Proposal: Weapon Training Feats are not Multi-Class Feats
The way weapon training feats work irks me.
In order for a garrote to function like a garrote or a whip to function like a whip or a blowgun to function like a blowgun, you have to take a multi-class feat. If you've already taken a multi-class feat, you can't make those weapons work like they should. You can only take Superior Weapon Proficiency, but then those weapons aren't very superior, they're pretty doggone lame, as in "Yay! I just spent a feat to master a weapon that inflicts 1d4 damage!"
(And HOW does a garrote inflict 1d4 damage without grabbing the target? Are you slapping the victim with the cord?! Okay. Deep breaths. Calm down.)
Could we make the weapon training feats just be weapon training feats, instead of multi-class feats? It makes more sense with the special weapons and opens up options for players (like me) that want that sort of thing.
This would cover...
Blowgun Training (Dragon 373)
Bola Training (Dragon 368)
Garrote Training (Dragon 373)
Net Training (Dragon 368)
Whip Training (Dragon 368)
Spiked Chain Training (Dragon 272)
(And HOW does a garrote inflict 1d4 damage without grabbing the target? Are you slapping the victim with the cord?! Okay. Deep breaths. Calm down.)
*whip crack noises*
Oh, also, I believe that this will open up Weapon Training to non-martial classes, provided that they take a martial class multiclass feat first.
Hmm, three feats to use a spiked chain as an implement, and then one more feat or an at-will power to be able to hit people with it too. Yes, I want. Effective? No, but so very, very cool.
Hmm, why did they make these multiclass feats in the first place? This is all it says in the article (from Dragon 368):
Quote:
Since the weapon mastery training feats require a great deal of focused training, each one is a multiclass feat.
Not much meat on that bone. It's basically just fluff.
Mechanically, I can only think of a few reasons.
One is that they don't want a character getting more than one of the weapon mastery feats - no mastery of both net and garrote. That could be satisfied by making a new category of "weapon mastery" feats that you can only take one of. So one weapon mastery plus one multiclass would be allowed.
Another is that the follow-on Novice/Adept/Expert feats allow power swapping, just like the regular multiclass feats, and they want to keep a cap on that. I'm not sure why that would be - I guess it would slightly reduce the odds of finding a broken combo. It would also help a player from diluting the character too much - part of the "you can't make a substandard character through poor choices" philosophy. Anyhow, if you want to address the excess power swapping issue, you could make a new feat that basically gives the same benefits as the standard mastery feat, but does not count as a prerequisite for the Novice/Adept/Expert path (and would not count as a multiclassing feat).
The final thing is that making these regular feats would pretty much make superior weapon proficiency feats for these weapons mostly superfluous. I actually think that's part of the reason for the restriction on regular multiclass feats - why would you ever take Skill Training if you can take another multiclass feat that grants that skill, plus more goodies? Same would be true with regard to weapon mastery feats with regard to superior weapon proficiency feats. I'm not sure how much of a big deal that is though - as Ken has pointed out, the benefits of these "superior" weapons without the mastery feats are somewhat dubious.
I for one, completely agree with you Ken. What in the world would be the point of wielding a Superior Weapon if there is nothing "Superior" about it? With the exception of the Bastard Sword (which with the weapon proficiency feat by itself does it's job; wield big weapon in one hand... done), these weapons practically REQUIRE that you pick up the multiclass feat for them to be effective in ANY way. If picking up the proficiency for the weapon doesn't let you use their BASIC functions... we may as well not have them at all. It would be like having a superior weapon proficiency for a Kusarigami (kama on a rope with a circular metal ring at the end) as a superior weapon that was only +2 proficiency and dealt 1d6 damage as a two-handed reach weapon, THEN adding a feat that let's you disarm with it. Well... the whole POINT of the weapon is that it's used to disarm. Granted...if a stranger to the weapon picked it up, he'd realize he could swing it around as a reach weapon... but that's someone who isn't even PROFICIENT with the weapon. Someone who took the time (i.e. the feat) to train in the weapons uses should automatically be familiar with the disarming techniques used with the weapon in question. You shouldn't have to spend 2 (two) feats just to be able to make a weapon do what it was designed to do IMHO.
