Hey guys! I recently discovered that dueling does in fact work with a shield after browsing the forums for a while. This made me consider whether or not I should take defense or dueling fighting style for fighter and paladin builds. (There’s also blessed warrior for paladin, but I’d rather just ask the bard or cleric to pick up guidance themselves)
I enjoy having high ACs while playing a paladin and fighter, but I also went through a great-sword/great-axe/maul phase (thanks to the templars from kingdom rush frontiers, “a sword day, a red day!”) so defense was my go to.
Now, however, I realize you can have a shield *and* have it work with dueling. This means I can still get a bonus +1 AC from the shield while also doing extra damage with a one handed weapon. (I’m thinking of grabbing a war hammer for the crusher feat, but maybe I’ll try a long sword and slasher. I’m leaning towards the former because crusher sounds fun but swords are cool too.)
so that begs the question, do I go for the extra damage (especially with a strength multiplier of plus 3 or plus 4) OR do I double down on defense to tank hits for my teammates? (Also note that I am particularly a big fan of the oath of redemption and eldritch knight sub classes if that helps)
Mechanically, Crusher is a better feat than Slasher. I actually used Slasher on a barbarian character I've been running for a while now and ended up getting the GM's permission to change it to Skill Expertise because Slasher was doing effectively nothing for me- the speed debuff it caused really wasn't useful and the critical effect didn't occur often enough to be worth it.
As far as going sword and board with Dueling vs two-hander with defensive, my advise is to pick the one you haven't played before. As long as the GM allows you to use the optional rules that let you swap out your fighting style when you hit a level that grants an ASI, you don't have to be worried that you'll find it doesn't actually fit your playing style or be stuck with a useless fighting style in the event that you find a really cool weapon you want to switch to that doesn't work with your current fighting style.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Oh?! I didn’t know about the optional rule that allows you to change fighting styles. Thanks for telling me that!
Yeah, it's in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. Listed under the Optional Rules sections for classes that get Fighting Styles (Fighters, Paladins, and Rangers).
plus after deliberating with myself I decided that I’d rather bash a hammer into someone than to slash at it. So warhammer it is!
Good plan!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Now, however, I realize you can have a shield *and* have it work with dueling. This means I can still get a bonus +1 AC from the shield while also doing extra damage with a one handed weapon. (I’m thinking of grabbing a war hammer for the crusher feat, but maybe I’ll try a long sword and slasher. I’m leaning towards the former because crusher sounds fun but swords are cool too.)
It’s probably a typo, but just pointing out that equipping a shield increases your AC by 2, not 1.
It depends a little on your role in the party. If you’re the only one up in melee, defense can be better for the added survivability. Every hit you don’t take means fewer spell slots the cleric needs to down to pick you up. And if there’s other high-damage characters, your extra 2 per hit won’t be quite as important. But if there’s a lot of support types, you might need the extra damage. Though 6thlyran is right about trying something new. None of the fighting styles are really game-altering huge things. You’ll be fine no matter what.
Now, however, I realize you can have a shield *and* have it work with dueling. This means I can still get a bonus +1 AC from the shield while also doing extra damage with a one handed weapon. (I’m thinking of grabbing a war hammer for the crusher feat, but maybe I’ll try a long sword and slasher. I’m leaning towards the former because crusher sounds fun but swords are cool too.)
It’s probably a typo, but just pointing out that equipping a shield increases your AC by 2, not 1.
They were comparing the potential AC of taking a shield with the dueling style vs a two-handed weapon with the defensive style, which is a difference of +1 AC.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Now, however, I realize you can have a shield *and* have it work with dueling. This means I can still get a bonus +1 AC from the shield while also doing extra damage with a one handed weapon. (I’m thinking of grabbing a war hammer for the crusher feat, but maybe I’ll try a long sword and slasher. I’m leaning towards the former because crusher sounds fun but swords are cool too.)
It’s probably a typo, but just pointing out that equipping a shield increases your AC by 2, not 1.
They were comparing the potential AC of taking a shield with the dueling style vs a two-handed weapon with the defensive style, which is a difference of +1 AC.
Now, however, I realize you can have a shield *and* have it work with dueling. This means I can still get a bonus +1 AC from the shield while also doing extra damage with a one handed weapon. (I’m thinking of grabbing a war hammer for the crusher feat, but maybe I’ll try a long sword and slasher. I’m leaning towards the former because crusher sounds fun but swords are cool too.)
It’s probably a typo, but just pointing out that equipping a shield increases your AC by 2, not 1.
They were comparing the potential AC of taking a shield with the dueling style vs a two-handed weapon with the defensive style, which is a difference of +1 AC.
Ok: that’d make sense.
Actually I just forgot that a shield gave you plus 2 AC. While writing this I thought it was a +1 bonus until I double checked the players handbook. oops! :P
It depends a little on your role in the party. If you’re the only one up in melee, defense can be better for the added survivability. Every hit you don’t take means fewer spell slots the cleric needs to down to pick you up. And if there’s other high-damage characters, your extra 2 per hit won’t be quite as important. But if there’s a lot of support types, you might need the extra damage. Though 6thlyran is right about trying something new. None of the fighting styles are really game-altering huge things. You’ll be fine no matter what.
That’s a good point. I’ll make sure to communicate with my team.
Dueling style gives +2 damage to those one hand/one weapon fighting attacks, and scales with your number of attacks. The scale has a ceiling of your attacks.
