Dragon Mag Trust Issues

[Felon]

Today I was killing some time in the Character Builder tricking out the intriguing new Seeker class. Selecting githzerai as my race, I went to the feat page and saw the Githzerai Blade Master feat. I think I literally did a double-take.

It grants profiiciency with both bastard sword and fullblade, all military blades, and a +2 on damage with all of those weapons. Anybody else would have to separately spend multiple feats, and Weapon Focus would only grant them +1 damage. So certainly there must be a requirement that creates some parity--it's fighter-only perhaps, or an ability score prerequisite. Nope. Just show up as a githzerai, and you're in like Flynn. Very hinky.

Then I looked at the source and suddenly my puzzlement was dispelled. "Oh, it's a Dragon Mag feat".

Man, I hate thinking that way, because it's so unilateral. But time and again it seems evident that despite their status as "official content" Dragon Mag feats don't seem subject to the same system of checks and balances as the feats we see in print. The other DM's have a Dragon Mag moratorium as well, which I think is a real shame, but there's just no trust.

But I know there are folks here who don't think twice regarding the source of their feats. I guess they're probably legal for RPGA, since they're official D&D content. So I'm interested to hear some thoughts on how common it is to treat Dragon Mag content differently from the printed content.

 

[amysrevenge]

Dwarves already get the same thing, only with Mordenkrads, Executioner's Axes, and all other hammers and axes, and it's in the PH.

 

[Felon]

Dwarves already get the same thing, only with Mordenkrads, Executioner's Axes, and all other hammers and axes, and it's in the PH.

Is Dwarven Weapon Training what you're referring to? It grants a dwarf a +2 damage bonus with axes and hammers, but it doesn't bestow any superior or military weapon proficiencies on them.

The comparison seems apt. Dwarves, like githzerai, lack the racial bonus to Strength, which is the basic ability score for classes that use big weapons, like fighter, ranger, warden, and barbarian. The trend of offsetting a suboptimal race/class combo through better-than-average feats is well-established. But the Githzerai Blade Master feat does go farther than Dwarven Weapon Training, and thus establishes my point about the lack of parity.

 

[Cadfan]

Read it again.

The Githzerai feat is basically the same, except it gives proficienly only with specific superior weapons, and the damage bonus scales per tier. The dwarven feat gives proficiency with all hammers and axes regardless of type, and the damage bonus doesn't scale.

I'm not sure I think either of these feats really need to exist. But they're pretty comparable overall.

 

[Rechan]

Is Dwarven Weapon Training what you're referring to? It grants the +2 damage with axes and hammers, but it doesn't bestow any superior or military weapon proficiencies on them.

Ask Wizards 11.14.08

Q: The Dwarven Weapon Training feat gives you proficiency with all axes and hammers, does this extend to superior weapons like the mordenkrad?
A: Yes, the lucky dwarf with this feat has access to a whole host of axes and hammers, even those that are superior.

 

[Felon]

Ask Wizards 11.14.08

Q: The Dwarven Weapon Training feat gives you proficiency with all axes and hammers, does this extend to superior weapons like the mordenkrad?
A: Yes, the lucky dwarf with this feat has access to a whole host of axes and hammers, even those that are superior.

Uggh. OK, thanks for clearing that up. Guess I undermined myself by picking the wrong Dragon Mag feat to use as my tipping point. I'll post again when I have a few more on hand.

 

[Rechan]

I have no qualms with Dragon Mag material. The same guys writing the D&D books are the same guys writing the articles (until they actually answer submission articles, anyways).

If there are obvious broken qualities, they retract and repost the article (like the Ranger power article), or it's ironed out by the end of the month. If there is any question, you can email them and get an answer.

I have only seen one or two real questionable things (usually a power that's not aptly balanced right). Comparing that the quantity coming out, I'm not concerned.

 

[Wik]

We have a "no feats from Dragon" rule in our campaign. Some are fair, I'm sure, but I don't want to have to look at each and every one.

For example, there's a feat in there that basically gives you both weapon expertise and weapon focus. Gah.

 

[Kez Darksun]

We have a "no feats from Dragon" rule in our campaign. Some are fair, I'm sure, but I don't want to have to look at each and every one.

For example, there's a feat in there that basically gives you both weapon expertise and weapon focus. Gah.

If you're talking about Focused Expertise, that is a feat from the PH3 Monk preview that allows you gain a +1 to hit with both implement and weapon attacks with the specific item, not a feat that grants both Weapon Focus and Weapon Expertise.

 

[Shroomy]

The DDI magazines produce as much unbalanced stuff as the sourcebooks, which is to say, not much. The best part of the DDI materials is that they're are two chances for it to be corrected if it does turn out to be problematic (once before the issue is compiled and second when the information is put into the CB; they've also errata'd material later).