That's the concept for my next character. By level 8, 9 maneuvers, 7d8 superiority dice with 2 ASIs to max out STR and a starting feat (I chose grappler) or 3 feats to sentinel, or tough, or athlete. (I love climbing at full speed and kipping up from prone) so many options....
@@ericpeterson8732 yeah, it feels heroic to reduce the effects of enemies while increasing the effectiveness of your party /and/ still dealing decent damage.
"Why would you have the Fighter make the important Investigation check?" Eldritch Knights and Psi Warriors want decent to good INT, and unless there's a Wizard or Artificer in the party most people dump INT so you're actually somewhat likely to have the highest. I wouldn't take it as my fighting style but if I took Martial Adept it could be useful to have 1 combat and 1 skill boosting maneuver, for those periods where there's more puzzle solving or social interaction.
It is kind of niche, but worth noting that quick toss is probably the easiest way to get extra sneak attacks as a rogue. You don't need to be a thrown weapon specialist - you can have your bow or crossbow, just carry some daggers or darts. Quick toss to hit an enemy and get sneak attack (plus the superiority die), then hold an attack action for a trigger that will occur on a different turn. Uses up your attack, bonus action, and reaction, but getting two sneak attacks reliably is really strong. Significant investment, but with three levels of fighter you can get double sneak attacks six times per short rest - superior technique, action surge, and battlemaster. Seven times, if you take the martial adept feat. And you can grab a bunch of other maneuvers. Those "roll and add to a skill check" maneuvers look a lot more useful on a character with extra skills and as many as 4 areas of expertise. Fighter (Battlemaster) / Rogue has always been a great multiclass, but I think with the new fighting styles and maneuvers, it is stronger than ever.
I'll add to it/expand, it let's you dodge and still attack. This is great for barbarians(and rogues as mentioned above) multiclasses, let's you use you main feature, and the increadible powerful dodge action if things are dicey.
Hey, this is actually a neat idea. I generally dislike nets because the check to get out is so easy, but to get advantage on all the rest of your attacks it is excellent.
Although I agree with some of your points on unarmed fighting, it does have some other things to consider. In the con column, unless your GM homebrews something, you are never going to find "magic fists". You won't be able to overcome creatures resistant to non-magical weapons. In the pro column, Fists pretty much ignore the action economy. You never have to draw or drop them. You could drop a dagger (usually a free action), punch and still have an item interaction left to say, close a door (or on the cheesier side), pick up the dagger again. You can also be effective in areas where weapons are forbidden. Finally, you didn't mention the automatic damage they can inflict while grappling
@@Startoshadows That was just an example of action economy. It could be any object. I thought it was cheesy it that it makes sense mechanically, but not narratively. It would look silly in a movie, for instance.
Just going to point out that the Dueling Fighting Style and the Thrown Weapon Fighting Styles stack. They both work assuming you only hold one in your hand at a time and this can start as early as level 1. Also, Sharpshooter, Archery, and the Thrown Weapon fighting style also work together if you use darts. Just some food for thought. Also a few levels in Artificer removes any issue with having a magical returning weapon being hard to find.
I was going to mention that too. The interesting part of Thrown Weapon Fighting is how it synergizes with other Fighting styles based on what you want to throw. It gives the Fighting Initiate Feat a bit more value too.
@@seacliff217 agreed. I just hope superior technique gets buffed in the future. 1 maneuver choice is too limiting. It should be at least 2 to put it on par with martial adept.
@Jacob Jensen pretty sure they added it for grapple focused character, the extra 1d4 per round of bonus damage to grappled creatures, throw it on a monk and it's not a bad style.
@@TreantmonksTemple Hey Cris. What are yours thought on The way of the living weapon from Exploring Eberron?. Do you have the chance to see it?. What do you think on the book in general?. Greetings.
@@TreantmonksTemple you should check out Exploring Eberron if you don't mind DMG stuff, the book is amazing if you like Eberron content as it's written by the setting creator. I'd love to see you break down the subclasses here :)
FWIW, I'm using the unarmed fighting style on a character who is built around a lock-down grappling playstyle (rune knight to get advantage/bonuses on athletics, feats like tavern brawler to get bonus action grapples and skill expert to get expertise). When in fights with a big bad, it's great to lock them down, shove them prone, and give advantage to everyone. For this style, I'm not sure if the unarmed fighting style is optimal, but is seems at least up there as pretty good in that niche build. I don't think your video mentioned the rider of that style, which is that any character grappled by you takes a d4 in damage--no roll to hit necessary. That makes it at least comparable, in my view, to grappling and striking with a one-handed d8 weapon in the other hand using the duelist fighting style, at least at low levels before we start factoring in extra attack (roll to hit for d8 with an additional +2 vs. free d4 and roll to hit for d6). Now I said comparable damage to a grappled creature, so duelist is still probably the more optimal choice for this kind of character because you get the benefits even when not grappling and because the duelist damage will outpace unarmed fighting style on extra attack. But since my concept was a sort of folk hero wrestler who fights with his fists, I'm ecstatic WoTC gave me an option that at least makes the concept viable (similar to your thrown weapons point).
Unarmed Fighting style is great on an unarmed build that wants to grapple, it's 1d8 + strength is the same as a one handed longsword, and he didn't even mention the +1d4 damage with no save or roll when you're grappling. Around the time magic weapons come into play the unarmed fighter could get the eldritch tattoo that turns your unarmed attacks magical with a +1 and with a once per day 15ft reach with 1d6 extra force damage
Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment were probably added for a good reason. In a lot of fiction fighter-types are also leaders of teams or generals commanding troops. Such figures are usually depicted as being smart and charismatic. Thus, having options to help ace such rolls when most needed fits those themes very well. Plus, if someone wants to make a social/intellectual fighter this could be an alternative way to do that. Instead of having to make tough stat investment choices, they could spend maneuvers on it instead if they value those less than high stats in physical scores. So these have a use for certain types of character/game for sure.
I agree on the darkness, or fogcloud advice. It could get very old quite quickly, trivialise combat (unless the DM overcompensates in a. Metagaming way) or leave some members of the party feeling left out. I still like blind fighting as an occasional thing just don't overdo it and build a party to break the game.
Blind Fighting was pretty great for a big part of Rime of the Frostmaiden. So many invisible duergar... Grappling Strike seems like it could be interesting on a Loxodon? Since their trunk can grapple, but can't wield a weapon. That's very campaign specific, though (I haven't had a DM who has allowed Loxodons, yet).
A very gimmicky way to not need the thrown weapon style is to be an eldritch knight, have thrown weapon 1 out, throw it, pull thrown weapon 2 out, throw it, use BA for eldritch knight weapon to recall the bonded weapon into your hand.
@@texteel nah. Just multiclass. Martials perform best as multiclassed anyway. You arent missing out on high level spells by staying pureclassed and adding 2 levels of artificer gives you an important tool + cantrips you can use for utility/RP.
Once again, well done with the video. With respect, I would recommend you re-read Grappling Strike and Unarmed Fighting style. Grappling strike says melee attack, not melee WEAPON attack. Unarmed Fighting Style gives a small 'auto-damage' to grappled opponents at the beginning of your turn. Thus, not unlike "thrown weapons + quick toss", they've given you a valid battlemaster build there. As an aside, nets and darts are both 'ranged weapons' with the 'thrown' property, qualifying them for both the sharpshooter feat and the thrown weapons fighting style. That means you can pitch nets 15ft without disadvantage and automatically restrain on a hit. Further, it puts a dart fighter is roughly equal to a hand-crossbow specialist buiild (1d4+2 vs 1d6) with one less feat but burning superiority dice for the bonus action. As I said, good video and I look forward to your video on the Rune Knight.
I'd put the dart user ahead of the hand crossbow as long as you have superiority dice or ways to add bonus dmg via your bonus action (like zephyr strike, hunter's mark).
@@TheRobversion1 My point about the darts vs. xbow is that there are a lot more options - viable, combat optimizable options - for the fighter now than just a PAM or 'pistol' build. The other thing to consider is that SOME people actually play without feats (cause, you know, they're optional). Under those rules, the Tasha-fighter is a lot more viable.
Nice summary. Totally did not pick up on the utility of Bait and Switch. I think Quick Toss can be helpful if you want a longbow user or a non-polearm heavy weapon wielder. Quick Toss gives you another way to weaponize bonus actions, even if it’s limited compared to Crossbow Expert or PAM.
I like the idea of playing a "Monk". Go Fighter 1 > Monk 1 > Fighter X with the Unarmed Fighting Style. Then you get to be a Dex based unarmored martial artist while still playing a class that's actually good. Defiantly not optimal, but a lot of fun. certainly a build I'd like to try out at some point. The only downside is that missing out on the Monk's ability to make your unarmed strikes magical means you'll probably be begging your DM for an Eldritch Claw Tattoo or some homebrewed magic fist wrappings or the like. Variant Human or Custom Lineage could also do this with Ranger, which also makes a pretty good "Monk". Of course this should only be considered if you're starting at lv2 at the least since at 1 you'd have to be attacking with Str, a stat you'll probably want to dump with this build.
Two-Weapon Fighting got a lot more useful with Martial Versatility, at least on non-feat lineages. Starting with it, then swapping out at level 4 when you can get a feat like Great Weapon Master, seems like it could be a nice boost to early levels when TWF is still decent.
I'm playing a drow paladin with Blind Fighting and it's absolutely fantastic. It's almost like having Greater Invisibility (albeit harder to leverage) at level 5.
When I am evaluating new options I typically categorize them based on three tiers of interest: is this a feature that is so potent that it's worth building around, i.e. is it a centerpiece? If not, is it able to fit well into a build that already exists and works, either by improving it, granting it flexibility, or an interesting alternate flavor, i.e. a complimentary feature? If neither of those, is it interesting enough thematically to apply a homebrew change to when possible, i.e. a fixer-upper? Bait-and-switch is the only thing here that feels like a real centerpiece. Blind fighting is on the cusp, but I feel like it's more a way to enable something people were already doing. Maybe there's a build that really takes off if it only needs to sink 1 level in Fighter rather than two in Warlock. The whole darkness thing was never really my cup of tea anyway.
