You know the Elf Sword cantrip [equivalent to the Shillelach cantrip but with longsword slashing instead of the d8 versatile quarterstaff bludgeoning] and one other cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can cast the cantrips as innate spells without spell components.
Thus ranged weapons remain subpar, reflex save remains subpar, heavy weapon remains subpar.
I would make this a 1st level feat instead of a fighting style and offer up a 1st level feat to others and I would say its about even.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So the argument is that for 5E balance is a matter of "close enough", with the implication that your homebrew is "close enough"? Because to look into that we could at least skip the whole "recalculate everything to points and do the math" rationale that doesn't hold water.
I'm ignoring your first two paragraphs there since the reasons you give for why the 5E designers did what they did are entirely speculative.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Stop comparing your fighting style to feats. It's an awful comparison. Compare fighting styles to fighting styles. I've said it multiple times. Your fighting style is without question better than every other fighting style and it's not close. It's not "in the same ballpark" as other fighting styles. It's so far and away better than every other fighting style that there is no way anything like this would ever make it into an official book. That said, if you think it's fun and aren't concerned with the opinions of people here saying it's wildly OP, than use it. But if that's the case, why are we all here talking about it?
A Fighter can spend a feat to get a Fighting Style.
A human Fighter can have two Fighting Styles at level 1, during character creation.
A Fighting Style is roughly equal to a feat in value.
he / him
The Archery Fighting Style is worth a feat. A flat +2 bonus to attack, especially within the 5e design constraint of bounded accuracy, is easily worth a feat, maybe more than a feat. If Archery is a primary weapon, then it would take two feats to improve Dex to equal this +2 bonus. But even if Dex is already max at a score of 20, granting +5 Dex, this +2 Archery bonus stacks on top of this, for +7, breaking bounded accuracy.
Character optimizers consider Archery a "no brainer" choice. The other Fighting Styles tend to come on line if optimizers are theoretically maximizing some method of damage output.
he / him
That human fighter gives up quite a few things for that feat, and is rather unlikely to spend it on a Fighting Style. An archer in particular is always going to pick Sharpshooter over a second Fighting Style, but other types of fighters will likely pick an actual feat as well. Hence, in practice a feat is worth (more than) a Fighting Style but a Fighting Style is not worth a feat.
edit: to address the Archery Fighting Style further, keep in mind that most characters for who this is an appealing option can take this as a Fighting Style already - Fighter, Rangers, they don't need to spend a feat on it. It might be worth a feat for a Rogue, but most Rogues will have better feat or ASI choices. Characters from other classes are, perhaps some very niche options notwithstanding, not going to want to touch it if they're trying to optimize at least somewhat. So again, in practice a Fighting Style is not worth a feat - even if that Fighting Style is Archery, arguably the best one.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A human Dex Fighter who chooses both Sharpshooter and Archery creates an exceptionally powerful Fighter at level 1.
he / him
Yes, and he has just one Fighting Style, the one he got from the Fighter class. He did not use his feat to get a second one. His actual choice, the Sharpshooter feat, is much more powerful than adding a Fighting Style.
Archery is a no-brainer when picking a Fighting Style. Archery is arguably not even much of a consideration when picking a feat.
In other words, a Fighting Style is not equivalent to a feat.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A feat that grants a stackable +2 bonus to the attack of a primary weapon, is worth a feat.
he / him
A feat that nobody takes is not worth a feat. If there was a feat that gave a +2 stackable bonus to the attack of a primary weapon, that would get taken. But such a feat doesn't exist, since Archery doesn't stack with itself or, for that matter, can't be taken twice and there is no separate feat that gives a +2 to ranged attacks.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I agree, if players dont take the feat, then it is subpar compared to other feats.
Archery is that feat that would get taken, that gives a +2 stackable bonus to the attack of a primary weapon.
Archery stacks with everything: proficiency, ability, inspiration, magic spells. Likewise it makes advantage statistically better.
Of course, one cannot take Archery twice. Archery is already pushing the limits of bounded accuracy.
In my experience, Archery is a frequent Fighting Style choice. Only recently via Tashas is this now a feat choice, and we will see how many char op builds make use of it.
