How ubiquitous is the Superior Weapon feat?

[sev]

The vast majority of weapon users feat out a superior weapon at first level anyway, not just the seeker. The only reason my swordmage still uses a longsword is because of a feat shortage.

For a striker wielding a two-handed weapon, I can see the superior weapon feat being incredibly effective, though I'd honestly overlooked it at first.

For other roles -- and particularly for one-handed weapons -- I'm less certain. I'm more likely to take weapon expertise for characters whose bread-and-butter is powers with side effects that only take effect on hit.
Is that just me? I'd be more likely to retrain with some superior weapon proficiency in the later heroic levels, rather than right at first.

Maybe I just have an unreasonable dislike of missing.

 

[IanB]

The superior weapon feat is often worth +1 to attack by itself (example: bastard sword vs. battle axe), so there's no particular reason to take weapon expertise first. Mileage may vary depending on what class you're playing of course.

 

[DracoSuave]

It depends. For weapon strikers, and weapon striker-secondaries, it's pretty common, and an easy and effective way to improve yourself in your roll. Rogues being the exception here, due to +1 with a +3 weapon you can get 18-20 crit on being so inherently good.

For those focused on other roles, you might be better off with a different feat. No amount of damage replaces +1 attack when you're considered about secondary effects.

Let's be honest tho. For some players, running in with a huge weapon is fun. SWP gives you a huge weapon. It's not rocket science as to why it's commonly taken.

That said, it's not for every weapon-user, just like not every implement-user wants dual-implement and a staff of ruin.

 

[sev]

The superior weapon feat is often worth +1 to attack by itself (example: bastard sword vs. battle axe), so there's no particular reason to take weapon expertise first. Mileage may vary depending on what class you're playing of course.

Are you referring to the proficiency bonus? Both the military and superior weapon categories have weapons with both +2 and +3 proficiency bonuses; I don't see that as related. The post that spawned this question, for example, cited the longsword, which already has a +3 proficiency bonus.

I'm still not convinced to spend an early feat on a superior one-handed weapon training until I've run out of other feats that provide more damage-increase. It gets you ~1 point of damage per W, and at early levels, you're mostly looking at powers that do 1W. I'd wait until I was looking at a character that had more than one 2+W powers per encounter, because there are other feats that get me more than +1 damage per hit. And then? I'm likely going to want increased hit because I want the option to do all that damage more often.

The two-handed superior weapons at least add in things like brutal or high crit or defensive to go alongside the damage-die increase that you generally get when you're upgrading to a superior weapon. So I can totally see taking superior weapon training as a first feat for, say, a giant-sword-wielding barbarian. Or even, giving up 1 point of hit in return for Brutal 2, an giant-axe-wielding barbarian (yum!).

 

[Ferghis]

I have a 9th level warforged fighter and I don't plan on taking a superior weapon unless I stumble across a drow long knife (so I can use deft hurler). The character concept is a bodyguard, so I'm good as long as I can tank, mark, interrupt, and punish. Sure, superior weapons can take the punishment up a notch, but I'd rather stick to large shield and longsword. There are too many other feats that are better to take. Off the top of my head:

- Quickdraw, to make sure he gets that attack in during a surprise round.
- Warforged Tactics, because nothing's better than aplus to hit when an enemy is next tomy squishy.
- MC monk, to force an enemy to move away from my squishy and perception or insight.
- Toughness or Durability, because the DM is evil.
- If the allies' AC is high enough, plate armor proficiency. I'm going to skip past that condition even though it's complicated because it's a complicated one. This is questionable, but not getting hit is probably better than doing a bit more damage, for a tank.

And then you're at paragon. All of the above feats are more important to me than a more damaging weapon. Long drow knife would be useful with deft hurler because it would let me mark an additional remote enemy with cleave, without compromising damage too much.

For non-daggermaster weapon strikers, on the other hand, it seems like a good idea.

 

[sev]

Rogues being the exception here, due to +1 with a +3 weapon you can get 18-20 crit on being so inherently good.

um. can you unpack that? I'm not parsing your properly.

 

[DracoSuave]

um. can you unpack that? I'm not parsing your properly.

Rogue Weapon Talent = +1 to hit with dagger
Daggermaster = 18-20 crit range
Dagger = +3 proficiency to hit.

 

[renau1g]

I don't think the +1 to damage it better than teh +1 to hit, but sometimes at level 1 it's nice to start with your executioner's axe/fullblade than to carry a greataxe and say "oh this? Yeah I'm sure after I kill a few monsters with the smaller one I'll step up to the big guy" taking the feat at 2nd level.

It's much better for multi-attackers or two-handed wielders

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

For non-daggermaster weapon strikers, on the other hand, it seems like a good idea.

I'd like a superior dagger, counting as a dagger, that rolled d6s.

This is mostly because I really dislike rolling d4s.

Brad

 

[Obryn]

I take it for pretty much all my weapon-using characters. Partly this is for the game advantages. But mostly, because it's cool.

Weapon Focus is a better feat choice for many characters, though, especially if they use their weapon as an implement.

But let's face it - if you're spending the feat on a big weapon, you're probably getting Weapon Focus, too. I'd say almost every weapon user will get one or both.

-O