You can mono class a Fighter with a race that has the darkness spell avoiding a dip. Dark elves would become a stronger choice with this. Wasn't there a magic item that continually created fog?
Also Rangers have access to both Blind Fighting and the Fog Cloud spell with no multiclassing or racial requirements, so for them the investment is now roughly as small as Devil's Sight + Darkness for a pure Warlock, with the trade off that a Ranger's Fighting Style is probably worth more than a single Invocation, but the Warlock's spell slots and concentration in turn are worth more than those of the Ranger, so roughly equal there.
I'm presently playing a mini campaign with a pack of werewolves as the primary enemy. I'm using Protection, and it's actually been very clutch because there's one attack of that Werewolf you do NOT want to land: the bite, since that bite can inflict lycantropy. So Protection is very useful to give that extra layer of protection.
Well optimisation wise, a thrower build almost exactly like a longbow user (except with lower range but more consistent damage) Lets say you have an attack modifier (dex or strenght of +3). The Longbow user does 1d8+3 damage per attack. This is on average 7.5dmg Now a strenght thrower does 1d6+5 dmg, which is 8.5dmg on average. But consider that a strenght thrower cannot get the bonus damage from the Sharpshooter feat, which is extremly strong. Compared to a dex thrower who uses darts: 1d4+5 dmg, on average 7.5dmg. But with darts you can use sharpshooter! So overall the longbow user is on average still stronger, because he has more range and with the archery fighting style (which they can get earlier) he has a better chance to hit, but both are quite similar with their damage output. A strenght thrower falls short though, because sharpshooter is so strong. One thing to add, the maneuvers Quick Toss might boost the dmg from the thrower. Did I miss something? Whats your take on it?
Crusher feat combined with brace, makes you able to use it every round. Also unarmed fighting is a good way to supercharge the monk, actually just a 1 lvl dip in fighter makes the monk basicly vaible up til 10th lvl or so. Might even do 2 lvl dip to get the actionsurge or even 3 lvls for samurai as the advantsge for 1 round makes a lot more sense if you are making 5-6 attacks pr round
Unarmed Fighting is only good at monk 1-4. At Monk 5+, because you have extra attack and already have a d6 martial arts die you get a bigger damage boost from Dueling. Action surge is fine, but worse on a Monk than any other character in the game. Samurai sounds nice until you remember that it takes your bonus action to get that advantage, meaning you are losing 1-2 attacks altogether for the round to get advantage on 1-2 attacks unless you also use your action surge in the same turn.
@@shanebernier2483 nah duelling requires you to wield a weapon in order to work, so wont work with unarmed strikes and unarmed fighting gives you d8 on all your attacks whereas the duelling would only work on those given by the monk weapons, the samurai your probably right about.
@@shotgunridersweden If you wield any monk weapon in one hand at level 5+, it is a d6 weapon (or better if you have access to martial weapons). That weapon also gets a +2 to damage rolls with Dueling, giving it an average damage of about 5.5 per hit (as opposed to the 4.5 of unarmed fighting). On a turn where you use Flurry of Blows and nothing else the damage is nearly identical, because you are gaining a point of damage per weapon attack and losing a point per unarmed attack. If you don't use Flurry of Blows though (like if you are out of ki) then you'll do more damage because you are making more weapon attacks than unarmed attacks.
@@shanebernier2483 well i feel your ignoring two factors here. First you seem to be working under the assumption that all your attacks hit and well thats usually not the case, and since your +2 benefit from duelling only counts on some attacks, bot all this is hit or miss and will in a prolonged fight reduce average damage. Secondly dice size matters when you crit, so whenever there is a crit your damagepotential will be greater using d8s than d6s.
@@shotgunridersweden The change in dice size from 1d6 to 1d8 is a single point of damage on average per crit, which only occur on 5% of attacks. While this technically boosts damage of unarmed fighting, it is by 0.05 points per attack, more than offset by even a single turn where you don't use flurry of blows. As for accuracy, all of your attacks are equally accurate. Factoring for accuracy on all attacks made does not change that dueling will have a higher average damage. If anything it helps the dueling build more, since someone using a weapon can benefit from magical weapons that boost accuracy.
I want to try it with an Aracokra Eldritch knight. Throw a spear, then call it back with weapon bond and throw again. Pull out 2nd spear throw again. Soul knife is a great idea!
@@ryanrex297 I was thinking about it I think the trickster would work better with archery and sharpshooter. You can already throw the blades as an action now that I think about it.
Unarmed Style is for grappling builds. My Rune Knight grappler is a monster with this fighting style. Those dice add up. 1d4 at the beginning + 1d8 with fist and rune knight d8. All while screwing over enemies on the battle field, giving all other melees advantage and keeping the squishies save.
Blind Fighting fits so perfectly with a Psi Warrior, flavorwise. I've been playing one in a mouseguard-like setting, where psionics where basically unheard of. Being able to see without looking has added a lot to the mistique of my character. Combined with the Psi Warrior's features and the Telekinetic feat, most people are just scared to be around him, and he got famed for combining these powers with physical might. It still haven't been useful in combat, since we have so little of them, but I wont ever change this fighting style.
Investigation depends on the DM, I use it all the time and it's usually pretty important. I'll often use it instead of perception to find hidden doors etc. That being said, it's always just going to be the Wizard or Rogue that does it. As an EK I'm taking the defense or Duelling fighting styles and not the manoeuvres one.
I was wondering if the Bugbears reach stacked with reach weapons. One of my next characters is going to be a Bugbear totem bear barbarian with PAM and GWM
One interesting use case for protection/interception fighting style is if you plan to play a mounted character, or one that has a pet/summon next to you in most fights. My favorite version of this is a small beastmaster ranger that takes a lv 1 dip in fighter, and rides around on their companion using interception to help reduce any damage it might take.
I made a Reborn barbarian, and started with the Tavern Brawler feat. Then when I could I took Fighting Initiate Unarmed. Modeled him after Solomon Grundy. Born on a Monday...
I've been running OotA, and blind fighting has been really useful for one of the PCs. She took it at the start and was unsure about how useful it would actually be, but she's totally on board with it now. It's great for the normal darkness throughout the underdark (she's playing a race without darkvision) when they don't want to announce their location with a bunch of light sources. But it's really come into its own with invisible enemies and other things that mess with sight. She destroyed a dark mantle encounter because their magical darkness is useless, and the poltergeists they've encountered were similarly countered by blindsight.
Technically with fighting initiate or multiclassing you can combine thrown weapon fighting + archery/duelling. You can even sneak superior technique there for quick toss. The magic wpn difficulty can be circumvented with artificer or kensei. havent used the blind fighting style yet outside of a sorc multiclass for quickened fog/darkness and tbh i switched it out for superior technique since i realized i could gain advantage much better by just quickening faerie fire, blindness, hold person or maximillian's earthen grasp. That way i dont interfere with my party and get some extra dmg in the process. As for great weapon fighting style, for base weapon dmg it indeed adds about 1 dmg on average (for a 2d6 dmg weapon). However, if you get magical weapons from your DM that provides dmg bonuses (such as flame tongue, giant slayer, dragon slayer, etc) then the dmg it adds becomes better than duelling as your reroll affects those dmg bonuses.
While not an average fighter, by taking the martial adept and superior Technique on a dex focused Battlemaster and picking up skill expert at level 4, I've been a *lot* of fun being a party face with only 14 cha and wis. Adding d8s to checks (especially with Bardic inspiration too) has often made my battle master a regular prince of battle, on and off the verbal battlefield. These options leave a lot of opportunity for new and fun interactions.
My DM is ruling that I can do the EK's bound weapon draw as part of the thrown weapon fighter style. I'm having a lot of fun throwing my javelin, then not calling back so that I have a hand free for somatic components.
I think Quick Toss can be useful for a melee specialist warrior. He makes his attacks in melee against his main target oh look there is another enemy moving towards the wizard. I’m going to get another attack with quick toss. It might kill a low level foe outright and at higher it can soften em up or make an enemy wizard lose concentration. Just adds nice tactical flexibility without robbing you of your main fighting style. Also would that work with something like a Dwarven Thrower? Because you know bonus action toss then charge at them get the hammer then smack em with it
Javalin gets bonus from Throw Weapon fighting style and Dueling for a +4 =P or Darts but using archery with the Throw weapon style Edit : This is awesome for building up to a Dwarven Thrower character at late levels XD
I'm excited for the unarmed fighting-style. If my DM let's me smite on my punches (which if their letting me do this build they might as well) then I can go Oath of Glory (formally known as Heroism) Paladin and yell SMASH!!!!! every time I smite. One For All Paladin, here we come.
A Level 2 Fighter/Artificer has a magical weapon with +1 to attack rolls and +3 damage with Thrown Weapon Fighting and Returning weapon. Not bad for level 2 at all.
Unarmed fighting is good for two-handed weapons users who want to grapple, since grappling occupies one of your hands. Also allows you to attack while grappling two targets, which would ordinarily be ineffective.
Great weapon fighting style sucks a bit less with greatsword or maul, as you are rolling 2d6 damage, so 1/3rd of dice rolls get a reroll, with 2/3 chance of improvement.
Great weapon fighting style says absolutely nothing about only being able to use it on one of the dice. So with a great sword if u roll a 1 and/ or 2 on both of the dice (or more if u get a crit) then u can Reroll them all if u wish. 2d6 is always better then d12. Since the average and the min is higher with 2d6 (since u can’t get a 1). The only time d12 is better if your a Barbarian or a half Orc with the ability to add one more dice to the roll when u get a crit.
