Proposal: Slight Tweak to Goliath Great Weapons Prowess
The Goliath Great Weapons Prowess Feat gives a goliath two things: weapon proficiency to simple and military 2H weapons and a +2 for damage when using them.
I proposes that the +2 carry over to superior weapons in which a goliath has to used an additional feat in order to gain proficiency of the weapon. Here's an example. Suppose a goliath barbarian sees a fullblade laying on the ground, dropped by an slain undead creature. If the barbarian wants to gain proficiency in the weapon, the goliath has to use a feat to train in it. But, by definition of the Goliath Great Weapon Prowess Feat, he wont get the +2 damage for the weapon because it isn't a military or simple 2H weapon. That doesn't make sense to me.
Proposal: If a Goliath has the Great Weapons Prowess Feat and has used another feat to train in using a superior great weapon (i.e. the fullblade), let the goliath have the additional +2 damage that is part the Great Weapons Prowess Feat.
Change the feat to: +2 damage in using any 2H simple, 2H military, and any trained (using a feat) 2H superior weapon.
I say NO because the feat bonus increases by 1 at the higher tiers unlike the feat Dwarven Weapon Training which instead gives a flat +2 feat bonus and proficiency to all hammer & axes(even superior)
I say NO because the feat bonus increases by 1 at the higher tiers unlike the feat Dwarven Weapon Training which instead gives a flat +2 feat bonus and proficiency to all hammer & axes(even superior)
so I vote NO
Ozzy
I didn't think of that. Thanks Ozy for bringing it up.
One more tweak:
Eliminating the +1 damage increases for higher tiers for superior weapons if superior weapons are included in the Goliath Great Weapons Prowess, thus allowing trained superior weapons a flat +2 damage bonus.
I actually like the feat as is. Unlike the Dwarven and Eladrin versions, it doesn't encourage you to find the best superior weapon of that class. I like that fact that it make martial weapons a better option for them instead. Also, 2 handed weapons is a MUCH bigger category than a normal weapon group. It'd give you too much 'bang for your buck'. I'd be against modifying it to include superior weapons because of those reasons.
Come join us in the Shifting Seas and Transitive Isles of Living 4th Edition, amazing adventures and great fun guaranteed!
Then to play community 4e in Eberron join us in LEB too! Give life to your characters and contribute to the living settings!
Please excuse my poor English. It is not my first language.
I proposes that the +2 carry over to superior weapons in which a goliath has to used an additional feat in order to gain proficiency of the weapon. Here's an example. Suppose a goliath barbarian sees a fullblade laying on the ground, dropped by an slain undead creature. If the barbarian wants to gain proficiency in the weapon, the goliath has to use a feat to train in it. But, by definition of the Goliath Great Weapon Prowess Feat, he wont get the +2 damage for the weapon because it isn't a military or simple 2H weapon. That doesn't make sense to me.
Respectfully, whether the feat is balanced is a far greater concern than whether it makes sense.
I don't see any problems with the feat as is, so I vote NO as well. Last nail in the coffin and all that.
Respectfully, whether the feat is balanced is a far greater concern than whether it makes sense.
I don't see any problems with the feat as is, so I vote NO as well. Last nail in the coffin and all that.
Thanks for the quick responses everyone. I respect the decisions the judges make, regardless whether or not I'm in favor of them. It is clear to me eveyone puts in a lot of thought to their decisions and make an effort to be fair.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
