D&D 5E Fixing the terrible Weapon Master feat

CapnZapp said:

The feat isn't spectacular. Anyone with even a little optimization acumen will use multiclassing to achieve what they want for a lower cost.

But in other news, nobody's forcing you to take it. And it definitely not terrible - it is a "half-feat" granting +1 ability score, and already there it is definitely out of "terrible territory" even if it didn't grant anything else.

The situation is fine. We have bigger axes to grind.

Click to expand...

A little optimization acumen and the mindset for doing so.

Loads of people dislike dipping that way. Often the same people who think there's more to life than DPR.

AlexSledge said:

I feel that weapon master, as a feat, would only feel at the appropriate level "power" wise in a campaign containing many exotic weapons each requiring their own proficiency, that also happened to be martial/basic weapons. But its not great as it is.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the forums and congrats to a successful thread necromancy as your first post!

Elfcrusher said:

A little optimization acumen and the mindset for doing so.

Loads of people dislike dipping that way. Often the same people who think there's more to life than DPR.

Click to expand...

And your point is...?

Specifically, what about my three-year old post do you disagree with?

If you "dislike dipping" and think there's "more to life than DPR", which in itself is a very dismissive way to characterize my argument, chances are you're not that concerned about mechanical issues anyway, and so the problem of this thread isn't an issue for you.

To the point: if you are one to think the feat is "terrible" to the level that this really bothers you, you are likely sufficiently "mechanically aware" that you are receptive to the message "don't worry about it since a simple one-level dip gives you all you need for a much better price, so just pretend the feat doesn't exist"

My biggest issue with Weapon Master is you get four proficiencies, which to me is laughable because over 90% of the time I don't see characters use more than two weapons, three at best: a main melee, a back-up smaller melee, and a ranged, or some similar combination.

Even for someone who wants to learn one weapon for a reason, you have three likely useless choices remaining since you are probably taking this for a particular weapon. I agree if you use multiclassing, a single level dip will get you more as well as probably the weapon.

Whatever route you go, there are definitely better ways this feat could work IMO.

I think it would be really interesting if you fold in Weapon Master into Martial Adept so you get:

4 Martial Weapons
2 Maneuvers
1 Superiority Dice (d6)
Regain on a Rest

There's hardly any powercreep, you add a bit of tactics, and you get a whole lot of conceptual flavour and diversity. With all the possible weapon/maneuvers combinations you can have 5 Wizards take the Feat and they can be completely different. Plus the maneuvers let you do something interesting with your new weapon besides attack with it using a bad Str/Dex mod.

The new Feat sits in a good place where no one can look at it and call it suboptimal, or broken. But it does get the creative juices flowing for all the interesting character concepts you can mix and match.

Wizard/Whip/Disarming Attack
Warlock/Blowgun/Menacing Attack
Sorcerer/Maul/Rally

Honestly, the possibilities seem endlessly fun, and interesting. It's easy into implement, and feels like it's actually worth the investment.

CapnZapp said:

Specifically, what about my three-year old post do you disagree with?

Click to expand...

Ha! Totally didn't notice the thread necromancy.

Idea of the Day: color code thread titles (or background color) so that the older the thread, the more red the title appears. (RGB values function of age, etc.) So you'd still see necro'd threads, but it would be visually obvious.

SmokeyCriminal said:

I think it would be really interesting if you fold in Weapon Master into Martial Adept so you get:

4 Martial Weapons
2 Maneuvers
1 Superiority Dice (d6)
Regain on a Rest

There's hardly any powercreep, you add a bit of tactics, and you get a whole lot of conceptual flavour and diversity. With all the possible weapon/maneuvers combinations you can have 5 Wizards take the Feat and they can be completely different. Plus the maneuvers let you do something interesting with your new weapon besides attack with it using a bad Str/Dex mod.

The new Feat sits in a good place where no one can look at it and call it suboptimal, or broken. But it does get the creative juices flowing for all the interesting character concepts you can mix and match.

Wizard/Whip/Disarming Attack
Warlock/Blowgun/Menacing Attack
Sorcerer/Maul/Rally

Honestly, the possibilities seem endlessly fun, and interesting. It's easy into implement, and feels like it's actually worth the investment.

Click to expand...

Personally, I dislike any type of "superior" dice mechanic and never, ever play a character who uses them. Horrible concept IMO.

That said, for those who don't mind it, I would reduce the weapon proficiencies to only 2, but otherwise I don't think your idea would be too much.