Is it just me that thinks quick toss should have given more accuracy to the throw instead of damage? 1 It would complement the fighting style a little bit. 2 for anyone not having the fighting style and using a superiority die, it would be more likely to hit, so no wasted resources = happier player
Honestly thrown weapons are often so bad that I could see it as a +1 to both hit and damage making it that much more attractive. And that's the conservative option. You could probably get away with +2 to both. The fact is SS and CBE makes for the safest and incredibly damaging fighter. Especially when most games do not track ammunition. :/
*What about using Brace + sharpshooter + sentinel with a hand axe or javelin since they're under the simple melee weapons list: max range on hand axe is 60ft, enemy moves into range so you throw the axe with Brace, it hits (weather you use the -5/+10 from SS or not is up to you), add the sup die to the dmg, then the enemy stops in their tracks with Sentinel. Is this a thing??? Max range on a javelin is 120ft ;)
Any idea how Interception fairs as you get into the higher levels? I finished running a 15-17th level game 5 months ago, and had the impression that imposing disadvantage on enemy attacks was increasingly ineffective as their bonuses rapidly outpaced PC Armor Classes, which were basically stagnant. So It felt to me like Interception was at least better than Protection since it was still having an effect.
The key is that you can swap styles later via the optional class features. So just use Interception early then swap it to a more conditional but effective feature later.
I hate the unarmed fighting style on principle, but it's not bad. Fighter initiate is an amazing choice for Fighters surprisingly enough. A good choice for it is the +1 to armor since you're likely always going to be wearing armor. A fighting style that increases reactions would have been neat. I wonder if they're thinking of making an archetype that excels at performance combat or that can do things like Pathfinders shattered defenses.
@@TreantmonksTemple 10:50, but listening to it again...I think what you meant was 6 additional because you had already said 2 previously about 25 seconds before. You had just stated it in a way that was for only 6 but yeah, I think you meant 6 additional. Regardless, great video Chris! I just wanted to make sure there wasn’t a limit I was unaware of.
Are Minotaur "wielding" their horns? If not are there any other ways to be unarmed fighting with two empty hands and still get to use manuevers that state "after hitting with a melee weapon...?
Is a minotaur "wielding" their natural weapon? That's a good question, I'm not sure there is a clear answer in the rules, I would be inclined to say they are.
I would like to point out that almost all those maneuvers state "after hitting with a (melee) weapon *attack* ...", with the attack part being crucial here since unarmed strikes are considered melee weapon attacks even though your fists, feet, and any other body part you might be using (except natural weapons maybe, I don't know about that) are not considered weapons. But since they are melee weapon attacks, unarmed attacks work with almost every maneuver. Brace is actually the only one that wouldn't work as far as I can tell. As a bit of trivia, Brace would also be the only maneuver that doesn't work for Psionic Blades since, even though it is considered a weapon unlike unarmed attacks, it's impossible to be wielding it at the moment Brace would otherwise trigger.
20th level fighter gets 4 attacks correct? So wouldn’t it be draw and throw 8 weapons with action surge? Am I missing something or are you assuming you already have two weapons drawn at start of turn?
One thing I don't like is assuming the Fighter makes 0 checks out of combat. If you're playing a Fighter, do you stand immobile while the rest of the group searches a room? Do you remain quiet 100% of the time when the party talks to NPCs? I've had countless times where the party enters a room and does everything BUT look in the correct place, or I say something and it's the correct response to encourage/discourage an NPC, but my dice rolls fail me. Not everything has to be about combat one hundred percent of the time, particularly when everyone else around you is bringing solid builds to the table.
I've always house-ruled thrown weapons by giving them the ammunition property, since before Tasha's came out. Even in that case, the throwing weapon style is still no worse than duelist.
Still sad the close quarters shooter fighting style didn't make it out of UA. It would have been perfect for the Forcelance character that was showcased a few months back.
Y would u use brace or even get it if u have PAM? I mean I guess for the slight extra dmg. If your wondering if u can use both and therefore get to attack twice as the same opportunity attack then the answer is no. The only thing you’d be doing is upping the dmg so getting both was kinda unnecessary.
I'm curious what your thoughts are on great weapon fighter for a paladin who is building around smite/crit. I assume the extra dice rolled from smite and the extra from crit would make it worth it. But I have no idea on how to back that up with numbers.
Crawford has ruled that great weapon fighting only affects the weapon's damage dice as opposed to extra dice from smites/sneak attack/spell effects. But ya, if your table allows it, It becomes a lot more damage if you can reroll for your smite 1s and 2s. It's also pretty good if you're using large die weapons and critting with a lot of additional weapon dice [like from brutal critical, half orc's savage attacks, the oricsh fury feat's extra die is doubled if you use it on a crit, same with kensei's deft strike -but you're limited to kensei weapons -half orc kensei could still get to 7d10 on a crit though.] Mathematically rerolling 1s and 2s averages an additional .5 per d4, .66 per d6, .75 per d8, .8 per d10, and .83 per d12. -here's a link explaining the math, rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average
I need an explanation on how the unarmed damage from the unarmed fighting style does not scale with the rest of the weapons. Is it the magic damage you need at higher levels? Because other than that most weapon retain the same die across several levels.
You need 2 hands to do 1d8+STR damge compared to a none Magic 1 hand sword gives 1d8+STR+2, to off ser the +2 you gain 1d4 each round but that do not Stack whit multi attack. And then there is the problem of Magic items Monk Aldo has there are only 2 +1 Magic items in the game for unarmed damge while there are plenty og +3 whit extra bonus weponds.
Well there's no flame-tongue gloves. Unless you get your DM to bend over backwards to get you Claw emblem or some such you'll get better mileage with actual weapons.
So the Fighting Arts both historic and Modern interests me. Different ranges...Clinch work and ground fighting is not (in my opinion) done very well in D&D. In Actual Fighting with Weapons you get binding and holds to prevent swings and stabs. The Fighter could get so much better with a Fighting moves list like spellcasters. Where are the feigns?...the tricks used to knockout someone. So many nuances in actual combat that are just glossed over.
Question about Darkness spell, in you cast on yourself without any mean to see inside, you still see outside normally or the light that would reach you is also blocked?.. Is like a 'Magic Mirror' that light go through? and in the same Scenario, but now with Blindsight of 10ft, if you can't see outside the radius of the Darkness, how you going to reach the enemy if you cant see him outside the 10ft of yourself?
The light that would reach you would be blocked by Darkness, so you can't see outside it. Darkness is like an enormous sphere of pure blackness that no (nonmagical) light can pass through. Regarding your second question, while many DM's houserule this to make it feel more realistic, the rules as written assume combatants are always aware of each other's position unless the "target" is actively hiding (used the Hide action). By RAW, if someone is invisible in combat but didn't use the Hide action, everybody involved would know exactly where the invisible person is, they'd just have disadvantage on their attacks since they can't see his weak spots or where his arms are defending for example.
That would've been funny, but then again the War Mage and their Power Surge is already fairly close to Runic, in terms of abilities that absorb enemy spells and grant a benefit for doing so.
I had an interesting concept for a fighter. I was inspired by the medieval sword fighting videos on TH-cam which demonstrate a series of maneuvers to defeat your foe. Like a battlemaster. th-cam.com/video/4GoQlvc_H3s/w-d-xo.html But you only get 3 maneuvers at level 3 and that just wasn't enough. So I decided to use every class feature that gives you more maneuvers and a superiority die. So level 1 variant human superior technique fighting style (grasping strike) and the grappler feat (to make the maneuver more effective). Level 3 are your traditional swordfighting maneuvers (disarm, riposte, and trip), now you have five d8 superiority dice per short rest. At level 4, martial adept gives you 2 more maneuvers (parry and pushing attack or menacing) and another superiority die. Now you have six dice per short rest. At level 7, class feature time- for two more maneuvers and an additional die. I chose lunging strike and bracing strike for more effective range. I envision using lunging strike to hit someone 10ft away and when they move in to attack me, then I use my reaction to bracing strike them. The ASIs at 6 and 8 can be used to increase STR to hit more often and increase the DC of the contested maneuvers. I'm still not sure if going to grappler and grasping at level 1 was the right choice, but it was on the video I used for inspiration, so I will probably try it out and swap it out later for something like bait and switch or evading steps, if I need to dance into combat to get my friends out. With 7d8 superiority dice and 9 maneuvers, I can almost do a maneuver every round, provided we aren't being hunted by an invading army of elves like we were in our last campaign arc. Unfortunately my current character Doc survived (Rogues do that), so my swordmaster battlemaster will have to wait a bit longer to enter the fray.
4:28 - no it wouldnt because the mechanics of invis themselves grant advantage/disadvange, not just the sight rules. Also in magical darkness or any other obscurement, the enemy just needs to use a hide action to escape once they are starting to lose because the feature in its dumb wording gives you sight (not detection via another sense) which in turn means despite seeing the enemy location, you still fail the check from being blinded and they can hide.
I don't care for blind fighting. Having blindsight at level 1 is too strong. There's a possible argument for it since you give up the bonuses the other styles would give you, but I don't think it equals out at all.
@@jacobjensen7704 I do agree with that. I have my reservations, but at the end of the day I'm sure there are folks who have thought about playing a blind fighter before and now have a way to make that fantasy come to life.
@@vigilantgamesllc it's also pretty situational, whereas the extra accuracy from archery, ac from defense or damage from dueling/others are almost always on.
I'm actually a little bit disappointed with this direction DnD is taking with making each new subclass of fighter or rogue a magic user, with only new flavour of how the magic is used. I'd love to see subclasses which focus on actual fighting, like utilizing weapons in better way, making shields matter to save their lives from a hit. Generally, improving their combat effectivness without calling for magical superpowers.
I've had some success with maneuvering strike with both melee and ranged weapons when it comes to getting squishies outa dodge, however now I'm thinking of swapping it out for bait and switch as they serve similar purposes but...that AC! how did I miss that! Also, pointing out the advantage aspect of Blind fighting really helped a friend of mine out with his fighter/shadow monk build in CoS. Cheers!
Yup, Bait and Switch, provided you have an ally within 5 feet of your intended path, is action "free" and superior to Evasive Footwork. Maneuvering Strike is still good though as one of the few ways to give allies movement outside their own turn as well as Disengage as a reaction rather than an action.
I think his point was that if you are using a feat to gain maneuvers, martial adept is superior to choosing the fighting initiate feat to gain superior technique.
@@vigilantgamesllc not necessarily. Consider barehanded tavern brawlers. Or the raging barbarian rending things apart with his hands. But also? I do have a human monk who took fighting initiate at level 1 to get this fighting style. Much needed if playing a monk.
