+1 to hit or +1 damage?

[Aidan mac Culloch]

A further consideration would be the type of class the character has.

Fighting-type characters with traditionally lower BAB would prefer the +1 to hit. I am thinking specifically of rogues, clerics, monks, and bards or maybe multiclass combinations that dilute the BAB progression.

On the other hand, fighting-types with strong BAB, by which I mean fighters, barbarians, paladins, and rangers would prefer the +1 to damage. Not an exclusive list by any means but certainly a factor.

 

[Particle_Man]

That calculation goes wonky as soon as your damage increases (like, having a flaming sword, or extra damage from a 2-handed weapon when you have a strength bonus of at least 2, or sneak attack, etc.). Once you get an average 10 damage (assuming a 50% chance to hit) it starts going the other way.

So if you do 10 damage or more, and expect to hit 50% of the time, I guess you should go for more TH. Do you have a fighter using a greatsword? Is your strength at least 14?

In general, TH is better. The PHB seems to agree with this, as there is a feat that grants +1 th, while the equivalent fighter feat grants +2 damage.

 

[Driddle]

In general, TH is better. The PHB seems to agree with this, as there is a feat that grants +1 th, while the equivalent fighter feat grants +2 damage.

Sadly, that the PHB agrees is not a good enough reason to trust that choice. :\
The recently released Iron Heroes variant offers a feat mastery progression that provides several single bonuses, +1 to hit and +1 damage, that you can pick from on the way up. It's possible to pick all or some combination as you see fit to define your "weapon focus."

 

[PrinceZane]

I'm with Aidan... depending on the character concept and all depends on what you should do. Until we see what the character is, its hard to say 1 or the other, and IMO makes posting just a guess that it fits with his char idea already...

 

[Squire James]

In general, TH is better. The PHB seems to agree with this, as there is a feat that grants +1 th, while the equivalent fighter feat grants +2 damage.

Not quite true. Weapon Focus is a LOT easier for a character to acquire than Weapon Specialization. 10 of the 11 base classes can't get the latter!

I'd say the attack bonus is slightly better than the damage bonus in the mid-range case, like perhaps 1.25 to 1. Armor Class trumps both once it clears 20. Your BAB goes up at least 1 every 2 levels, but your AC only goes up if you hunt down that magical gear. Most "low magic" games end up being some form of "eggshells with hammers", because it's a LOT easier for a warrior with no magic gear to get a +20 attack bonus than a 30 AC!

 

[Aust Diamondew]

+1 to hit becuase of the aforementioned powerattack. Even with out power attack I'd take +1 to hit though, no paticular reason I just would.

 

[Endur]

+1 to hit is better.

Not only for PA/expertise reasons, but for AOOs, etc. There are many situations where the amount of damage you do does not matter, but whether you hit or miss is very important.

Likewise, what if the target only has a few hit points left, then your +1 to damage is meaningless.

 

[Particle_Man]

The recently released Iron Heroes variant offers a feat mastery progression that provides several single bonuses, +1 to hit and +1 damage, that you can pick from on the way up. It's possible to pick all or some combination as you see fit to define your "weapon focus."

What page? I am looking at p. 147 of Iron Heroes, under the Weapon Focus feat tree, and it alternates between +1 th and +2 damage. Available to many classes, since most of them are "fighters". So it seems that Mike Mearls also thinks that +1 TH is twice as good at +1 DA.

 

[IronWolf]

I'd take the +1 to hit over the +1 to damage if needing to choose. In order to do damage you have to hit, so I like to increase my odds of getting that hit.

 

[MonsterMash]

Personally I'd take the +1 to hit.