No other feat or style gives a big bonus to hit like the Archery Fighting Style does. A simple 1st level archer can get +8 to hit easy. +9 is even possible. Is this fair, unbalanced or intended? Melee and casters get upset/jealous when they can't get near that?
Our characters (in my current party) use a point buy system. If a melee or caster decides he/she doesn't need an 18/20 in their primary (combat) stat....they spent their points. Cleric needs 18/20 Wisdom and a decent Con? Will have a shitty Strength and can't melee very well. Might not even be able to wear plate armor (well, unless dwarf). Probably why so many Clerics pick dwarf.
No other feat or style gives a big bonus to hit like the Archery Fighting Style does.
Dueling FS gives +2 damage.
A simple 1st level archer can get +8 to hit easy. +9 is even possible. Is this fair, unbalanced or intended? Melee and casters get upset/jealous when they can't get near that?
Archery's all fun and games until an enemy gets within 5 feet of you, and then you're caught with no shield and a bunch of bad choices:
Waste your action disengaging.
Put away your ranged weapon and waste your action drawing a melee weapon.
Drop your ranged weapon (which allows enemies to pick it up) and draw a melee weapon.
Shoot with disadvantage.
Shoot normally after provoking an opportunity attack.
You also have to deal with creatures (including your own allies) getting in the way and providing half-cover.
Feats can fix those issues, but only at the cost of ASIs.
I've not really compared the different fighting styles, but let's throw some mathematical comparisons.
Consider a 1st level character, with a +3 bonus in their relevant stat (dex for the archer). They have +5 attack without the fighting style, doing 1d8+3 damage (with bow, or sword). Let's put them in studded leather for an AC of 16.
A goblin is a fairly typical monster at 1st level, so let's work with a target AC of 14 to hit being normal. Without a fighting style, the character needs to roll a 9+ to hit the AC 14 (60% of the time).
Archery (+2 attack)
This changes the character's attack to +7, meaning they hit on a roll of 7+ (70% of the time). That's a 17% increase in the likelyhood of hitting, so let's just say 17% more effective (note that this style is more effective against higher AC opponents - it would add 200% increase against a target that is AC 25)
Defense (+1 AC)
Difficult to compare directly - reduces the change of being struck. The AC 16 above increases to AC17. A goblin will strike a character with AC 16 on a 12+ (45% of the time) they need a 13+ to hit AC 17 instead (40% of the time). Reducing incoming hit percentage from 45% to 40% means that the character will take approx 12% less damage, so let's say 12% more effective (note that this style is more effective if the character has higher AC already.
Duelling (+2 damage)
The damage the character does increases from 1d8+3 (average of 8) to 1d8+5 (average of 10). That's a 25% increase in damage, so let's say it's 25% more effective.
These are only some real quick comparisons for a specific situation. Any smart character will work to make the fighting style they picked efficient for them, so that it will naturally appear that the other styles aren't as good.
There's a big difference between +2 to hit and +2 to damage. Don't hit, you are doing zero damage. You can have +20 to damage...if you can't land a blow, you're doing zero..
There's a big difference between +2 to hit and +2 to damage. Don't hit, you are doing zero damage. You can have +20 to damage...if you can't land a blow, you're doing zero..
And if you don’t do damage, it doesn’t matter if you hit or not.
Probably. If it weren't, I expected there'd be a lot more of a stink raised about - maybe something similar in scale and scope to the feedback given on the ranger class - and some action on the part of WotC to address it.
...intended?
Definitely. If something so plainly and obviously written weren't intended, it would have been fixed by errata by now.
Our characters (in my current party) use a point buy system. If a melee or caster decides he/she doesn't need an 18/20 in their primary (combat) stat....they spent their points. Cleric needs 18/20 Wisdom and a decent Con? Will have a shitty Strength and can't melee very well. Might not even be able to wear plate armor (well, unless dwarf). Probably why so many Clerics pick dwarf.
Archers choosing a maxed out Dex are similarly choosing to have something important not as high to do so like Clerics (and all other classes). Every character benefits from decent Dex, Con, and Wis because those saving throws (and common ability checks with 2 of the 3) are very important to survival and success in adventures - and the other 3 scores are of use to most characters as well, unless the DM is deliberately downplaying their uses by the way they choose to run their campaign.
Also, Strength requirements on the armor chart are not "you can't wear this unless this strength is met" requirements - they mean "you will move slower while wearing this unless this strength is met."
No other feat or style gives a big bonus to hit like the Archery Fighting Style does. A simple 1st level archer can get +8 to hit easy. +9 is even possible. Is this fair, unbalanced or intended? Melee and casters get upset/jealous when they can't get near that?
Our characters (in my current party) use a point buy system. If a melee or caster decides he/she doesn't need an 18/20 in their primary (combat) stat....they spent their points. Cleric needs 18/20 Wisdom and a decent Con? Will have a shitty Strength and can't melee very well. Might not even be able to wear plate armor (well, unless dwarf). Probably why so many Clerics pick dwarf.
Dueling FS gives +2 damage.
You also have to deal with creatures (including your own allies) getting in the way and providing half-cover.
Feats can fix those issues, but only at the cost of ASIs.
I've not really compared the different fighting styles, but let's throw some mathematical comparisons.
Consider a 1st level character, with a +3 bonus in their relevant stat (dex for the archer). They have +5 attack without the fighting style, doing 1d8+3 damage (with bow, or sword). Let's put them in studded leather for an AC of 16.
A goblin is a fairly typical monster at 1st level, so let's work with a target AC of 14 to hit being normal. Without a fighting style, the character needs to roll a 9+ to hit the AC 14 (60% of the time).
Archery (+2 attack)
This changes the character's attack to +7, meaning they hit on a roll of 7+ (70% of the time). That's a 17% increase in the likelyhood of hitting, so let's just say 17% more effective (note that this style is more effective against higher AC opponents - it would add 200% increase against a target that is AC 25)
Defense (+1 AC)
Difficult to compare directly - reduces the change of being struck. The AC 16 above increases to AC17. A goblin will strike a character with AC 16 on a 12+ (45% of the time) they need a 13+ to hit AC 17 instead (40% of the time). Reducing incoming hit percentage from 45% to 40% means that the character will take approx 12% less damage, so let's say 12% more effective (note that this style is more effective if the character has higher AC already.
Duelling (+2 damage)
The damage the character does increases from 1d8+3 (average of 8) to 1d8+5 (average of 10). That's a 25% increase in damage, so let's say it's 25% more effective.
These are only some real quick comparisons for a specific situation. Any smart character will work to make the fighting style they picked efficient for them, so that it will naturally appear that the other styles aren't as good.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
There's a big difference between +2 to hit and +2 to damage. Don't hit, you are doing zero damage. You can have +20 to damage...if you can't land a blow, you're doing zero..
I understand your thoughts, but the statistical evidence demonstrates that they are at least on par.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Good thing close quarters shooter exists now in UA.