I agree! I found Mink to be u appealing because it lumped the general idea of “punching” in with Ki, aging resistance, learning every language, magical martial arts and so on. Not to mention Dexterity- but now, we can effectively sock someone with our strength!
@@Jscallen13 needing a fighting style for monk speaks to the issues with monk which need to be addressed. The introduction of the monk has to do with their training and mastering of ki. Just anyone can't punch terrible monsters in the face and deal any considerable damage. Monks can because of the way they specialize. The monk needs to be fixed so it works the way it should. The answer isn't, "let's just ignore it and give unarmed fighting to other classes. Oh and let's make them even better at level 1." Also, if you don't want to he monastic, change the flavor. Be a street fighter for all I care, but use the monk class.
I really like the idea of picking up the "quick toss" maneuver on a character who has the crusher feat, so that I could have the option of using a BA to toss a light hammer to knock a distant enemy into an environmental hazard or away from a squishy caster without having to reposition or give up my main attack routine. Probably less effective than I am imagining, but I think it would be a cool way to expand tactical options. Also, knocking a dude off of a horse by bonking him in the head with a tiny, thrown hammer just feels hilarious to me.
I want everyone to picture a shark-based triton with Blind Fighting lurking around in a Fog Cloud while the Jaws theme is playing. It's honestly been really fun. Also, I've found that having the option to straight-up reverse the advantages of creatures swarming me or an ally PC/NPC has been a very nice thing in my pocket, even if it's a once-per-day or once-in-a-while kind of strategy.
The rogue subclass to utilise `brace` the most is probably the swashbuckler - move up, hit, get your free disengage and move away - either they "hunt" you down potentially taking another sneak attack. Rakish audacity of course almost guarantees you sneak attack by just walking away from where the most enemies are, since you don't need advantage and don't need to maneuvre yourself into a position where you have an ally nearby (and moving away from most other enemies is a good idea for you anyway). I do really like ambush and tactical presence as well. I could see going for a battlemaster fighter who maybe takes the feat for another superioty die and two more maneuvres to get 3 combat orientated moves and picks up these 2 for out of combat utility. Yes just focusing on combat they of course have less options than with 5 "combat" maneuvres, but if I know I will play in a campaign which will see a reasonable share of non combat encounters, than I might want to have those that come up much less, but I'll probably be very happy to have the options when they do happen. And while I agree there will highly likely be one or more highly charismatic characters in the party I also feel that you can't always choose who does the talking (maybe that is just me as a DM, but I do like to have NPCs address different people in the party, to ensure everybody get the chance to play while being in a bigger social scene). I wouldn't build every battlemaster like that, but I can certainly see the appeal of a fighter that feels like a "general" - a somewhat charismatic leader who will look for alternative ways to solve the issues at hand. So I guess long story short: I agree those maneuvres aren't great per se, but they provide certain options we really didn't have and I love having them because they aren't just more ways of doing more damage.
@@nathansmith9597 You’d have to get Warcaster (and someway to get booming blade like magic initiate) to be able to use it on that reaction attack but yea I was gonna say the same thing. U can actually potentially have the extra booming blade dmg happen twice cause u can go up to them attack with a booming blade attack and then disengage as a bonus action and then if they move boom and if they come near u attack with the same thing (and add some more dmg with the superiority dice) and then back away again and if the keep moving again then boom yet again. Pick up someone like goading attack maybe and the enemy is gonna have such a hard time reaching u that the not having disadvantage against u won’t matter most of the time. I’m actually doing this right now with one of my chars. I’m a Paladin/fighter/rogue. Vengeance Paladin (gets haste so u can attack again and add more smite dmg and also when they make an opportunity attack they can disengage). Battlemaster fighter of course and then arcane trickster rogue for booming blade and whatnot (vengeance Paladins channel divinity allows them advantage for one minute as well). So when an enemy comes near me they take the regular attack, sneak attack (potentially), booming blade, superiority dice, and divine smite. And now I’m like 30 ft away from that enemy with a booming blade on them (haste doubles your movement so that’s y I say 30ft).
One thing about: Ambush, Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment they can be used outside combat.... when u wont use your dices to anything anyway, and at higher lvl u have quite a few Battle Master Maneuvers :)
Thing I wanted to mention is that you can take a quick toss on an archer, quick toss a net (which gets +2 to hit from archer FS), now you have a restrained opponent to wail on at advantage
They added some great options. I didn't even realize how good bait and switch was. You could swap places with another melee PC to boost AC. Looking forward to your takes on the subclasses!
‘Beat up the monk for fun’ you joke but legit in my current campaign the monk and the fighter ended up sparring, the fighter having the unarmed fighting style, it... wasn’t exactly pretty for the monk.
@@unwithering5313 not really, one PC losing a fight to another in one game doesn't prove much of anything. Someone had to win and I wouldn't think monks were stronger than fighters if the opposite happened. (I do agree monks are much weaker, but this alone doesn't prove that)
The great thing about the Superior Technique fighting style is that *BATTLE MASTERS* can take it, both adding a new maneuver and adding another (admittedly crappy) superiority die. It's kind of like taking Eldritch Adept if you're a warlock or Metamagic Adept if you're a sorcerer, except you don't have to waste a feat on it ... which makes it *AMAZING* for Battle Masters. Of course, the inherent limitation of only being really good for Battle Masters really makes it *OBVIOUSLY* circumstantial ... :\
Right? a battle master with this fighting style and martial adept could start with 6 maneuvers known and 5 superiority dice per short rest, eventually increasing to 8 dice and 12 known. Also since the superiority die is added to your subclass pool they scale in die size. But ya, pretty bad fighting style for others generally. -Though almost duplicating battle master level 3 on another fighter with just a feat and a fighting style isn't a terrible trade.
GWF isn't always crap, while it does only add about 1.33 damage to a greatsword on average any weapon with additional dice rolls will benefit even more. For instance, with a flametongue greatsword (if you consider the flames part of the weapon attack) you can get a +2.66 extra damage. In certain (situational) circumstances GWF can out shine something like dueling. However, it is nice to get a fighting style that augments your combat rather than just boosting raw numbers.
@@TreantmonksTemple Ok, I wasn't sure. As far as I knew there was a difference between additional weapon damage (inherent in the weapon) and some external source of extra damage like smite which I was aware of a Sage advice saying that GFW didn't work for smite. Thanks.
I think the niche for the unarmed fighting style is still being able to do your full damage with one or both of your hands full from grappling. Combo that with the size increase from rune knight and you can make some crazy grappler builds.
There's a special place in my heart for the VHuman Battlemaster with Superior Technique and the Martial Adept feat.
Watching this video has made me consider this. So many maneuvers..
Depending on wich maneuvers you pick, this can be 5e version of the Commander from 4th edition.
@@godofzombi Ah yes, the Warlord of 4e: one of those awesome concepts that just didn't take off
That's the concept for my next character. By level 8, 9 maneuvers, 7d8 superiority dice with 2 ASIs to max out STR and a starting feat (I chose grappler) or 3 feats to sentinel, or tough, or athlete. (I love climbing at full speed and kipping up from prone) so many options....
@@ericpeterson8732 yeah, it feels heroic to reduce the effects of enemies while increasing the effectiveness of your party /and/ still dealing decent damage.
"Why would you have the Fighter make the important Investigation check?" Eldritch Knights and Psi Warriors want decent to good INT, and unless there's a Wizard or Artificer in the party most people dump INT so you're actually somewhat likely to have the highest. I wouldn't take it as my fighting style but if I took Martial Adept it could be useful to have 1 combat and 1 skill boosting maneuver, for those periods where there's more puzzle solving or social interaction.
It is kind of niche, but worth noting that quick toss is probably the easiest way to get extra sneak attacks as a rogue. You don't need to be a thrown weapon specialist - you can have your bow or crossbow, just carry some daggers or darts. Quick toss to hit an enemy and get sneak attack (plus the superiority die), then hold an attack action for a trigger that will occur on a different turn.
Uses up your attack, bonus action, and reaction, but getting two sneak attacks reliably is really strong.
Significant investment, but with three levels of fighter you can get double sneak attacks six times per short rest - superior technique, action surge, and battlemaster. Seven times, if you take the martial adept feat.
And you can grab a bunch of other maneuvers. Those "roll and add to a skill check" maneuvers look a lot more useful on a character with extra skills and as many as 4 areas of expertise.
Fighter (Battlemaster) / Rogue has always been a great multiclass, but I think with the new fighting styles and maneuvers, it is stronger than ever.
I'll add to it/expand, it let's you dodge and still attack. This is great for barbarians(and rogues as mentioned above) multiclasses, let's you use you main feature, and the increadible powerful dodge action if things are dicey.
a filthy combo would be trip attack and grappling strike. now you have the shove prone and the grapple attack while doing damage with your weapon
Convince your DM to let you use 3.5 Reaping Mauler Grapple and Pin mechanics and your laughing
You can use a net with quick toss, which is a really strong thing to take advantage of if you do a little building around it
Hey, this is actually a neat idea. I generally dislike nets because the check to get out is so easy, but to get advantage on all the rest of your attacks it is excellent.
Except that attacks with a net are always made with disadvantage unless you have crossbow master :/
@@collegeoffoliage6776 or sharp shooter.
@@hopefulmayhem5744 true, but if you're using a ranged weapon within 15ft of the enemy you probably want crossbow expert anyway 😅
@@collegeoffoliage6776 I mean cross bow expert only let's you use the net at Melee but sharp shooter gives you up to 15 at range.
Although I agree with some of your points on unarmed fighting, it does have some other things to consider. In the con column, unless your GM homebrews something, you are never going to find "magic fists". You won't be able to overcome creatures resistant to non-magical weapons. In the pro column, Fists pretty much ignore the action economy. You never have to draw or drop them. You could drop a dagger (usually a free action), punch and still have an item interaction left to say, close a door (or on the cheesier side), pick up the dagger again. You can also be effective in areas where weapons are forbidden. Finally, you didn't mention the automatic damage they can inflict while grappling
Why is it cheesy to pick the dagger back up? Doesn't sound like this character is even using it, they might as well just stow it.
@@Startoshadows That was just an example of action economy. It could be any object. I thought it was cheesy it that it makes sense mechanically, but not narratively. It would look silly in a movie, for instance.