Defense fighting styles +1 AC scales with the number of enemies and attacks they have, which can potentially scale quite a bit more than the number of attacks you receive, even as a fighter.
defense fighting style can feel boring, but it can be wildly effective and also doesn’t impose the weird feeling of restrictive weapon uses. Defense style will increase your AC regardless of what weapons you use.
having 19 AC and taking the dodge action at the appropriate time at level 1 can have you survive quite an onslaught, especially since you can dodge and second wind on the same turn if necessary as a fighter.
paladin with all that armor can do something similar with shield of faith, a bonus action spell that further increases AC by +2 for a potential 21AC, available at level 2 Paladin.
a Paladin making use of the heroism spell for replenishing Temporary Hitpoints and maybe the heavy armor master feat can be effective at low levels too as a tank.
There are quite a few subclasses available that can help power up the sword and board style if that’s your focus. Offensively and defensively.
Well, in general folks go for Kill 'em All First rather than "Let them wear themselves out on me."
As a Paladin, I'm going to try and Smite my way through their front ranks and let the speedy characters rush ahead. As a Fighter, I might bash my way in and run ahead myself.
I would only lean Tank if I was the only build that could go that direction, but even then I'd still be considering slash and bash.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Hey guys! I recently discovered that dueling does in fact work with a shield after browsing the forums for a while. This made me consider whether or not I should take defense or dueling fighting style for fighter and paladin builds. (There’s also blessed warrior for paladin, but I’d rather just ask the bard or cleric to pick up guidance themselves)
I enjoy having high ACs while playing a paladin and fighter, but I also went through a great-sword/great-axe/maul phase (thanks to the templars from kingdom rush frontiers, “a sword day, a red day!”) so defense was my go to.
Now, however, I realize you can have a shield *and* have it work with dueling. This means I can still get a bonus +1 AC from the shield while also doing extra damage with a one handed weapon. (I’m thinking of grabbing a war hammer for the crusher feat, but maybe I’ll try a long sword and slasher. I’m leaning towards the former because crusher sounds fun but swords are cool too.)
so that begs the question, do I go for the extra damage (especially with a strength multiplier of plus 3 or plus 4) OR do I double down on defense to tank hits for my teammates? (Also note that I am particularly a big fan of the oath of redemption and eldritch knight sub classes if that helps)
Mechanically, Crusher is a better feat than Slasher. I actually used Slasher on a barbarian character I've been running for a while now and ended up getting the GM's permission to change it to Skill Expertise because Slasher was doing effectively nothing for me- the speed debuff it caused really wasn't useful and the critical effect didn't occur often enough to be worth it.
As far as going sword and board with Dueling vs two-hander with defensive, my advise is to pick the one you haven't played before. As long as the GM allows you to use the optional rules that let you swap out your fighting style when you hit a level that grants an ASI, you don't have to be worried that you'll find it doesn't actually fit your playing style or be stuck with a useless fighting style in the event that you find a really cool weapon you want to switch to that doesn't work with your current fighting style.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Oh?! I didn’t know about the optional rule that allows you to change fighting styles. Thanks for telling me that!
plus after deliberating with myself I decided that I’d rather bash a hammer into someone than to slash at it. So warhammer it is!
Yeah, it's in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. Listed under the Optional Rules sections for classes that get Fighting Styles (Fighters, Paladins, and Rangers).
Good plan!
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
It’s probably a typo, but just pointing out that equipping a shield increases your AC by 2, not 1.
It depends a little on your role in the party. If you’re the only one up in melee, defense can be better for the added survivability. Every hit you don’t take means fewer spell slots the cleric needs to down to pick you up. And if there’s other high-damage characters, your extra 2 per hit won’t be quite as important. But if there’s a lot of support types, you might need the extra damage.
Though 6thlyran is right about trying something new. None of the fighting styles are really game-altering huge things. You’ll be fine no matter what.
They were comparing the potential AC of taking a shield with the dueling style vs a two-handed weapon with the defensive style, which is a difference of +1 AC.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Ok: that’d make sense.
Actually I just forgot that a shield gave you plus 2 AC. While writing this I thought it was a +1 bonus until I double checked the players handbook. oops! :P
That’s a good point. I’ll make sure to communicate with my team.
Dueling style gives +2 damage to those one hand/one weapon fighting attacks, and scales with your number of attacks. The scale has a ceiling of your attacks.
Defense fighting styles +1 AC scales with the number of enemies and attacks they have, which can potentially scale quite a bit more than the number of attacks you receive, even as a fighter.
defense fighting style can feel boring, but it can be wildly effective and also doesn’t impose the weird feeling of restrictive weapon uses. Defense style will increase your AC regardless of what weapons you use.
having 19 AC and taking the dodge action at the appropriate time at level 1 can have you survive quite an onslaught, especially since you can dodge and second wind on the same turn if necessary as a fighter.
paladin with all that armor can do something similar with shield of faith, a bonus action spell that further increases AC by +2 for a potential 21AC, available at level 2 Paladin.
a Paladin making use of the heroism spell for replenishing Temporary Hitpoints and maybe the heavy armor master feat can be effective at low levels too as a tank.
There are quite a few subclasses available that can help power up the sword and board style if that’s your focus. Offensively and defensively.
Well, in general folks go for Kill 'em All First rather than "Let them wear themselves out on me."
As a Paladin, I'm going to try and Smite my way through their front ranks and let the speedy characters rush ahead. As a Fighter, I might bash my way in and run ahead myself.
I would only lean Tank if I was the only build that could go that direction, but even then I'd still be considering slash and bash.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
That's because eliminating enemies as quickly as possible is almost always a more effective strategy than trying to outlast them.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.