ClaytonCross said:

I like the ability to give any character weapon proficiencies of my choice. Changing it would cause my table to lose that ability with no replacement. Your suggested ability is just another "+ damage" ability which I find to be less interesting and less unique than the only feat that provides weapon proficiencies. If you want your "I want to do more damage … because" feat. You do just do something like "Reaper: character never misses and always does enough damage to kill enemies with one hit unless they are bosses." … because that's would end the relentless attempts to power creep damage and do nothing interesting with the feat.

I am not trying to be a jerk. I am just trying to make a point that being better at attacking and doing damage is not a "feat" of heroism and increasing those is not unique or interesting. Its just power creep and trivializing combat so you can kill things more than others kill things. Which is what you get from basic leveling in any class. If your trying to replace feat it needs to be something more than damage/to hit creep. Make it do something truly unique that makes the character stand out in a feat of skill others can't do.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you added the part about not trying to be a jerk, because you did an incredible job of coming across that way in your first paragraph.

Now, I don't disagree with your point that feats are ideally about doing things other people cannot do. And you are right in damage being a very vanilla style feat. IF I had designed a new version of it (the version I am talking about is not mine, it belongs to the Dawnforged cast), I probably wouldn't have done anything like this.

But where I like this feat has nothing to do with your Reaper strawman. I like this feat for making sure my rogue who only uses daggers isn't falling behind the curve. I like this feat for making me still feel like a damage machine even when I use shields instead of greatswords. I use it not to raise max damage, but to bring lower damage up to the averages.



Now, you said you like the ability to give "any character" any weapon proficiency, and that your table would miss the loss of that ability. I'm honestly curious about who you use this feat for, because it has a deadly flaw in it per RAW that I do not like.

That is this. Who takes Weapon Master? People who primarily use weapons or who want to primarily use weapons would be the obvious choice.

For Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, and Ranger this feat is completely useless in RAW, because they are already proficient with all weapons.

In the "eh, maybe?" camp, you have Clerics, Bards, Monks, and Rogues. Now, for Cleric and Bard, they have subclasses that give them all the weapons, so you would need to want a martial weapon, and have not picked a subclass that would have given you that weapon. For Rogues and Monks you would be looking into getting specific weapons that still work within their specialized combat styles. For Monk... I don't see why you would bother. All Monk weapons are already on their proficiency list and if you have a very specific weapon you are likely taking Kensai anyways to get it. Rogue is the only one I see benefiting from the RAW feat, since they could grab whips, Heavy Crossbows and Longbows, which all can use sneak attack and they are not already proficient with.

In the "why? Just Why?" camp I would put druids, sorcerers, warlocks and wizards. Maybe I could figure Warlock, but since pact of the blade already gives you everything you would need to have not chosen that, and then we have to discuss cantrips. Which really applies to Clerics and all the others as well. The point of getting a weapon prof is to use it in combat, you can already wield any weapon in the game, you just aren't accurate with it. And all of the casters except bard have way way better cantrips than the weapons they could get. With Xanathar's Druids get 1d10's or 1d12's in primal savagery, Clerics get 1d12's in Toll of the Dead, ect ect ect.


And final nail in the coffin. If you really want weapon proficiency gains (that somehow aren't related to doing more damage and doing better in combat) then why not use Xanathar's training system? It gives prof in tools and skills, zero reason you can't do the same thing for a weapon. And I'd argue you don't have to find and pay a teacher if a party member has the requisite prof, and with so many characters having martial weapons anyways, you are very likely to get what you need.

ClaytonCross said:

Example: Weapon Master... Choose one melee weapon without the two-handed property, while wielding only weapon(s) of that type (shortsword, longsword, hand axe, etc) and not wearing a shield, you may use your attack to manipulate lines of approach while maintaining your defense. Each time you make an attack against a target in 5ft, you may move to a another position within 5ft of that target without triggering attacks of opportunity from other enemies. The distance you can move can not exceed your speed.

So imagine a Ranger with two short swords or a fighter with a longsword and every time they attack the strike the opponent, parry the blade, and swivel in to a new position manipulating into or out of a group of enemies in order to escape being cornered or attack a target hiding behind guards. No additional damage or to hit but really useful and unique to all feats. Its use full and kind of an epic visual of a lone warrior manipulating his position through a crowd of multiple attacker who just can't seem to pin him down or hold him back... Kind of a master of his weapons...

Click to expand...

So... this isn't a bad ability, but I'd say it is a really bad feat.

You pick one weapon, it must be a one-handed weapon, and you cannot be using a shield. So this feat is only appealing to dual-wielders off the bat, because heavy weapon users and sword and board are immediately disqualified.

