Hello,
As this is my 1st post, I'm taking a moment to thank this community for providing help for players, and I assume GMs too. I think that support, including by peers, is a cornerstone of any system (product, service, etc.). I could find peers the good old way but it would be tedious.
My Fighter 2 has for Fighting Style: Protection. Some have told me that the disadvantage to foes only apply to a single party-member within 5' (of characters using Fighting Style Protection). I don't see how they concluded that reading the 2 sentences related to that style in this current version of 5e PHB. The only requirements that I see for him to benefit from it (rather my character colleagues) have, beside of course having the style:
- see the attacker
- the creature I want to protect is within 5'
-
wield a shield
So if all those are met, those in #2 will benefit from disadvantage to their attack. If so, that would mean my character could be surrounded by allies which are in turn surrounded by foes and the allies surrounding my character would receive disadvantage from all attacks ; including attacks from foes surrounding my character, attacks from foes in melee range of the allies surounding my character (foes not surrounding my character), as well as foes outside of melee range. So in essence, as long as the 3 points listed are met, my character using Fighting Style Protection is The Flash with a shield for the purpose of imposing disadvantage on enemies.
Thank you kindly for detailling the benefits of Fighting Style Protection
Welcome to the forums. Yes, there is one for players, DMs and those in Adventurers' League, too.
Fighting Style, Protection uses a reaction and a character only gets to use one reaction on its turn, so only one ally per round could benefit from it.
So the text says "when a creature (...) feet if you, you can use your reaction to impose disadvantage on the attack roll." At the moment that something attacks your ally, you use your reaction, and give disadvantage to that one attack roll. When that enemy attacks again, you can't use a reaction because it's already spent, so no disadvantage on the attack. When another enemy makes an attack, no reaction, no disadvantage.
The other stuff you mentioned is correct. If you've got allies in a ring around you, and enemies in a ring around your allies, you can impose disadvantage on any attack by those enemies against your ally. Including archers and other ranged attackers; if you can see them attacking, and your ally is next to you, you can shove your shield in their face and try to stop the arrow. But only once. After the first enemy gets disadvantage on an attack, the rest of them get off scot-free, no penalty.
It should also be noted that it's only 1 attack, even against a multi-attack. So if a bear swings 2 claws at your ally, you can give disvantage to 1 of them.
So on the logic that the current 2 sentences of Fighting Style Protection definition refer to attack as singular (as opposed to plural), shouldn't Great Weapon Fighting also only get 1 reroll as roll is only refered as singular? That doesn't make sense to me, all the damage rolls of 1 or 2 should be rerolled. I've seen it happen, a guy rolled a crit and had a bunch of damage dices to roll and he had 3 dices to reroll because they didn't meet the minimum damage. I'm not sure if the minimum danage was due to Fighting Style Great Weapon Fighting, so maybe it was due to something else. Oh! Thinking of this, I recall the character was a paladin. But anyway if Fighting Style Great Weapon Fighting replaces more than 1 damage roll, I'd like you to reconsider how many disadvantage Fighting Style Protection impose.
I'm making a tank. I was convinced that Fighting Style Protection protected all those around him, meaning all all the time, not just all 1 time per round ; well thinking of it now all the time would be too much for enemies with multiattack (or things like War Magic with 1 cantrip + 1 attack per round), so for all enemies for all the allies surrounding my character but only once for all those. If you're all--positive--that it's only 1/round, wouldn't Fighting Style Defense be better for a tank?
WilliamCQ wrote:
mellored wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
"Better" is such a loaded, and subjective, word. Better at what? Keeping yourself alive? Helping your friends to stay alive? Those two styles serve different purposes. But both are useful.
How 'bout you take the one that makes the most sense for the style and flavor of the character you want to play? Don't worry so much about maths. Having fun is worth more than math.
One fighter in our group took the +1 AC. Another is a sword-n-boarder with protection style. They both seem happy with their choices.
[EDIT: Double ninja'ed!!!!!!]
mellored wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
Variant Human, Heavy Armor Master
Or go Barb and Rage for S/B/P resistance
Macv12 wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
mellored wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
The Heavy Armor Master bonus is negated by magical weapons but there is no restriction on Barbarian Rage. Rage gives resistance on B/P/S damage in any case.
WilliamCQ wrote:
Currently this edition does not seem to have mechanics to draw aggro to your tanky character. In the games I run, I allow the players to "roleplay" out drawing attacks or getting enemies to focus in on them. That said, what is the rest of your party made up of? Might be a good time to consult the other players and synergize your characters with theirs.
In the game I run, we have a Fighter with Protection and a Pally with Protection on the front lines. They generally form the core of the front line covering each other in tighter cooridors. In a slightly more spread out encounter they do their best to cover the other characters. Generally the Cleric is in the middle of their ball formation healing left and right and supporting from behind. These two synergize very well as both have high AC and both protect each other when needed, especially against tougher mobs.
In the game I play in, my halfling paladin synergizes with the halfling barbarian (and now a half orc barbarian). My pally usually is 2nd row, behind the barbarians, covering them with Protection, reviving them out of unconsciousness with 1HP Lay on Hand heals as needed. We have a rougher time as we are facing higher level encounters (often) and in many ways, are short a solid front row tank (both barbarians are DPS). That said, with an addition of a Cleric to the party, things have been going a lot easier as we manage to keep the barbarians conscious as they rage. Are the barbarians tanks? Yes, I view them as such, but they are more effective as tanks with my halflings protection abilities especially if they take 1/2 damage from almost all attacks while in Rage mode.
So to me, your tanking style really should be reflective of what the rest of your party consists of, if that's a possibility for you.
Thanks Azylynne for your very good feedback. 