Just going to point out that the Dueling Fighting Style and the Thrown Weapon Fighting Styles stack. They both work assuming you only hold one in your hand at a time and this can start as early as level 1.
Also, Sharpshooter, Archery, and the Thrown Weapon fighting style also work together if you use darts.
Just some food for thought. Also a few levels in Artificer removes any issue with having a magical returning weapon being hard to find.
I was going to mention that too. The interesting part of Thrown Weapon Fighting is how it synergizes with other Fighting styles based on what you want to throw.
It gives the Fighting Initiate Feat a bit more value too.
@@seacliff217 agreed. I just hope superior technique gets buffed in the future. 1 maneuver choice is too limiting. It should be at least 2 to put it on par with martial adept.
Cris: Unarmed Fighting is probably not going to be that strong long-term
Me, making my Rune Knight Hulk Build: But my big bonks...
One of the problems is that it doesn't get around damage resistance. If it did, it'd be okay.
@@jacobjensen7704 Eldritch Claw tattoo gets around that
@@Cz82 So does the insignia of claws if you don't want to use a attunement slot
@Jacob Jensen pretty sure they added it for grapple focused character, the extra 1d4 per round of bonus damage to grappled creatures, throw it on a monk and it's not a bad style.
A Rune Knight grappler is very strong now with Tasha's release and the Unarmed Fighting Style synergizes amazingly with said build
"Beat up a monk for fun" lol, a fighter is a better monk than the monk if they take a fighting style that isn't even among the good ones.
"beat up the monk for fun"
Don't mind if I do
Wait your turn. There's a line.
@@TreantmonksTemple Hey Cris. What are yours thought on The way of the living weapon from Exploring Eberron?. Do you have the chance to see it?. What do you think on the book in general?. Greetings.
@@LukmanJuan I haven't had a chance to see it. I'm assuming it's in playtest?
@@TreantmonksTemple Is from Keith Baker. He did not release it with WoTC though.
@@TreantmonksTemple you should check out Exploring Eberron if you don't mind DMG stuff, the book is amazing if you like Eberron content as it's written by the setting creator. I'd love to see you break down the subclasses here :)
FWIW, I'm using the unarmed fighting style on a character who is built around a lock-down grappling playstyle (rune knight to get advantage/bonuses on athletics, feats like tavern brawler to get bonus action grapples and skill expert to get expertise). When in fights with a big bad, it's great to lock them down, shove them prone, and give advantage to everyone. For this style, I'm not sure if the unarmed fighting style is optimal, but is seems at least up there as pretty good in that niche build. I don't think your video mentioned the rider of that style, which is that any character grappled by you takes a d4 in damage--no roll to hit necessary. That makes it at least comparable, in my view, to grappling and striking with a one-handed d8 weapon in the other hand using the duelist fighting style, at least at low levels before we start factoring in extra attack (roll to hit for d8 with an additional +2 vs. free d4 and roll to hit for d6). Now I said comparable damage to a grappled creature, so duelist is still probably the more optimal choice for this kind of character because you get the benefits even when not grappling and because the duelist damage will outpace unarmed fighting style on extra attack. But since my concept was a sort of folk hero wrestler who fights with his fists, I'm ecstatic WoTC gave me an option that at least makes the concept viable (similar to your thrown weapons point).
Just got to play a very similar character yesterday and was loving it. Grapple builds got so many tools in Tasha’s
@@mojorn8837 Yeah, it's great. Oath of Glory might work great with it as well.
Unarmed Fighting style is great on an unarmed build that wants to grapple, it's 1d8 + strength is the same as a one handed longsword, and he didn't even mention the +1d4 damage with no save or roll when you're grappling. Around the time magic weapons come into play the unarmed fighter could get the eldritch tattoo that turns your unarmed attacks magical with a +1 and with a once per day 15ft reach with 1d6 extra force damage
Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment were probably added for a good reason. In a lot of fiction fighter-types are also leaders of teams or generals commanding troops. Such figures are usually depicted as being smart and charismatic. Thus, having options to help ace such rolls when most needed fits those themes very well.
Plus, if someone wants to make a social/intellectual fighter this could be an alternative way to do that. Instead of having to make tough stat investment choices, they could spend maneuvers on it instead if they value those less than high stats in physical scores.
So these have a use for certain types of character/game for sure.
I agree on the darkness, or fogcloud advice. It could get very old quite quickly, trivialise combat (unless the DM overcompensates in a. Metagaming way) or leave some members of the party feeling left out. I still like blind fighting as an occasional thing just don't overdo it and build a party to break the game.
Blind Fighting was pretty great for a big part of Rime of the Frostmaiden. So many invisible duergar...
Grappling Strike seems like it could be interesting on a Loxodon? Since their trunk can grapple, but can't wield a weapon. That's very campaign specific, though (I haven't had a DM who has allowed Loxodons, yet).
A very gimmicky way to not need the thrown weapon style is to be an eldritch knight, have thrown weapon 1 out, throw it, pull thrown weapon 2 out, throw it, use BA for eldritch knight weapon to recall the bonded weapon into your hand.
My DM is letting me bonded weapon draw as part of the attack action. I'm having a lot of fun hurling the same javelin repeatedly.
Returning weapon infusion works well too.
@@TreantmonksTemple sure, but that is teammate reliant
@@texteel nah. Just multiclass. Martials perform best as multiclassed anyway. You arent missing out on high level spells by staying pureclassed and adding 2 levels of artificer gives you an important tool + cantrips you can use for utility/RP.
Once again, well done with the video. With respect, I would recommend you re-read Grappling Strike and Unarmed Fighting style. Grappling strike says melee attack, not melee WEAPON attack. Unarmed Fighting Style gives a small 'auto-damage' to grappled opponents at the beginning of your turn. Thus, not unlike "thrown weapons + quick toss", they've given you a valid battlemaster build there.
As an aside, nets and darts are both 'ranged weapons' with the 'thrown' property, qualifying them for both the sharpshooter feat and the thrown weapons fighting style. That means you can pitch nets 15ft without disadvantage and automatically restrain on a hit. Further, it puts a dart fighter is roughly equal to a hand-crossbow specialist buiild (1d4+2 vs 1d6) with one less feat but burning superiority dice for the bonus action.
As I said, good video and I look forward to your video on the Rune Knight.
I'd put the dart user ahead of the hand crossbow as long as you have superiority dice or ways to add bonus dmg via your bonus action (like zephyr strike, hunter's mark).
@@TheRobversion1 My point about the darts vs. xbow is that there are a lot more options - viable, combat optimizable options - for the fighter now than just a PAM or 'pistol' build. The other thing to consider is that SOME people actually play without feats (cause, you know, they're optional). Under those rules, the Tasha-fighter is a lot more viable.
Nice summary. Totally did not pick up on the utility of Bait and Switch. I think Quick Toss can be helpful if you want a longbow user or a non-polearm heavy weapon wielder. Quick Toss gives you another way to weaponize bonus actions, even if it’s limited compared to Crossbow Expert or PAM.
I like the idea of playing a "Monk". Go Fighter 1 > Monk 1 > Fighter X with the Unarmed Fighting Style. Then you get to be a Dex based unarmored martial artist while still playing a class that's actually good. Defiantly not optimal, but a lot of fun. certainly a build I'd like to try out at some point. The only downside is that missing out on the Monk's ability to make your unarmed strikes magical means you'll probably be begging your DM for an Eldritch Claw Tattoo or some homebrewed magic fist wrappings or the like. Variant Human or Custom Lineage could also do this with Ranger, which also makes a pretty good "Monk". Of course this should only be considered if you're starting at lv2 at the least since at 1 you'd have to be attacking with Str, a stat you'll probably want to dump with this build.
Two-Weapon Fighting got a lot more useful with Martial Versatility, at least on non-feat lineages. Starting with it, then swapping out at level 4 when you can get a feat like Great Weapon Master, seems like it could be a nice boost to early levels when TWF is still decent.
I'm playing a drow paladin with Blind Fighting and it's absolutely fantastic. It's almost like having Greater Invisibility (albeit harder to leverage) at level 5.
When I am evaluating new options I typically categorize them based on three tiers of interest: is this a feature that is so potent that it's worth building around, i.e. is it a centerpiece? If not, is it able to fit well into a build that already exists and works, either by improving it, granting it flexibility, or an interesting alternate flavor, i.e. a complimentary feature? If neither of those, is it interesting enough thematically to apply a homebrew change to when possible, i.e. a fixer-upper?
Bait-and-switch is the only thing here that feels like a real centerpiece. Blind fighting is on the cusp, but I feel like it's more a way to enable something people were already doing. Maybe there's a build that really takes off if it only needs to sink 1 level in Fighter rather than two in Warlock. The whole darkness thing was never really my cup of tea anyway.
You can mono class a Fighter with a race that has the darkness spell avoiding a dip. Dark elves would become a stronger choice with this. Wasn't there a magic item that continually created fog?
Also Rangers have access to both Blind Fighting and the Fog Cloud spell with no multiclassing or racial requirements, so for them the investment is now roughly as small as Devil's Sight + Darkness for a pure Warlock, with the trade off that a Ranger's Fighting Style is probably worth more than a single Invocation, but the Warlock's spell slots and concentration in turn are worth more than those of the Ranger, so roughly equal there.
the blind fighting style is huge in enabling a new archetype for the eldritch knight
Darkness is an evocation spell. I like that it gives Eldritch Knights another thing to concentrate on.
EK be like: stop trying to hit me and hit me!
I'm presently playing a mini campaign with a pack of werewolves as the primary enemy. I'm using Protection, and it's actually been very clutch because there's one attack of that Werewolf you do NOT want to land: the bite, since that bite can inflict lycantropy. So Protection is very useful to give that extra layer of protection.
Well optimisation wise, a thrower build almost exactly like a longbow user (except with lower range but more consistent damage)
Lets say you have an attack modifier (dex or strenght of +3). The Longbow user does 1d8+3 damage per attack. This is on average 7.5dmg
Now a strenght thrower does 1d6+5 dmg, which is 8.5dmg on average. But consider that a strenght thrower cannot get the bonus damage from the Sharpshooter feat, which is extremly strong.