Then, when you attack you get to move to a different space next to that enemy, without triggering AO's from nearby enemies. Meaning it is only useful when you are getting flanked or surrounded, and want to run from that spot. Which is a decently niche set of circumstances by itself.

But then I wonder, why not just use mobile? With mobile you attack a target and the target can't make AO's against you. So, in a 2 v 1 set up, it is indistinguishable (with the added benefit of working with any weapon or attack in the game). You may then call upon the 3 v 1 scenario, but since 1st feats are usually around 4th, you are likely hitting 5th level soon and all the martial classes get extra attack. Meaning 3 v 1 Mobile can do this as well.

And monks are rogues (who are the main skirmishers outside of ranger) can disengage as a bonus action, making all of this feat worthless for them. (Unless spending a point of ki is a big deal for the monk, but we are talking an entire feat here, that shouldn't be the comparison)

So, you've given a feat, called it "Weapon Master" that allows you to maybe have an advantage if you are wielding the right weapon in a 4 v 1 pile on, if you are skirmishing and need to relocate position. It's not very impressive.

Chaosmancer said:

I'm glad you added the part about not trying to be a jerk, because you did an incredible job of coming across that way in your first paragraph.

Click to expand...

Ya I figured I had to disclaimer myself after I went back. Its hard to tell the difference between trying to push a point and being a jerk in text talking to someone you don't know well enough to get where they are coming from. So just understand as you continue on, I mean not personal offense, I exaggerate, I used bad examples, and write with passion that might be mistaken as anger or inertance but that's just because in the head of the reader inflection is added that I don't intend and an air of seriousness is added beyond that appropriate discussion of gaming on a forum of strangers.

Chaosmancer said:

Now, I don't disagree with your point that feats are ideally about doing things other people cannot do. And you are right in damage being a very vanilla style feat. IF I had designed a new version of it (the version I am talking about is not mine, it belongs to the Dawnforged cast), I probably wouldn't have done anything like this.

Click to expand...

And they fell into the same trap as so many who make homebrew. The problem with adding anything that does "more damage" is that your fighting in a party. If the party does more damage then the GM adapts encounters to the party to keep the game a challenge or prevent TPK by GM railroad. As such D&D is not like a video game where 3 monsters trigger/aggro at spot X and all do Y damage every time and the more power the better. Nope, the game changes with the group so one player gaining power creep just makes them a powergamer creating disparity to show boat UNLESS that is the role the party intends for them to take. Every class already has the tools to do the jobs its intended to do. Feats are really tool for breaking the mold and doing something different. MOST of them are not combat damage related. The ones that are tend to be more "fighting styles" then anything. A straite +1 to hit and damage is the LEAST feat thing you could do. Great weapon master is basically an all in haymaker, polearm master if your spinning staff fighter using the back of the weapon and planting one end against charges, sentinel is guard hold enemies at bay or preventing them from running away like city police, sharp shooter is a sniper shooting through a window and all of which are archtypes as much as they are bonuses. Their is "style" to just being better. What does being a weapons master mean more than a proficiency bonus or attribute already accounts for as you level?

Chaosmancer said:

But where I like this feat has nothing to do with your Reaper strawman. I like this feat for making sure my rogue who only uses daggers isn't falling behind the curve. I like this feat for making me still feel like a damage machine even when I use shields instead of greatswords. I use it not to raise max damage, but to bring lower damage up to the averages.

Click to expand...

Well the Reaper Strawman was intended to be an obvious strawman simple to highlight a point, but rogues get the majority of their damage from backstab not the 1d4 - 1d8 damage of the dagger. Choosing to use two 1d4 daggers instead of two 1d6 short swords or a 1d8 rapier will change your average damage by at most 2 points. While backstab at 20 will add around 35, and the +1 to hit is a 5% increase in trigger that damage has a significantly larger impact. Add to that, no one wanting to power game as a "damage machine" is going to hold back form taking this feat with two shortsword fighter or rogue. Add to that a fighter with sword and board can already use Dueling to add +2 damage since a shield is not weapon... and that makes this feat as a damage buff doubly redundant. Not to mention that the point of taking a shield is greater defense not greater offense.... your just saying you want it all without a choice.. that's really … (and please understand I am not trying to make this personal I just don't know a better kinder way to say this.) … selfish. If your Offensive and tank that's fine, but then leave being a "damage machine" to the player who is not a tank so they have something to do in a fight. If your a rogue your likely the scout... so scout and let the barbarian who only does damage be good at doing damage. If you want to be a damage machine of death, ignore your lack of defense, don't try to scout, or be a healer, just do damage. It sounds like your trying to take as many party roles in a group as you can like your playing a solo game as a result your pushing out your group. Pick one, do that, be part of the group. D&D is not a solo game.