Well, you're never required to spend two feats: you either spend the Superior Weapon Proficiency, and get to use the weapon with it as listed, or the multiclass feat, and get that plus some basic special abilities (and the ability to spend power-swap feats for more). The only issue is that most characters can't take more than one multiclass feat, so you can't have a fighter that's good with more than one of these weapons, and anyone that's used a more conventional multiclass can't use them at all.
Jack-of-all-trades or no, it doesn't make much sense that bards can learn as many weapons as they want, but fighters are stuck with one.
Jack-of-all-trades or no, it doesn't make much sense that bards can learn as many weapons as they want, but fighters are stuck with one.
Well, bards can't actually take these straight up because it requires being in a martial class. But obviously that's easily solved by starting out with a fighter (or other martial class) multiclass feat.
Since Ecce asked, I'll quickly go over the weapon training feats.
Blowgun: doubles range, free reload, hit crit and rogues can use it with powers!
Garrote:-2 penalty to escape the grab, combat advantage and rogues can use it with powers! Bolo:trade damage for immobilized [or prone on a crit]. Net: add slowed Whip:-2 targets hit.
The weapon feats are really good. The weapons themselves...
Net and bolo seem pretty weak, only having their weapon groups [thrown flails] stand out. Whip is the only one handed reach weapon! Sounds superior! Blowgun is a dagger with ammo and no melee. Weak. Garrote lets you damage during grab attack. As such, it ranks as superior. So 2 out of the 5 are good without the feats...
As for 'why multi-class'? Mainly the power swap feats.
What's the details on blowgun training, I'm curious?
Better range, crits, reload time, and can be used to sneak attack and with Rogue powers. The encounter power dazes and doesn't break stealth. The utility power gives a bonus to attack and damage with your next blowgun attack. The daily power stuns for a turn and dazes for longer. All are Dex vs AC and deal terrible damage because they're working with the blowgun's d4.
Among these "superior" weapons, the Spiked Chain's the only one worth using without the Weapon Training feat, since it's a glaive with +1 to hit. And apparently +1 to hit is worth a feat, at least in heroic tier. I guess the whip is nice too for anyone who wants to land a melee attack but doesn't want to get attacked back or care about the damage they deal.
The image of someone using a net without Weapon Training amuses me. How? What exactly are you trying to do?
It's a 1 handed, off hand reach weapon. I've seen a tempest fighter do pretty good with 2 whips.
I haven't looked closely at the tempest (or really, at all), but is this significantly better than a spiked chain? Giving the enemy -2 to hit is fantastic, but it's at the cost of some damage (not that much though) and only needing one good weapon rather than two. So yes, it is significantly better, because giving the enemy -2 to hit is fantastic. Thanks for clarifying .
However, unless the tempest does some crazy thing I'm unaware of, two whips deal less damage than one spiked chain, so I wasn't completely wrong. And I feel that the chain powers are better than the whip's, but I don't know if tempest fighters have enough dex to care
Jack-of-all-trades or no, it doesn't make much sense that bards can learn as many weapons as they want, but fighters are stuck with one.
That's one of my issues with the set-up.
I like the suggestion that Superior Weapon Proficiency automatically include the abilities afforded under training. It makes sense. If a character wants to go up the power-swap tree and become a specialist, then they take the Weapon Training feat. But, I don't see the power swap feats as being too strong. You're not ending up with more powers or better powers than other characters, just different powers.
Now... the whip. My goodness, but someone is watching too many movies thinking that would make a decent weapon for combat. It hurts to get hit by a whip, but it will hardly kill you. Wearing a heavy jacket protects you from it, and metal armor--sheesh--that should negate it completely. Basically, it's good for annoying cows and making loud noises to scare animals.
I haven't looked closely at the tempest (or really, at all), but is this significantly better than a spiked chain? Giving the enemy -2 to hit is fantastic, but it's at the cost of some damage (not that much though) and only needing one good weapon rather than two.