If there is an equivalent Fighting Style that gives a sword a stackable +2 bonus attack, we will more see of that as feat choices too.
he / him
If such a FS gets created, Fighters and Paladins will more than likely be able to take it as a Fighting Style and won't need to spend an ASI on it. That changes things. I don't think it's a coincidence such a FS doesn't exist, not when we already have the Dueling Style. There are a couple of FSs that are somewhat complementary, but not to the point +2 to hit and +2 to damage with a sword would be - and I've never seen anyone spend a feat on a Fighting Style, never mind a second one.
Archery-the-feat doesn't stack with everything. That's the whole point: it doesn't stack with Archery-the-Fighting-Style, and thus it's immaterial for anyone who already has Archery-the-Fighting-Style. And in optimized terms, anyone who wants Archery gets it as the Fighting Style. Spending a feat on it is not an optimized choice. Which, again, indicates a feat is worth more than a Fighting Style.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I can see some examples of it being a good feat to take:
Classes that want a fighting style but do not want to dip out of the class: Shadow Monk and Blind Fighting, Rogue and Archery Style (Especially with Cunning Action: Aim), etc...
V. Human fighters that want to start out with 2 fighting styles. Eldtrich Knight would love both Dueling and Blind Fighting if they pick up something like darkness (which is evocation!)
Very interesting and playable, it's a bit overpowered, IMO. You take away armor proficiency, but make up for it with at-will Mage Armor, and only having one primary ASI stat to worry about is really powerful on an EK fighter. All those extra ASI bumps can go to weapons feats, defensive feats, tough, lucky, etc.
At level 6 you can have 20 in Intelligence, which would be the equivalent of having 20 into STR, DEX, and INT when it comes to weapons and spells, and you have the same AC as plate mail but without disadvantage.
The funny thing is this already exists.....just take Defensive fighting style and studded leather suddenly becomes mage armor.
The part that really makes it crazy is the ability to get Eldritch blast or another cantrip from seemingly any class. Would you be able to cast it with INT? If so its just Defensive fighting style+
You're not wrong, but I think those are somewhat niche considerations. Enough to feel that in optimum conditions at least a Fighting Style is not quite worth as much as a feat. V. Humans give up a lot for that 1st level feat, for that reason alone they seem to be a special case from an optimization standpoint. Not wanting to dip out is a consideration, but given that a Fighter level would give a Rogue proficiency with longbows as well (if they don't have it as a racial proficiency of course) there's that to think of, and so on. An Eldritch Knight can choose to forego spells that allow saves in order to be able to dump Int but that is, particularly with Eldritch Strike at lvl 10, arguably not optimal - and if they can't dump Int then a straightforward ASI to buff their stat array gets really hard to resist. Lots to unpack.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Not quite. That does nothing for weapon use or spell casting. With his homebrew once you get your INT to 20:
Spellcasting is +5
Your armor bonus is 13 + 5
All STR based weapons are +5
All ranged weapons are +5
This is all from a single ASI stat (intelligence). I like the idea, and the reasons behind it. But it is super strong.
Note, the current version is moreorless the same as as the original post, but repackages as:
Force Armor Fighting Style
• Swap out proficiencies with Medium and Heavy armors.
• Instead, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can cast and dispel it at will as a reaction, as an innate spell without spell components.
• While using Mage Armor, you can use Intelligence for your AC bonus instead of Dexterity.
• You know the Elf Sword cantrip [equivalent to the Shillelach cantrip but with longsword slashing instead of the d8 versatile quarterstaff bludgeoning] and one other cantrip of your choice, such as Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, or Resistance. You can cast the cantrips as innate spells without spell components. Intelligence is the spellcasting ability.
Thus ranged weapon remains subpar, reflex save remains subpar, heavy weapon remains subpar, Athletics remains subpar.
he / him
Fair...you would get the same benefits from Hexblade with CHA sans the Dexterity but with medium armor thats hardly an issue as you can cap at 14.
Battlesmith also gets close as they can start with medium armor and 14 Dex and have INT for all their weapons.
But I agree you are basically making a fighting style that mirrors a 1 level dip in Warlock or a 3 level dip in Artificer lol.
I would make this a 1st level feat instead of a fighting style and offer up a 1st level feat to others and I would say its about even.