Melee Weapon Mastery before Improved Critical?

[Legildur]

Straight damage calculations can be misleading. Firstly, there are many opponents not subject to criticals. Secondly, it increases your attack bonus for opposed checks (such as Disarm or Sunder). Thirdly, extra attack bonus not only increases the likelihood of hitting (and damage), but can be traded off in some circumstances, e.g. Combat Expertise or Power Attack.

Also, MWM is more flexible, in that it can apply to a range of weapons. And given the proliferation of the 'golf bag of weapons' syndrome in 3.5E, this needs to be considered.

 

[javcs]

Melee Weapon Mastery without a doubt.
Sure, Improved Critical sounds like it is good, but it's not as good as it sounds with most weapons.

Melee Weapon Mastery works on more weapons, and provides bonus to hit and bonus damage that applies to everything.
Improved Critical applies to one weapon, and only increases critical threat range, which adds up to more damage only depending on the kind of creature being dealt with.

 

[Victim]

http://www.geocities.com/frisbeet/DandDandFightin.html

Melee Weapon Mastery does more damage against AC 21.

One other strike against Improved Crit is that it doesn't stack with Keen weapons or the Keen Edge spell. Most other feats aren't so easily replaced with magic.

 

[Darklone]

Wow.

I think Improved Weapon Focus just ran past me crying.

-- N

Don't forget it stacks with all the rest. So if you have MeleeWM, Weapon Focus and WS, you'll still want to hit even better, so you take Imp WF!

Another vote for not forgetting the +2 to hit. WMW is already better than Imp Crit without the bonus to hit, but a +2 to hit usually is more than a +2 to damage.

The only reason to take Imp Crit is if you're not a fighter.

 

[VonRichthofen]

Take both... - No, honestly. MWM is indeed way better.

 

[frankthedm]

Take both... - No, honestly. MWM is indeed way better.

It is way better that the 12 level Improved weapon specialization.

Remind us what Melee Weapon Mastery does?

In the Feat listing, it says this.

Melee Weapon Mastery http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060501a&page=4

Prereq.: Proficiency with selected weapon, Weapon Focus with selected weapon, Weapon Specialization with selected weapon, base attack bonus +8

Benefit: Gain Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization benefits with multiple weapons.

The actual text is however...Choose a weapon for which you have Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization. When wielding any weapon that does the same type of damage (slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning), you gain a +2 bonus on attacks and damage.

Because when rules contradict, the actual text gets used as a default, the wotc emplyees have to say the version that adds an untyped +2/+2 to all weapons of a damage type is currently the correct version. Don't cry when it gets erattaed though.

The feat list version is balanced for an 8th level Feat.

The text version I suspect had a wording that allowed the character to gain his Focus, greater focus and specialization bonuses with other weapons. But during the phase of the book, text gets cleaned up, too much text got clipped, leaving us with the overpowered text version. The text version is balanced at about 14-16th level.

 

[Particle_Man]

Wow.

I think Improved Weapon Focus just ran past me crying.

-- N

This gave me the giggles.

Another vote for MWM.

 

[frankthedm]

Wow.

I think Improved Weapon Focus just ran past me crying.

-- N

It should, The Text version of that feat is way overpowered. Those who say otherwise can only cling to a plea of "But the fighter needs it!"In which case it should of been fighter level 8, not just BAB 8 .

 

[Quartz]

I don't like feats being 'Class X, level Y'.

Anyway, thanks everyone for your observations.

 

[Seeten]

In the first set of calculations, I also ignored the +1 bonus from Weapon Focus, bonuses from Str, magic, etc - all other bonuses, in fact, apart from Weapon Specialisation. This was deliberate.

In the second set of calculations, I gave each +10 in bonuses from all sources. I think that covered it.

You'll also have read my conclusion, right?

You're conclusions are faulty, as they are drawn from faulty assumptions. MWM gives +2 hit AND +2 damage. You assume the +2 hit is useless, and don't even use it to power attack. This alone makes your conclusion faulty.

It isnt a wash, the math shows MWM clearly better in all cases. For better math, check the post above yours.