Compared to a dex thrower who uses darts: 1d4+5 dmg, on average 7.5dmg. But with darts you can use sharpshooter!
So overall the longbow user is on average still stronger, because he has more range and with the archery fighting style (which they can get earlier) he has a better chance to hit, but both are quite similar with their damage output. A strenght thrower falls short though, because sharpshooter is so strong.
One thing to add, the maneuvers Quick Toss might boost the dmg from the thrower.
Did I miss something? Whats your take on it?
Crusher feat combined with brace, makes you able to use it every round. Also unarmed fighting is a good way to supercharge the monk, actually just a 1 lvl dip in fighter makes the monk basicly vaible up til 10th lvl or so. Might even do 2 lvl dip to get the actionsurge or even 3 lvls for samurai as the advantsge for 1 round makes a lot more sense if you are making 5-6 attacks pr round
Unarmed Fighting is only good at monk 1-4. At Monk 5+, because you have extra attack and already have a d6 martial arts die you get a bigger damage boost from Dueling. Action surge is fine, but worse on a Monk than any other character in the game. Samurai sounds nice until you remember that it takes your bonus action to get that advantage, meaning you are losing 1-2 attacks altogether for the round to get advantage on 1-2 attacks unless you also use your action surge in the same turn.
@@shanebernier2483 nah duelling requires you to wield a weapon in order to work, so wont work with unarmed strikes and unarmed fighting gives you d8 on all your attacks whereas the duelling would only work on those given by the monk weapons, the samurai your probably right about.
@@shotgunridersweden If you wield any monk weapon in one hand at level 5+, it is a d6 weapon (or better if you have access to martial weapons). That weapon also gets a +2 to damage rolls with Dueling, giving it an average damage of about 5.5 per hit (as opposed to the 4.5 of unarmed fighting). On a turn where you use Flurry of Blows and nothing else the damage is nearly identical, because you are gaining a point of damage per weapon attack and losing a point per unarmed attack. If you don't use Flurry of Blows though (like if you are out of ki) then you'll do more damage because you are making more weapon attacks than unarmed attacks.
@@shanebernier2483 well i feel your ignoring two factors here. First you seem to be working under the assumption that all your attacks hit and well thats usually not the case, and since your +2 benefit from duelling only counts on some attacks, bot all this is hit or miss and will in a prolonged fight reduce average damage. Secondly dice size matters when you crit, so whenever there is a crit your damagepotential will be greater using d8s than d6s.
@@shotgunridersweden The change in dice size from 1d6 to 1d8 is a single point of damage on average per crit, which only occur on 5% of attacks. While this technically boosts damage of unarmed fighting, it is by 0.05 points per attack, more than offset by even a single turn where you don't use flurry of blows.
As for accuracy, all of your attacks are equally accurate. Factoring for accuracy on all attacks made does not change that dueling will have a higher average damage. If anything it helps the dueling build more, since someone using a weapon can benefit from magical weapons that boost accuracy.
Thrown weapon fighting with a soul knife rouge.
I want to try it with an Aracokra Eldritch knight. Throw a spear, then call it back with weapon bond and throw again. Pull out 2nd spear throw again.
Soul knife is a great idea!
@@ryanrex297 I was thinking about it I think the trickster would work better with archery and sharpshooter. You can already throw the blades as an action now that I think about it.
Unarmed Style is for grappling builds. My Rune Knight grappler is a monster with this fighting style. Those dice add up. 1d4 at the beginning + 1d8 with fist and rune knight d8. All while screwing over enemies on the battle field, giving all other melees advantage and keeping the squishies save.
Blind Fighting fits so perfectly with a Psi Warrior, flavorwise. I've been playing one in a mouseguard-like setting, where psionics where basically unheard of. Being able to see without looking has added a lot to the mistique of my character. Combined with the Psi Warrior's features and the Telekinetic feat, most people are just scared to be around him, and he got famed for combining these powers with physical might. It still haven't been useful in combat, since we have so little of them, but I wont ever change this fighting style.
Investigation depends on the DM, I use it all the time and it's usually pretty important. I'll often use it instead of perception to find hidden doors etc. That being said, it's always just going to be the Wizard or Rogue that does it. As an EK I'm taking the defense or Duelling fighting styles and not the manoeuvres one.
There still room for more fighting styles since way more types of weapons in dnd then be covered by what is canon
I was wondering if the Bugbears reach stacked with reach weapons. One of my next characters is going to be a Bugbear totem bear barbarian with PAM and GWM
One interesting use case for protection/interception fighting style is if you plan to play a mounted character, or one that has a pet/summon next to you in most fights. My favorite version of this is a small beastmaster ranger that takes a lv 1 dip in fighter, and rides around on their companion using interception to help reduce any damage it might take.
I made a Reborn barbarian, and started with the Tavern Brawler feat. Then when I could I took Fighting Initiate Unarmed. Modeled him after Solomon Grundy. Born on a Monday...
I've been running OotA, and blind fighting has been really useful for one of the PCs. She took it at the start and was unsure about how useful it would actually be, but she's totally on board with it now.
It's great for the normal darkness throughout the underdark (she's playing a race without darkvision) when they don't want to announce their location with a bunch of light sources. But it's really come into its own with invisible enemies and other things that mess with sight. She destroyed a dark mantle encounter because their magical darkness is useless, and the poltergeists they've encountered were similarly countered by blindsight.
Jeremy Crawford has said that if you take the battlemaster subclass then the fighting style dice increases size just like the other dice.
Technically with fighting initiate or multiclassing you can combine thrown weapon fighting + archery/duelling. You can even sneak superior technique there for quick toss.
The magic wpn difficulty can be circumvented with artificer or kensei.
havent used the blind fighting style yet outside of a sorc multiclass for quickened fog/darkness and tbh i switched it out for superior technique since i realized i could gain advantage much better by just quickening faerie fire, blindness, hold person or maximillian's earthen grasp. That way i dont interfere with my party and get some extra dmg in the process.
As for great weapon fighting style, for base weapon dmg it indeed adds about 1 dmg on average (for a 2d6 dmg weapon). However, if you get magical weapons from your DM that provides dmg bonuses (such as flame tongue, giant slayer, dragon slayer, etc) then the dmg it adds becomes better than duelling as your reroll affects those dmg bonuses.
While not an average fighter, by taking the martial adept and superior Technique on a dex focused Battlemaster and picking up skill expert at level 4, I've been a *lot* of fun being a party face with only 14 cha and wis. Adding d8s to checks (especially with Bardic inspiration too) has often made my battle master a regular prince of battle, on and off the verbal battlefield.
These options leave a lot of opportunity for new and fun interactions.
My DM is ruling that I can do the EK's bound weapon draw as part of the thrown weapon fighter style. I'm having a lot of fun throwing my javelin, then not calling back so that I have a hand free for somatic components.
This is exactly what I want to do.
I want to make an aracokra Eldritch Knight and rain spears and magic from the sky.
I think Quick Toss can be useful for a melee specialist warrior. He makes his attacks in melee against his main target oh look there is another enemy moving towards the wizard. I’m going to get another attack with quick toss. It might kill a low level foe outright and at higher it can soften em up or make an enemy wizard lose concentration. Just adds nice tactical flexibility without robbing you of your main fighting style.
Also would that work with something like a Dwarven Thrower? Because you know bonus action toss then charge at them get the hammer then smack em with it
I just realized that Defensive Flourish+Bait and Switch+Shield spell probably means you aren't getting hit for 4 rounds/SR.
Javalin gets bonus from Throw Weapon fighting style and Dueling for a +4 =P or Darts but using archery with the Throw weapon style
Edit : This is awesome for building up to a Dwarven Thrower character at late levels XD
If you use darts you can also use sharpshooter
Making its dmg average the same as a longbow (for a dex thrower)
@UCyRnvEtx76nl4CEBAQfHHvQ by raw: No
Javelins are a melee weapon with the thrown property. For sharpshooter you need a ranged weapon for the dmg buff.
I'm excited for the unarmed fighting-style. If my DM let's me smite on my punches (which if their letting me do this build they might as well) then I can go Oath of Glory (formally known as Heroism) Paladin and yell SMASH!!!!! every time I smite. One For All Paladin, here we come.
I once had a DM who loved to find ways to disarm/take away your equipment at every turn. Unarmed Fighting would be a required style with him.
A Level 2 Fighter/Artificer has a magical weapon with +1 to attack rolls and +3 damage with Thrown Weapon Fighting and Returning weapon. Not bad for level 2 at all.
Do you think a dip into artificer for returning weapon would be worth the dip for a thrown weapon fighter?
If I was making a thrown weapon build I would dip 2 artificer almost for sure.
I really want to play an unarmed fighter but no new games yet also nice video love you’re content
I'm wanting to do an unarmed Fighter, leaning towards EK; with the crusher feat.
@@levifjellman6378 Maybe dip a level in monk so you can make 2 unarmed attacks per turn.
Unarmed fighting is good for two-handed weapons users who want to grapple, since grappling occupies one of your hands. Also allows you to attack while grappling two targets, which would ordinarily be ineffective.
Great weapon fighting style sucks a bit less with greatsword or maul, as you are rolling 2d6 damage, so 1/3rd of dice rolls get a reroll, with 2/3 chance of improvement.
Great weapon fighting style says absolutely nothing about only being able to use it on one of the dice. So with a great sword if u roll a 1 and/ or 2 on both of the dice (or more if u get a crit) then u can Reroll them all if u wish. 2d6 is always better then d12. Since the average and the min is higher with 2d6 (since u can’t get a 1). The only time d12 is better if your a Barbarian or a half Orc with the ability to add one more dice to the roll when u get a crit.
16:37 Unless I'm missing something, but the Bait and Switch maneuver doesn't even seem to use your reaction.
Omg your right. Nice catch. That just got so much better.
Yup, it's top tier for sure.
Bait and Switch Fighting Style on an Echo Knight (via a feat to gain Battlemaster maneuvers) looks like an awesome combo.
The Echo is not an ally, it's technically an object. Echoes are weird.
