Explainable AI (XAI) aims to support appropriate human-AI reliance by increasing the interpretability of complex model decisions. Despite the proliferation of proposed methods, there is mixed evidence surrounding the effects of different styles of XAI explanations on human-AI reliance. Interpreting these conflicting findings requires an understanding of the individual and combined qualities of different explanation styles that influence appropriate and inappropriate human-AI reliance, and the role of interpretability in this interaction. In this study, we investigate the influences of feature-based, example-based, and combined feature- and example-based XAI methods on human-AI reliance through a two-part experimental study with 274 participants comparing these explanation style conditions. Our findings suggest differences between feature-based and example-based explanation styles beyond interpretability that affect human-AI reliance patterns across differences in individual performance and task complexity. Our work highlights the importance of adapting explanations to their specific users and context over maximising broad interpretability.