See, Staff of Defense wins out for me hands down every time. Um, yes, I'd like a +1 to all defenses including my AC, for 1d8 crit instead of 1d10.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Weapon Focus & Implements
- Thread starter Griogre
- Start date
See, Staff of Defense wins out for me hands down every time. Um, yes, I'd like a +1 to all defenses including my AC, for 1d8 crit instead of 1d10.
Obryn
Hero
That's another good one! I still like the extra damage, though, especially when we're talking about bursts and blasts.
Regardless, Staves have excellent properties. And I'd rather have a static property than a Daily power almost any day.
-O
DracoSuave
First Post
Agreed. The problem with Wands isn't the existance of Weapon Focus, but the fact that wands are usually sub-par.
At least Orbs bring something to the table that's good.
At least Orbs bring something to the table that's good.
WalterKovacs
First Post
I think the biggest issue was that in PHB 1 you had he weapon focus with no requirement and works for pretty much every attack that a weapon user can do ... and then you have the spell equivalents which only apply in certain energy types and they all have different requirements. So, if you wanted a spellcaster to get the same benefit you need to either go with 13's in every stat (except for STR), and take four feats, and even then there are spells that don't get the same benefit.
It would be a lot nicer if they just went with implement focus right off the bat, then they could have made the weapon keyword/implement keyword issue clear (of course they still have other issues, like what powers/properties of a weapon will apply when using the weapon as an implement). In the paragon tier, they already had the feats for weapon specialization and energy type specialization. It would mean that characters with a mix of weapon and implement powers, like the swordmage, have to take two feats instead of one at the moment, but they still save by not needing to buy two different magic items (like a paladin/avenger that would either have to get a magic weapon that counts as a holy symbol, or need two different items, and still has to take both focus feats and both expertise feats to apply it to all/most of their powers.)
The idea of spellcasters specializing in energy was a good idea, but the biggest problem is that because of weapons that convert all attacks into a single energy type, it makes the energy specialization feats (at least some of them) so much better for weapon users, since they have to take a specific item to make all their powers do the same energy type [and they can turn it off if they face a resistant foe] while a spellcaster has to pick specific powers in order to do the same, which makes it harder to deal with resistant foes.
Hopefully they'll eventually sit down and clear up weapons as implements (and vice versa) so that it's known how they work (one example: can a flaming dagger turn every sorceror power into a fire attack?) and clarify the various feats for weapons, implements, energy types, etc.
Of course there are other confusions, like whether intelligent blademaster applied to thrown melee weapons used in for a basic ranged attack.
It would be a lot nicer if they just went with implement focus right off the bat, then they could have made the weapon keyword/implement keyword issue clear (of course they still have other issues, like what powers/properties of a weapon will apply when using the weapon as an implement). In the paragon tier, they already had the feats for weapon specialization and energy type specialization. It would mean that characters with a mix of weapon and implement powers, like the swordmage, have to take two feats instead of one at the moment, but they still save by not needing to buy two different magic items (like a paladin/avenger that would either have to get a magic weapon that counts as a holy symbol, or need two different items, and still has to take both focus feats and both expertise feats to apply it to all/most of their powers.)
The idea of spellcasters specializing in energy was a good idea, but the biggest problem is that because of weapons that convert all attacks into a single energy type, it makes the energy specialization feats (at least some of them) so much better for weapon users, since they have to take a specific item to make all their powers do the same energy type [and they can turn it off if they face a resistant foe] while a spellcaster has to pick specific powers in order to do the same, which makes it harder to deal with resistant foes.
Hopefully they'll eventually sit down and clear up weapons as implements (and vice versa) so that it's known how they work (one example: can a flaming dagger turn every sorceror power into a fire attack?) and clarify the various feats for weapons, implements, energy types, etc.
Of course there are other confusions, like whether intelligent blademaster applied to thrown melee weapons used in for a basic ranged attack.
NorthSaber
First Post
So... What are Shamans supposed to do? I don't think Totems are a weapon group, and the variety of damage types dealt by Shamans is quite wide. (I'll probably ask my DM for Weapon Focus: Totems, but I don't think it's legal.)
Obryn
Hero
I don't think losing an extra +1 damage per tier will significantly hurt your shtick, so I think you'll be fine.
-O
I think I'm not understanding you. It would be at most 2 more damage on a crit, which happens well, not all that often, whereas the defenses come up every round you're attacked.
Obryn
Hero
The Staff of Ruin's property is that it basically deals double its enhancement bonus to damage.
So, a +2 Staff of Ruin deals +4 damage on every attack instead of just +2. A +3 deals +6 damage, and so on. It thereby earns my undying love. (The Xd10 criticals are just the icing on the cake, not the cake itself.)
-O
NorthSaber
First Post
I don't think losing an extra +1 damage per tier will significantly hurt your shtick, so I think you'll be fine.
While this is true, it does feel unfair, because for most implement-users, the appropriate Weapon Focus is one of the best feats available. And even if it's only a +2 to damage, that's a +2 to all damage I'm ever going to do, and even if it's only a +2, all of those small bonuses come from someplace.
I've found that this game is mostly about getting all the +1's and +2's you can get and stacking them together to make an efficient character.
CapnZapp
Legend
I think I need your help understanding exactly what the issues are here.
Yes, I agree Weapon Focus has the look and feel of a martial ability. That is, you've learnt how to twack people harder, doing more damage.
And so getting that extra damage when you channel a spell through it (using a staff or pact dagger as an implement, say) doesn't make sense.
From a fluff POV, not a crunch POV, that is.
And so, can we expect this ruling to be withdrawn as soon as Implement Focus becomes available?
---
Now, to the real confusion.
What is the current official status on the distinction (if any is left) between the "weapon" and "implement" keywords.
As Draco correctly points out, the Weapon Focus ruling does not technically contribute to any blurring between them.
Isn't it so that unless you're member of a special class, you don't gain any benefits from mixing the wrong item and keyword (i.e. a weapon used for an implement power or an implement used for a weapon power)?
I think I need to ask you to lay out any instances where this isn't clear before I can really appreciate the discussion... like knowing the problem before discussing the fix!
...thanks.
Yes, I agree Weapon Focus has the look and feel of a martial ability. That is, you've learnt how to twack people harder, doing more damage.
And so getting that extra damage when you channel a spell through it (using a staff or pact dagger as an implement, say) doesn't make sense.
From a fluff POV, not a crunch POV, that is.
And so, can we expect this ruling to be withdrawn as soon as Implement Focus becomes available?
---
Now, to the real confusion.
What is the current official status on the distinction (if any is left) between the "weapon" and "implement" keywords.
As Draco correctly points out, the Weapon Focus ruling does not technically contribute to any blurring between them.
Isn't it so that unless you're member of a special class, you don't gain any benefits from mixing the wrong item and keyword (i.e. a weapon used for an implement power or an implement used for a weapon power)?
I think I need to ask you to lay out any instances where this isn't clear before I can really appreciate the discussion... like knowing the problem before discussing the fix!
...thanks.
Similar Threads