Is it just me that thinks quick toss should have given more accuracy to the throw instead of damage? 1 It would complement the fighting style a little bit. 2 for anyone not having the fighting style and using a superiority die, it would be more likely to hit, so no wasted resources = happier player
Honestly thrown weapons are often so bad that I could see it as a +1 to both hit and damage making it that much more attractive. And that's the conservative option. You could probably get away with +2 to both.
The fact is SS and CBE makes for the safest and incredibly damaging fighter. Especially when most games do not track ammunition. :/
*What about using Brace + sharpshooter + sentinel with a hand axe or javelin since they're under the simple melee weapons list: max range on hand axe is 60ft, enemy moves into range so you throw the axe with Brace, it hits (weather you use the -5/+10 from SS or not is up to you), add the sup die to the dmg, then the enemy stops in their tracks with Sentinel. Is this a thing??? Max range on a javelin is 120ft ;)
20th level fighter using action surge could throw 8* weapons a turn? I'm guessing that's what you meant? Or am I missing something here?
9 actually. Don’t forget u have a bonus action to use too (which u can get with quick toss).
I play a battlemaster gun using gnome that loves to throw the occasional quick toss nuke... I mean dart. SS plus maneuver dice is pretty sweet.
Any idea how Interception fairs as you get into the higher levels? I finished running a 15-17th level game 5 months ago, and had the impression that imposing disadvantage on enemy attacks was increasingly ineffective as their bonuses rapidly outpaced PC Armor Classes, which were basically stagnant. So It felt to me like Interception was at least better than Protection since it was still having an effect.
The key is that you can swap styles later via the optional class features. So just use Interception early then swap it to a more conditional but effective feature later.
It might be weaker but I can’t wait to make an unarmed fighter dhampir .. tavern brawler, and crusher feat
I hate the unarmed fighting style on principle, but it's not bad.
Fighter initiate is an amazing choice for Fighters surprisingly enough. A good choice for it is the +1 to armor since you're likely always going to be wearing armor.
A fighting style that increases reactions would have been neat.
I wonder if they're thinking of making an archetype that excels at performance combat or that can do things like Pathfinders shattered defenses.
You said 6 attacks at 20th level, but you meant 8 correct? Is there some limit I’m unaware of?
I think the point is that the fighter starts the fight with 2 knives already in hand
@@misterkeko9012 But does that matter since you can just keep drawing as part of the attack anyways?
You would need to give me a timestamp, but it's very possible I meant 8.
@@TreantmonksTemple 10:50, but listening to it again...I think what you meant was 6 additional because you had already said 2 previously about 25 seconds before. You had just stated it in a way that was for only 6 but yeah, I think you meant 6 additional.
Regardless, great video Chris! I just wanted to make sure there wasn’t a limit I was unaware of.
@@keeganmbg6999 Nope, checking it again I think I meant 8 and misspoke. Either way, you are correct - it would be 8.
Are Minotaur "wielding" their horns? If not are there any other ways to be unarmed fighting with two empty hands and still get to use manuevers that state "after hitting with a melee weapon...?
Tavern brawler works great, too! An improvised weapon is only a weapon when you attack with it.
Is a minotaur "wielding" their natural weapon? That's a good question, I'm not sure there is a clear answer in the rules, I would be inclined to say they are.
I would like to point out that almost all those maneuvers state "after hitting with a (melee) weapon *attack* ...", with the attack part being crucial here since unarmed strikes are considered melee weapon attacks even though your fists, feet, and any other body part you might be using (except natural weapons maybe, I don't know about that) are not considered weapons.
But since they are melee weapon attacks, unarmed attacks work with almost every maneuver. Brace is actually the only one that wouldn't work as far as I can tell.
As a bit of trivia, Brace would also be the only maneuver that doesn't work for Psionic Blades since, even though it is considered a weapon unlike unarmed attacks, it's impossible to be wielding it at the moment Brace would otherwise trigger.
20th level fighter gets 4 attacks correct? So wouldn’t it be draw and throw 8 weapons with action surge? Am I missing something or are you assuming you already have two weapons drawn at start of turn?
9 actually cause u have your bonus action one as well (which u can get here with quick toss).
One thing I don't like is assuming the Fighter makes 0 checks out of combat.
If you're playing a Fighter, do you stand immobile while the rest of the group searches a room? Do you remain quiet 100% of the time when the party talks to NPCs? I've had countless times where the party enters a room and does everything BUT look in the correct place, or I say something and it's the correct response to encourage/discourage an NPC, but my dice rolls fail me. Not everything has to be about combat one hundred percent of the time, particularly when everyone else around you is bringing solid builds to the table.
Nice work
nice analisis!
I've always house-ruled thrown weapons by giving them the ammunition property, since before Tasha's came out. Even in that case, the throwing weapon style is still no worse than duelist.
Bugbear battle master with glaive and brace maneuver. Anyone coming within 15 ft of you is getting hit.
Still sad the close quarters shooter fighting style didn't make it out of UA. It would have been perfect for the Forcelance character that was showcased a few months back.
AYE! a new video!
Ultimate Dart Thrower build when? :-)
if you are using a reach weapon, would you, as a GM, allow the fighter to use the Interception style within the weapons increased range?
It would depend how closely I was working to RAW in the campaign - there's a good chance I would, but that would be a houserule.
@@TreantmonksTemple oh I know it would be, I am not claiming otherwise
I'm sorry if I missed this, but does brace trigger PAM?
Y would u use brace or even get it if u have PAM? I mean I guess for the slight extra dmg. If your wondering if u can use both and therefore get to attack twice as the same opportunity attack then the answer is no. The only thing you’d be doing is upping the dmg so
getting both was kinda unnecessary.
@@davidstratton696 awesome, thank you. I'll pass that on .
I'm curious what your thoughts are on great weapon fighter for a paladin who is building around smite/crit. I assume the extra dice rolled from smite and the extra from crit would make it worth it. But I have no idea on how to back that up with numbers.
Crawford has ruled that great weapon fighting only affects the weapon's damage dice as opposed to extra dice from smites/sneak attack/spell effects. But ya, if your table allows it, It becomes a lot more damage if you can reroll for your smite 1s and 2s. It's also pretty good if you're using large die weapons and critting with a lot of additional weapon dice [like from brutal critical, half orc's savage attacks, the oricsh fury feat's extra die is doubled if you use it on a crit, same with kensei's deft strike -but you're limited to kensei weapons -half orc kensei could still get to 7d10 on a crit though.]
Mathematically rerolling 1s and 2s averages an additional .5 per d4, .66 per d6, .75 per d8, .8 per d10, and .83 per d12. -here's a link explaining the math, rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average
I need an explanation on how the unarmed damage from the unarmed fighting style does not scale with the rest of the weapons. Is it the magic damage you need at higher levels? Because other than that most weapon retain the same die across several levels.
You need 2 hands to do 1d8+STR damge compared to a none Magic 1 hand sword gives 1d8+STR+2, to off ser the +2 you gain 1d4 each round but that do not Stack whit multi attack. And then there is the problem of Magic items Monk Aldo has there are only 2 +1 Magic items in the game for unarmed damge while there are plenty og +3 whit extra bonus weponds.
Well there's no flame-tongue gloves. Unless you get your DM to bend over backwards to get you Claw emblem or some such you'll get better mileage with actual weapons.
@@esbenskovrasmussen9066
I guess the extra +2 is coming from dueling fighting style?
I see.
Bait and Switch lets you go through walls RAW
So the Fighting Arts both historic and Modern interests me. Different ranges...Clinch work and ground fighting is not (in my opinion) done very well in D&D. In Actual Fighting with Weapons you get binding and holds to prevent swings and stabs. The Fighter could get so much better with a Fighting moves list like spellcasters. Where are the feigns?...the tricks used to knockout someone. So many nuances in actual combat that are just glossed over.
Question about Darkness spell, in you cast on yourself without any mean to see inside, you still see outside normally or the light that would reach you is also blocked?.. Is like a 'Magic Mirror' that light go through?
and in the same Scenario, but now with Blindsight of 10ft, if you can't see outside the radius of the Darkness, how you going to reach the enemy if you cant see him outside the 10ft of yourself?
I've always played it that you can't see out of it.
The light that would reach you would be blocked by Darkness, so you can't see outside it. Darkness is like an enormous sphere of pure blackness that no (nonmagical) light can pass through.
Regarding your second question, while many DM's houserule this to make it feel more realistic, the rules as written assume combatants are always aware of each other's position unless the "target" is actively hiding (used the Hide action). By RAW, if someone is invisible in combat but didn't use the Hide action, everybody involved would know exactly where the invisible person is, they'd just have disadvantage on their attacks since they can't see his weak spots or where his arms are defending for example.
Rune Knight better fight like Celes or riot!
That would've been funny, but then again the War Mage and their Power Surge is already fairly close to Runic, in terms of abilities that absorb enemy spells and grant a benefit for doing so.
I had an interesting concept for a fighter. I was inspired by the medieval sword fighting videos on TH-cam which demonstrate a series of maneuvers to defeat your foe. Like a battlemaster.
th-cam.com/video/4GoQlvc_H3s/w-d-xo.html
But you only get 3 maneuvers at level 3 and that just wasn't enough. So I decided to use every class feature that gives you more maneuvers and a superiority die. So level 1 variant human superior technique fighting style (grasping strike) and the grappler feat (to make the maneuver more effective). Level 3 are your traditional swordfighting maneuvers (disarm, riposte, and trip), now you have five d8 superiority dice per short rest. At level 4, martial adept gives you 2 more maneuvers (parry and pushing attack or menacing) and another superiority die. Now you have six dice per short rest. At level 7, class feature time- for two more maneuvers and an additional die. I chose lunging strike and bracing strike for more effective range. I envision using lunging strike to hit someone 10ft away and when they move in to attack me, then I use my reaction to bracing strike them. The ASIs at 6 and 8 can be used to increase STR to hit more often and increase the DC of the contested maneuvers. I'm still not sure if going to grappler and grasping at level 1 was the right choice, but it was on the video I used for inspiration, so I will probably try it out and swap it out later for something like bait and switch or evading steps, if I need to dance into combat to get my friends out. With 7d8 superiority dice and 9 maneuvers, I can almost do a maneuver every round, provided we aren't being hunted by an invading army of elves like we were in our last campaign arc. Unfortunately my current character Doc survived (Rogues do that), so my swordmaster battlemaster will have to wait a bit longer to enter the fray.
