Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scion" data-source="post: 1282661" data-attributes="member: 5777">For now I will ignore the psionics part, spell focus doesnt work for them and the equivalent in psionics may or may not get a change.Lets focus on the weapon focus example, as it was the one I was going to use anyway if someone made another comment saying that spell focus is ok at +1 and worth a feat (since this discussion is about prices, and monitary value of said feats, this still goes on topic. by definition of one feat is much less powerful than another then the one that is lacking shouldnt cost as much)For weapon focus a character picks a weapon and gets a +1 in this weapon. For spell focus you pick a school and get a +1 to saves in that school. So far it looks like spell focus is ahead, they get more choices after all.Now, the wf character will get the bonus every attack, or near to. After all, if you focus in a weapon then you will use it more than any other. Everytime you attack with that weapon you get that +1.For the spell focus character the same cannot be said. The character will 'not' be throwing a spell every round that from that school that requires a save. Unless of course he wishes to be incredibly polarized to one field. Most schools only deal in one saving through, and even then their are always spells that will give no save, or slots that will be used for buffing or something else.Even a sorcerer, who picks up many spells, would be nearly out of the game if they stuck to only one school. Unless those spells had some special advantage such as no save allowed. He will have to cast spells outside of this one school eventually.Failing this however spellcasters have a limited number of slots. Very limited. If you have 40 slots in a day to use (very very high level caster with a very good prime stat) chances of more than 20 of these useing spell focus is not very good. At these levels especially some creatures will be resistant or immune to certain saving throws. See above about schools normally only having one save.Chances are very good that the fighter will swing more than 40 times in a day. That means 40 chances for the +1 to matter. A caster who throws 40 spells of a single type, that require a save, is fairly ludicrus. Whereas 40 attacks from a fighter might be as little as 5 rounds of full attacking (at 8 attacks/round. 4 from BAB, 3 from various twf chains, one from haste.. or toss in some speed ehancements, whatever)The numbers have been run on several threads, and by people who are more willing to look up all of the details repeatidly than I am currently. Even at +2 it was never a 'no brainer' but it did tend to actually matter sometimes at +2. It has been said that they made it +1 for fear of the +4 that the two feats were before. Who cares? If +4 is too strong then stop the +4, put in a sidebar in the phb saying that the +4 was abusive and to not use it. As it was the +2 was only sortof worth it, but only barely.Weapon focus winds up being a 'lot' over the carear of a character. It can even make a noticeable difference. Spell focus at +1 is merely a joke. I'll see if I can find relavent threads, it is hard currently with internet acting up. sorry for not having it posted right now <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />Furthermore, nerfing a feat because this or that prc is too strong is definately not the way to go! At best a new feat can be made up that does nothing or next to nothing and require that. Or just tone down the prc. As for buying ones way into a prc that seems like a bad idea pretty much all of the time no matter what anyway. Strikes me very similar to getting into prcs that require being able to cast a certain spell and getting a ring of spell storing or ioun stone or imbue with spell and using those to qualify. Those are just abuses waiting to happen, they shouldnt be reflected in costs though, merely in the dm saying it doesnt work.</blockquote>

Verification