Melee Training - Good or Bad?

[Saeviomagy]

Also, the rogue being in melee helps the party with flanking. In some parties, that helps. Riposte Strike also becomes an option for artful dodgers with melee training.

Alas, it does not. Riposte strike does NOT grant a basic melee attack. It grants a secondary attack that is str vs ac, using str for damage.

 

[MadLordOfMilk]

I imagine the same is true for an avenger. Actually - doesn't the avenger want his foe to run so he can chase? Good OAs are going to discourage a foe from running.

Step 1: Mark a primarily-ranged (IE artillery) target with Oath of Enmity
Step 2: Get adjacent and wait.

Either your target shifts away and triggers your Censure of Pursuit bonus damage, or is forced to take an opportunity attack whenever they do something ranged. If your OA sucks, of COURSE they'll just take the hit from that instead

 

[Keenath]

I imagine the same is true for an avenger. Actually - doesn't the avenger want his foe to run so he can chase? Good OAs are going to discourage a foe from running.

Depends on what kind of Censure he took. A Retribution avenger wants to hit you as much as possible. But no, an avenger doesn't necessarily want you to run. If you run, he may not get to use his Oath reroll next turn.

I think the opportunity attack happens before he leaves the square, so unless censure is also an interrupt, then it won't be up for the OA.

Well, it doesn't say. It says "if your...target moves away from you". An opportunity attacks are "triggered by an enemy leaving a square adjacent to you", and "interrupts the action that triggered it".

Well, clearly leaving the square has triggered an OA, but has it triggered the Censure? I don't know. I need official clarification!

 

[Nail]

Going back to the OP:

The feat Melee Training is good....but far from "broken" or "bad". It gives options to classes that didn't have them, and it allows some leaders (Warlords!) to "spread th' Love" of Commander's Strike around.

I like it.

 

[Skallgrim]

Going back to the OP:

The feat Melee Training is good....but far from "broken" or "bad". It gives options to classes that didn't have them, and it allows some leaders (Warlords!) to "spread th' Love" of Commander's Strike around.

I like it.

As do I. I suspect that you'll see the very most use for this in classes where most of their Weapon powers use one stat, but their melee basic attack uses strength (Rogues with Dex, Swordmages with Int, Beast Form rangers with Wisdom, Avengers with Wisdom). For those people, it RETURNS them to the parity that most other classes already enjoy. The Melee Ranger, Fighter, Barbarian, etc. use the SAME primary stat for powers and basic melee attacks already, so this allows those classes the same benefit.

I think you will also see it in some specialized builds. Our Cleric mostly uses Wisdom based ranged powers, but has a really good AC, and Shield Proficiency (because he wanted it, and to boost a low Ref). He likes this, because he's not planning on being a STR based melee cleric, but doesn't HAVE to eat Opportunity Attacks to be effective in close combat. Some other classes simply aren't worried about basic attacks most of the time, or have an at-will power which can be used as a basic attack.

It's a feat slot for a boost to one At Will attack (compare it to some of the gladiator feats). I think it's fairly balanced, and neither too powerful, nor too necessary, to make a good feat.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I won't argue that it is broken. I do, however, think it is a very very bad feat.

It is step 2 or 3 down the road to eliminating any conceptual basis from attributes whatsoever.

Combined with backgrounds that let you use your highest attribute for hit points, you get

I, the Thavian Swordmage hit like a truck with my longsword because I am so smart. And I am well-nigh indestructibly tough because I am so smart.

Really? I, the Charisma paladin hit like a truck with my warhammer because I am so pretty. And I am well-nigh indestructibly tough because I am so pretty.

Not so fast. I, the artful dodger rogue am threatening--on an OA, I can shove my dagger through three inches of steel plate because I am so quick. And I am well-nigh indestructibly tough because I am so quick.

If this is the design they are going for, they might as well just say:
"You have a primary attribute--describe it however you like, maybe you are smart, maybe you are attractive and personable, maybe you are strong, maybe you are tough--whatever it is, it gives you a bonus of +4 (+.5/4lvl, +.5 per tier) to all of your attack rolls and damage. It also determines your hit points." Forget about calling it strength or dexterity, Intelligence, or anything else--with feats, backgrounds, etc that let you use it for everything under the sun it really doesn't represent anything resembling strength, dexterity, intelligence, or anything else in the game world.

And metagaming from the DM? Move it from "in poor taste" to "mandatory." There is no longer any relationship between a character's appearance and the effectiveness of even their melee basic attack. They wizard who can barely lift his staff implement? He is just as likely to hit and does nearly as much damage as the muscle-bound barbarian with a two-handed sword.

 

[Danceofmasks]

You're already describing 4e.
What's that saying?
4e classes are the same crap, different flavour.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

To be fair, the regional background thing is from Forgotten Realms only, and seems really cheap to me. The Melee Training feat is a little different because it only affects your Melee Basic Attack, not ALL powers. Hit points are something that are dealt with in every round of combat, and where they come from should not be so easily manipulated. I think that's why when you look at the "Backgrounds" section of the PHB 2 you'll see that the various options are much more low key when compared to the regional benefits from Forgotten Realms.

 

[WalterKovacs]

I won't argue that it is broken. I do, however, think it is a very very bad feat.

It is step 2 or 3 down the road to eliminating any conceptual basis from attributes whatsoever.

Combined with backgrounds that let you use your highest attribute for hit points, you get

I, the Thavian Swordmage hit like a truck with my longsword because I am so smart. And I am well-nigh indestructibly tough because I am so smart.

Really? I, the Charisma paladin hit like a truck with my warhammer because I am so pretty. And I am well-nigh indestructibly tough because I am so pretty.

Not so fast. I, the artful dodger rogue am threatening--on an OA, I can shove my dagger through three inches of steel plate because I am so quick. And I am well-nigh indestructibly tough because I am so quick.

Ignoring the whole thing about backgrounds, and the fact that number of healing surges per day is much more important than your HP ...

How is it more logical that the character that uses Intelligence or Charisma or Dexterity for every other melee attack is suddenly incapable of hitting someone because they are charging or making an OA. A paladin is channeling divine power, a swordmage is channeling arcane power, and a rogue has weapon finesse [which does extra damage as well]. Is that really that illogical?

 

[Tony Vargas]

While this feat may not seem broken, on the surface, it does alter game balance among classes and builds. If you look at the PH classes, for instance, there are a number that tend towards high STR (primary, or relatively high-priority secondary) - Fighters, Warlords, avenging Paladins, battle Clerics, brutal Rogues - those classes had better melee basic attacks than other classes that had less (or no) reason to invest much in STR - like Warlocks, Wizards, artful Rogues, and devoted Clerics. Now, either lacking a viable melee basic attack was taken into account when those classes and builds were balanced, and the feat breaks that balance, or the classes were imbalanced to begin with, and were just now fixed. Considering the power selection of the avenging Paladin (there's a dearth of STR powers for it to choose), and the relative merits of some brutal vs artful Rogue powers (sly flourish vs riposte strike, for instance), I'd have guessed that having or lacking an MBA /was/ considered when classes - and, especially, builds - were balanced with eachother.

Warlocks should be particularly pleased, though: they can finally stab people effectively with those pact blades they've been carrying around.