Oh, and he's a longsword fighter, for the versatility. Two handed for power strikes but can still grapple and smack.
4:28 - no it wouldnt because the mechanics of invis themselves grant advantage/disadvange, not just the sight rules.
Also in magical darkness or any other obscurement, the enemy just needs to use a hide action to escape once they are starting to lose because the feature in its dumb wording gives you sight (not detection via another sense) which in turn means despite seeing the enemy location, you still fail the check from being blinded and they can hide.
You wouldn’t “grab” that maneouver... I think I’m gonna be sick now....
:D
Can a psi fighter use a rouge psi points for there psi abilities.
I go over that in my next video!
…common sense must have a generous dm
I don't care for blind fighting. Having blindsight at level 1 is too strong. There's a possible argument for it since you give up the bonuses the other styles would give you, but I don't think it equals out at all.
10 feet is not very far. It's best when paired with Darkness.
@@jacobjensen7704 I do agree with that. I have my reservations, but at the end of the day I'm sure there are folks who have thought about playing a blind fighter before and now have a way to make that fantasy come to life.
@@vigilantgamesllc it's also pretty situational, whereas the extra accuracy from archery, ac from defense or damage from dueling/others are almost always on.
I'm actually a little bit disappointed with this direction DnD is taking with making each new subclass of fighter or rogue a magic user, with only new flavour of how the magic is used. I'd love to see subclasses which focus on actual fighting, like utilizing weapons in better way, making shields matter to save their lives from a hit. Generally, improving their combat effectivness without calling for magical superpowers.
I hate unarmed fighting. A 1st level fighter should not be punching harder than a 10th level monk.
That sounds like a monk problem not a fighter problem.
I've had some success with maneuvering strike with both melee and ranged weapons when it comes to getting squishies outa dodge, however now I'm thinking of swapping it out for bait and switch as they serve similar purposes but...that AC! how did I miss that! Also, pointing out the advantage aspect of Blind fighting really helped a friend of mine out with his fighter/shadow monk build in CoS. Cheers!
Yup, Bait and Switch, provided you have an ally within 5 feet of your intended path, is action "free" and superior to Evasive Footwork.
Maneuvering Strike is still good though as one of the few ways to give allies movement outside their own turn as well as Disengage as a reaction rather than an action.
Surely you can stack superior technique and martial adept to give you 3 manoeuvres and 2 d6 superiority dice.
Yes you can.
I think his point was that if you are using a feat to gain maneuvers, martial adept is superior to choosing the fighting initiate feat to gain superior technique.
I’m very happy they added the unarmed fighting style. Not all who throw hands are monastic.
So... take the monk class, which was already suffering, and now let's take away its fantasy theme too... cool.
@@vigilantgamesllc not necessarily. Consider barehanded tavern brawlers. Or the raging barbarian rending things apart with his hands. But also? I do have a human monk who took fighting initiate at level 1 to get this fighting style. Much needed if playing a monk.
I agree! I found Mink to be u appealing because it lumped the general idea of “punching” in with Ki, aging resistance, learning every language, magical martial arts and so on. Not to mention Dexterity- but now, we can effectively sock someone with our strength!
@@Jscallen13 needing a fighting style for monk speaks to the issues with monk which need to be addressed. The introduction of the monk has to do with their training and mastering of ki. Just anyone can't punch terrible monsters in the face and deal any considerable damage. Monks can because of the way they specialize.
The monk needs to be fixed so it works the way it should. The answer isn't, "let's just ignore it and give unarmed fighting to other classes. Oh and let's make them even better at level 1."
Also, if you don't want to he monastic, change the flavor. Be a street fighter for all I care, but use the monk class.
@@joefollo4891 again, problems which should have been addressed with the monk, not given to other classes.
I really like the idea of picking up the "quick toss" maneuver on a character who has the crusher feat, so that I could have the option of using a BA to toss a light hammer to knock a distant enemy into an environmental hazard or away from a squishy caster without having to reposition or give up my main attack routine. Probably less effective than I am imagining, but I think it would be a cool way to expand tactical options. Also, knocking a dude off of a horse by bonking him in the head with a tiny, thrown hammer just feels hilarious to me.
Thrown axes with the slasher feat can also be a way to restrict enemy movement.
love this!
"Beat up the Monk for fun" is what really got me :D
I want everyone to picture a shark-based triton with Blind Fighting lurking around in a Fog Cloud while the Jaws theme is playing. It's honestly been really fun.
Also, I've found that having the option to straight-up reverse the advantages of creatures swarming me or an ally PC/NPC has been a very nice thing in my pocket, even if it's a once-per-day or once-in-a-while kind of strategy.
The rogue subclass to utilise `brace` the most is probably the swashbuckler - move up, hit, get your free disengage and move away - either they "hunt" you down potentially taking another sneak attack. Rakish audacity of course almost guarantees you sneak attack by just walking away from where the most enemies are, since you don't need advantage and don't need to maneuvre yourself into a position where you have an ally nearby (and moving away from most other enemies is a good idea for you anyway).
I do really like ambush and tactical presence as well. I could see going for a battlemaster fighter who maybe takes the feat for another superioty die and two more maneuvres to get 3 combat orientated moves and picks up these 2 for out of combat utility. Yes just focusing on combat they of course have less options than with 5 "combat" maneuvres, but if I know I will play in a campaign which will see a reasonable share of non combat encounters, than I might want to have those that come up much less, but I'll probably be very happy to have the options when they do happen.
And while I agree there will highly likely be one or more highly charismatic characters in the party I also feel that you can't always choose who does the talking (maybe that is just me as a DM, but I do like to have NPCs address different people in the party, to ensure everybody get the chance to play while being in a bigger social scene).
I wouldn't build every battlemaster like that, but I can certainly see the appeal of a fighter that feels like a "general" - a somewhat charismatic leader who will look for alternative ways to solve the issues at hand.
So I guess long story short: I agree those maneuvres aren't great per se, but they provide certain options we really didn't have and I love having them because they aren't just more ways of doing more damage.
Get booming blade on that swashbuckler for even more fun and profit
@@nathansmith9597 You’d have to get Warcaster (and someway to get booming blade like magic initiate) to be able to use it on that reaction attack but yea I was gonna say the same thing. U can actually potentially have the extra booming blade dmg happen twice cause u can go up to them attack with a booming blade attack and then disengage as a bonus action and then if they move boom and if they come near u attack with the same thing (and add some more dmg with the superiority dice) and then back away again and if the keep moving again then boom yet again. Pick up someone like goading attack maybe and the enemy is gonna have such a hard time reaching u that the not having disadvantage against u won’t matter most of the time.
I’m actually doing this right now with one of my chars. I’m a Paladin/fighter/rogue. Vengeance Paladin (gets haste so u can attack again and add more smite dmg and also when they make an opportunity attack they can disengage). Battlemaster fighter of course and then arcane trickster rogue for booming blade and whatnot (vengeance Paladins channel divinity allows them advantage for one minute as well). So when an enemy comes near me they take the regular attack, sneak attack (potentially), booming blade, superiority dice, and divine smite. And now I’m like 30 ft away from that enemy with a booming blade on them (haste doubles your movement so that’s y I say 30ft).
One thing about: Ambush, Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment they can be used outside combat.... when u wont use your dices to anything anyway, and at higher lvl u have quite a few Battle Master Maneuvers :)
Brace + Crusher just seems like it has to have serious potential...
Thing I wanted to mention is that you can take a quick toss on an archer, quick toss a net (which gets +2 to hit from archer FS), now you have a restrained opponent to wail on at advantage
They added some great options.
I didn't even realize how good bait and switch was. You could swap places with another melee PC to boost AC.
Looking forward to your takes on the subclasses!
‘Beat up the monk for fun’ you joke but legit in my current campaign the monk and the fighter ended up sparring, the fighter having the unarmed fighting style, it... wasn’t exactly pretty for the monk.
Doesn't that prove that 5e has a balance/ power creep issue?
@@unwithering5313 no it prove that there a problem with the monk
@@unwithering5313 not really, one PC losing a fight to another in one game doesn't prove much of anything. Someone had to win and I wouldn't think monks were stronger than fighters if the opposite happened.
(I do agree monks are much weaker, but this alone doesn't prove that)
The great thing about the Superior Technique fighting style is that *BATTLE MASTERS* can take it, both adding a new maneuver and adding another (admittedly crappy) superiority die. It's kind of like taking Eldritch Adept if you're a warlock or Metamagic Adept if you're a sorcerer, except you don't have to waste a feat on it ... which makes it *AMAZING* for Battle Masters.
Of course, the inherent limitation of only being really good for Battle Masters really makes it *OBVIOUSLY* circumstantial ... :\
Right? a battle master with this fighting style and martial adept could start with 6 maneuvers known and 5 superiority dice per short rest, eventually increasing to 8 dice and 12 known. Also since the superiority die is added to your subclass pool they scale in die size. But ya, pretty bad fighting style for others generally. -Though almost duplicating battle master level 3 on another fighter with just a feat and a fighting style isn't a terrible trade.
GWF isn't always crap, while it does only add about 1.33 damage to a greatsword on average any weapon with additional dice rolls will benefit even more. For instance, with a flametongue greatsword (if you consider the flames part of the weapon attack) you can get a +2.66 extra damage. In certain (situational) circumstances GWF can out shine something like dueling.
However, it is nice to get a fighting style that augments your combat rather than just boosting raw numbers.
According to Sage Advice, it is only the base weapon damage that gets the benefit.
@@TreantmonksTemple Ok, I wasn't sure. As far as I knew there was a difference between additional weapon damage (inherent in the weapon) and some external source of extra damage like smite which I was aware of a Sage advice saying that GFW didn't work for smite. Thanks.
I think the niche for the unarmed fighting style is still being able to do your full damage with one or both of your hands full from grappling. Combo that with the size increase from rune knight and you can make some crazy grappler builds.