Chaosmancer said:

Now, you said you like the ability to give "any character" any weapon proficiency, and that your table would miss the loss of that ability. I'm honestly curious about who you use this feat for, because it has a deadly flaw in it per RAW that I do not like.

That is this. Who takes Weapon Master? People who primarily use weapons or who want to primarily use weapons would be the obvious choice.

For Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, and Ranger this feat is completely useless in RAW, because they are already proficient with all weapons.

Click to expand...

No, they are already weapons masters as you said, a caster who wants to wield a melee weapon maybe with booming blade takes it instead of multi-classing because they don't want to multi-class they just want access to some weapons. Wizards for example have a really good capstone and while you might never make it there it reasonable not to want to lose that option incase you do, just because you want to use a longsword or rapier.

Chaosmancer said:

In the "eh, maybe?" camp, you have Clerics, Bards, Monks, and Rogues. Now, for Cleric and Bard, they have subclasses that give them all the weapons, so you would need to want a martial weapon, and have not picked a subclass that would have given you that weapon. For Rogues and Monks you would be looking into getting specific weapons that still work within their specialized combat styles. For Monk... I don't see why you would bother. All Monk weapons are already on their proficiency list and if you have a very specific weapon you are likely taking Kensai anyways to get it. Rogue is the only one I see benefiting from the RAW feat, since they could grab whips, Heavy Crossbows and Longbows, which all can use sneak attack and they are not already proficient with.

In the "why? Just Why?" camp I would put druids, sorcerers, warlocks and wizards. Maybe I could figure Warlock, but since pact of the blade already gives you everything you would need to have not chosen that, and then we have to discuss cantrips. Which really applies to Clerics and all the others as well. The point of getting a weapon prof is to use it in combat, you can already wield any weapon in the game, you just aren't accurate with it. And all of the casters except bard have way way better cantrips than the weapons they could get. With Xanathar's Druids get 1d10's or 1d12's in primal savagery, Clerics get 1d12's in Toll of the Dead, ect ect ect.

Click to expand...

This assumes every player is a DPR optimizer/power gamer. Your points are entirely mute if you just want to do something because its cool. This often happens for 2 reasons. 1. New players who don't often know the rules making characters right before a game will just take what sounds cool and have fun with it. 2. Players who have been around for a while will sometimes start playing with back story and roleplay concepts as much or more than looking at power building / optimizing. So sure they could cast toll the dead as a warlock but instead they took pact of the chain, high strength and want to wield a long sword, then for spells they focus on control spells. That means primarily they casting hold person while the party beats the crap of the target and they also hit it in melee for a little critical damage. Will they do much DPR even with this? No of course not, they just don't want to stand their and it means they can make opportunity attacks with that cool magic longsword the party tank through out when he upgraded. Nothing wrong with any of this. Your assertion is that you have minim levels of DPR at your table so you want to make this a way to get that. I am just saying it has value at other tables it doesn't at yours.

Chaosmancer said:

And final nail in the coffin. If you really want weapon proficiency gains (that somehow aren't related to doing more damage and doing better in combat) then why not use Xanathar's training system? It gives prof in tools and skills, zero reason you can't do the same thing for a weapon. And I'd argue you don't have to find and pay a teacher if a party member has the requisite prof, and with so many characters having martial weapons anyways, you are very likely to get what you need.

Click to expand...

Xanathar's system does not allow for weapons proficiency training and since stealing other classes abilities with out cost is the definition of mechanism many GMs will deny it on that alone. Taking this feat is the request cost many GMs require. Even so I have seen a wizard take this feat and still have to roll play training with the party tack to actually be able to use it. Story GM.

Chaosmancer said:

So... this isn't a bad ability, but I'd say it is a really bad feat.

Click to expand...

It was just to show a point so I am not defending my design. I spent maybe 2 mins on it. I just wanted to further point to "do something different, not more damage".

Really Defensive Duelist(daggers and short sword master), shield master, Great weapon master, polearm master, Mobile (Hit and run master, pairs well with polearm master so they have to move in and trigger it), sentinel, sharpshooter (sniper), ARE the great weapon master feat your trying to make separated out to the specific weapons you intend to master... you just need to choose what you want to master.

Elfcrusher said:

Ha! Totally didn't notice the thread necromancy.

Idea of the Day: color code thread titles (or background color) so that the older the thread, the more red the title appears. (RGB values function of age, etc.) So you'd still see necro'd threads, but it would be visually obvious.

Click to expand...

My advice is to repost this suggestion in the Meta subforum. Chances are Morrus doesn't read this thread.