Since double weapons do not exist here, then yes, whips are much better. Tempests are your two weapon fighters so you'll always be buying 2 weapons, JUST like a melee ranger has to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBarking
However, unless the tempest does some crazy thing I'm unaware of, two whips deal less damage than one spiked chain
Your powers require 2 weapons, so 1 single spiked chain means you can't even use your powers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBarking
And I feel that the chain powers are better than the whip's, but I don't know if tempest fighters have enough dex to care
I didn't even look at the power swaps to be honest. I was saying that two one handed, off hand reach weapons worked well. Never saw the swaps used.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenHood
It hurts to get hit by a whip, but it will hardly kill you.
This is why I found this comment kind of funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalidrev
You shouldn't have to spend 2 (two) feats just to be able to make a weapon do what it was designed to do IMHO.
The whip and the blowgun do WAY more that with just the Superior Weapon Proficiency than they were designed for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenHood
I like the suggestion that Superior Weapon Proficiency automatically include the abilities afforded under training.
This then makes them TOO good. No other weapons give conditions or minuses to hit. We are stuck with them either being too weak for Superior Weapon Proficiency normally and too strong for it to it include the training bonuses. I'd be more inclined to change net, blowgun and bolo's martial weapons since they aren't very superior. Whip and garotte both give unique features so I'd keep them both superior. Then require that you have proficiency in the weapons to take the basic training feat, dropping the multiclass.
That way fighters and others that get martial weapons could more easily pick up and it solves the issue with the proficiency giving out too much.
I'd be more inclined to change net, blowgun and bolo's martial weapons since they aren't very superior. Whip and garotte both give unique features so I'd keep them both superior. Then require that you have proficiency in the weapons so take the basic training feat, dropping the multiclass.
That way fighters and others that get martial weapons could more easily pick up and it solves the issue with the proficiency giving out too much.
This seems like a good direction... I was thinking that it would have the nice side benefit of making it so bards would need an extra feat to get to the training, since they wouldn't have proficiency to start. But they actually have martial ranged, and you've left the melee weapons superior, so they'd still be in the same boat. (And didn't the 3e bard get proficiency with whip? It does seem like a kind of bardy weapon....)
In the end though, leaving garrote and whip as superior means you'd need to take two feats to get the mastery feat benefits. Are they really so superior as to justify that? Ken, would you actually spend two feats for Tonk to get garrote?
In the end though, leaving garrote and whip as superior means you'd need to take two feats to get the mastery feat benefits. Are they really so superior as to justify that? Ken, would you actually spend two feats for Tonk to get garrote?
For the garrote bonuses, it's worth 2 feats. Start with a strong rogue then add damage to the starting grab, make the escape -2, make them grant combt advantage AND let rogues use their powers/sneak attacks with it. Sorry but it's not worth just one normal feat.
Ken, would you actually spend two feats for Tonk to get garrote?
No. It would not be worth the effort. I'd end up spending one feat and waiting two levels with a weapon that I wouldn't bother using before I could spend the second feat. That would be about a year of play-by-post. If I spend a feat, I want to get something worthwhile for it. And, frankly, it's just blasted stupid to have a garrote that does not grab when it attacks.
I would be satisfied if use of a garrote required combat advantage.
Ahh... The Garrote DOES grab without the training feat. If you read it's base description, you see that it deals damage as part of a grab attack.
At base it's better than a dagger [high crit] without the ability to do damage on the grab attack. SO 1 bump from simple to martial for the high crit and another to superior for the grab attack. Seems fair.
Since double weapons do not exist here, then yes, whips are much better. Tempests are your two weapon fighters so you'll always be buying 2 weapons, JUST like a melee ranger has to.
Actually, the spiked chain is allowed as a double weapon. It may have happened by accident, because that proposal got so freaking convoluted and everyone's attention was drawn to Reaper's Touch, but it got through, and JoeNotCharles said he didn't mind the chain being a double weapon. Granted, that was when it took your multiclass feat to use it as such, so that may need to be revisited depending on how this turns out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elecgraystone
Your powers require 2 weapons, so 1 single spiked chain means you can't even use your powers.
I thought tempest fighters loved double weapons. Is this operating under the assumption that the spiked chain isn't a double weapon?
sorry couldn't resist.
.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
