AV2 Item power levels

[Mengu]

What I don't get is, why do they have weapon focus (and racial weapon damage bonus feats), but have not yet introduced the same for implements. Clearly it's not overpowered since there are plenty of classes that can use weapons as implements now. What is so powerful about the wand or the rod, that having implement focus rod might break some other mechanic?

Also there is all this racial weapon support, but nothing for implements. How hard or unbalancing would it be to make a feat that lets a tiefling infernal warlock get +2 feat bonus to damage rolls with rods and pact daggers, or a feat that lets an elf wizard have a +2 feat bonus to damage rolls with wands and orbs, or a feat that lets a deva paladin have a +2 feat bonus to damage rolls with a holy symbol, or a feat that lets a goliath shaman gain a +2 feat bonus to damage rolls with a totem?

 

[Diirk]

Except weapon keyword = proficiency bonus added. Implement keyword = proficiency bonus not added.

True, but its not like they don't have plenty of weapon vs reflex/fort etc powers anyway. Actually glancing through, most of the weapon powers involve hitting with the sword, and most of the implement powers involve not using the sword itself physically... there's just a couple of exceptions.

They worded Weapon Expertise (and Implement Expertise) differently than Weapon Focus ... so Weapon Focus should work the same? I don't think I can follow the logic there.

What I meant was Weapon Focus as presumably originally intended was a feat that let you do extra damage with weapons (ie 'Weapon' attacks). The language wasn't clear tho, and then the whole implement/weapon issue came about in certain limited circumstances so they said it would work with those implements as well.

Now if all this was completely as intended, then presumably from the naming 'Weapon Expertise' should be like 'Weapon Focus' but increasing attack instead of damage, right ? But oddly, they completely reworded it so it worked with weapon attacks only.

So they should work the same, but they screwed up the wording in weapon focus to allow it to do more than it should. Thus they worded weapon expertise differently.

The biggest problem is that weapons get much better "stuff" compared to implements. There is no implement focus, for example, which would make most weapon focus issues moot (outside of cases like the swordmage and monk which would want "focuses focus" or maybe call it expert focus?). Not to mention stuff like flaming weapons and the like. [There is the issue with the cold weapons and how it makes a rogue more likely to use the cold feats that give vulnerability and combat advantage than a wizard does].

Yeah I completely agree with all this. Honestly with how screwed up things are now they should just junk the lot of the feats and make an 'Expertise' feat and a 'Focus' feat that allow you to choose a weapon group, implement or individual item (as both implement and weapon) to gain +attack and +damage to. And maybe just an 'Implement Proficiency' as well that lets anyone pick whatever implement they want, because the disparity between some types of implements and other is just laughable.

There's a rod sorta like a flaming weapon in AV2 for warlocks from memory, but much more limited. Converted necrotic/poison damage to radiant or something? But you had to active it as a minor action every time you wanted to do so.

 

[Ryujin]

Through enemies? No. Although there is a weapon I believe in AV2 that allows for that (you become insubstantial on a charge). However, the amulet wouldn't allow you to move through enemy spaces anyway.

Charging past enemies? Sure, they do it all the time. OA's only stop you if it's from a fighter, or it drops you to zero. I've seen a couple monsters who immobilize with thier basic attacks, but outside of those situations, getting hit by an OA isn't going to stop the charging Barbarian.

That's just it; they get attacks of opportunity. This badge apparently removes that. Being insubstantial, via Ghoststride Boots, Ghostphase Armor, etc. can be pretty handy, but you still get hit. By RAW you could double move right through 20 opponents and do a charge attack against the big baddie at the end of your movement, without getting touched along the way.

 

[Mirtek]

So they should work the same, but they screwed up the wording in weapon focus to allow it to do more than it should. Thus they worded weapon expertise differently.

And then they decided that wording weapon expertise differently was a stupid idea and created the focused expertise feat to fix it.

It sometimes just looks like not even they know what they really want.

 

[abyssaldeath]

And then they decided that wording weapon expertise differently was a stupid idea and created the focused expertise feat to fix it.

It sometimes just looks like not even they know what they really want.

Well, Focused is for a specific weapon type while Expertise is for an entire group. A difference that probably won't come into play often, but it could be an important difference.

 

[Nifft]

Well, Focused is for a specific weapon type while Expertise is for an entire group. A difference that probably won't come into play often, but it could be an important difference.

IMHO there are a bunch of things wrong with Focused Expertise.

1/ It's not balanced against Weapon Expertise or Implement Expertise. Instead, it's "balanced" against character loot planning. Basically, the times the distinction is important, it's for meta-game reasons -- and that can lead to frustration on the part of the DM or the player, since it's a conflict between DM and player, not a conflict between character and environment.

2/ It works fine for a Swordmage or a Bard with Arcane Implement Proficiency (blade), but Paladins are still screwed (though a Paladin Arcane Gish* can benefit).

3/ Any "Expertise" feat exists at all. Bleah. This is exactly the kind of boring bonus feat we were supposed to be rid of with the magic of 4e's fixed math. (This is a meta-complaint.)

Cheers, -- N


*) It is interesting to me that "Gish" is legal in FireFox's dictionary.

 

[abyssaldeath]

I have no problem with the bonus feats, damage or hit. To me it's just more numbers on my sheet. It means something to me(the player), but nothing to my alter ego(the character).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I will never understand why people rail against what others want just becuse they do not...

I like having a balance between activate 'cool fx' powers and static increase powers. In a perfect world all of my paragon level characters would ave atleast 2 items with static properties, atleast 2 items with 'cool fx' Daily activatiosn, and atleast 1 item with a 'cool fx' encounter/atwill power...

on the other hand my friend kurt HATES daily use items...he fights tooth and nail for weapons, armor, neck, and other slot items that have always on properties instead of dailies...infact I have seen hm go months (Gameing 2x a week) without useing daily magic items...

then there is paul...he hates static bonuses...infact he never has things like the armband of power...he rathers the giant kind gloves and the ruby scabard that both have encounter + to damage that he always explains with 'cool fx'

Joe doesn't care at all...infact he sometimes forgets to update his weapons...at level 18 he still had a +2 luck blade once...oh and in that game we hit epic before he got his 1st neck slot item...


we all play in the same games...we each have our own style. why argue "I hate static boreing +2/4/6 damage arm slot items...if someone else is argueing "that is all I want.."

 

[FireLance]

A daily reroll vs every single attack getting extra damage? That had better be a hell of a power you're rerolling.

Lead the attack. As a warlord I don't need to focus on damage. That's the striker's job and the two-weapon ranger in my party does indeed have iron armbands of power. I'm there to ensure that the power that can potentially turn the tide in a tough fight hits.

The Charisma-focused paladin/Champion of Order also prefers bracers of mental might to maximize the hit chance for his certain justice. As a defender, damage is a secondary concern to ensuring that the toughest opponent in a fight is dazed and weakened as long as he has it marked.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Lead the attack. As a warlord I don't need to focus on damage.

I have seen epic taclords that carry +1 luck daggers just to make sure they hit with that 1st level daily...becuse when it comes out it is important...