PHB2: Melee Weapon Mastery - am I missing something?

Nifft said:
I don't understand this. Are you assuming someone would take Weapon Specialization before Power Attack?
I'm saying that at low levels, reducing your AB by using Power Attack may not be useful. Consider a 4th level fighter with Str 16 and WF, WS, and PA. He attacks at +8 for +5 damage. If he's battling hobgoblin mooks (AC 15), then he hits on 7+. Since they've only got 6 HP, it's not worth using PA as you do a minimum of 6 HP damage. It's more important to hit them in the first place, especially if you've got Cleave and Great Cleave. Equally, if the same character were faced with an AC 25 foe, then reducing the chance to hit is foolish because you stand little chance of hitting. It's more important to hit and do some damage than to hit well. In both cases WS gives you the benefit, because it doesn't reduce your chance to hit.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Quartz said:
I'm saying that at low levels, reducing your AB by using Power Attack may not be useful. Consider a 4th level fighter with Str 16 and WF, WS, and PA. He attacks at +8 for +5 damage. If he's battling hobgoblin mooks (AC 15), then he hits on 7+. Since they've only got 6 HP, it's not worth using PA as you do a minimum of 6 HP damage. It's more important to hit them in the first place, especially if you've got Cleave and Great Cleave.
... and you don't, because you need Power Attack to get Cleave. ;) (See? Power Attack is better!)

Cheers, -- N
 

WS is not so weak if you use Point Buy 28 or lower.

For the nowadays common Point Buy 32 or even higher, it's ridiculously weak.

WS should give an unnamed +2 bonus to strength.
 

Felon said:
So, IYO, fighters SHOULD outdamage paladins, their fellow warrior class. But if another class (like a little wizard with his d4 hit dice) outdamages a fighter, that's something broken that needs fixing? You reject the notion of "level ground" in one instance, but not another? That's a compelling arguement I'd love to hear.

Yeah, I think fighters should consistenly outdamage paladins. Not all the time, but most of the time. IME, Paladins are only used when a player roles GREAT ability scores, due to the fact that paladins need high scores in many abilities to be effective. Couple that with their high saves and other abilities, and I think it's more than fair to say that fighters should at least outdamage them most of the time. Feel free to disagree. ;)

I'm not sure how you made the next conclusion. I never said anything about the wizard being broken or needing fixing. Using the core rule books only, in my opinion, benefits the spell casters more than the fighters (as far as relative power levels go). That doesn't mean I think the wizard or cleric is broken...I just think they are more powerful overall than fighters. I think using some of the other rule books helps to make the fighters more competitive with the spell casters, especially at higher levels. In short, I think feats like the one we are debating about bring more balance to the game. That's just 1 person's opinion.

I have personal experience using this feat from about level 15 (when I picked up the PHB2) to about level 22 or 23, and no one in our group complained about me being more powerful than them. The wizards and clerics were still as effective as ever, and so was the paladin (especially once I showed him the charging smite ability in the PHB2). In fact, charging smite is one case where the paladin would consistently outdamage me. The main reason of complaint by the paladin was that at high levels, I had an Ax that I could throw and do massive damage with, and he was afraid ;) to charge in alone with his greatsword. The player never once used a ranged weapon in our entire campaign I think. So, typically, I was laying waste to enemies at range while he was waiting around for them to engage us. I'm sure someone else could have tweaked a paladin to be more effective than this player.

For those that are complaining about the brokeness of this feat, solely based on reading the description, I say that you should use it in game before judging it. Happy gaming.
 

jontherev said:
I'm not sure how you made the next conclusion. I never said anything about the wizard being broken or needing fixing.
I thought I made it pretty clear. You did suggest that fighters are weak because spellcasters outdamage them and that this feat helped put them "on level ground".

The implication is that the ground was uneven, and fighters need some kind of compensation. That is what I'm disputing.

I have personal experience using this feat from about level 15 (when I picked up the PHB2) to about level 22 or 23, and no one in our group complained about me being more powerful than them.
Well, how often do the players in your group complain about stuff? I suspect there are frenzed berserkers out there that nobody's complained about either. Do you consider folks letting stuff slide to be a reliable benchmark of balance?
 

Felon said:
I thought I made it pretty clear. You did suggest that fighters are weak because spellcasters outdamage them and that this feat helped put them "on level ground".

The implication is that the ground was uneven, and fighters need some kind of compensation. That is what I'm disputing.

You can dispute all you like, but it won't change my opinion. Yes, I think fighters needed help. You want evidence? Ok. Fighters rely on feat choices to remain competitive with the other classes...that is ALL they get for class abilities. Using only the PHB, their feat choices, frankly, are not that good imo. There are levels where you are choosing some really weak feats, especially at the higher levels. This, imo, is the main reason you saw so many multi-classed fighters. The PHB2 imo, made the straight fighter an incredibly viable option. Sure, I didn't exactly play a straight fighter (I took 1 level of barb, 1 level of exotic weapon master, and then got bored at epic levels and started taking cleric levels), but I was close enough. Using only the PHB imo, there was really no reason (power-wise) to stay a fighter after taking Greater Weapon Specialization. After I took GWS, I don't think I took ANY feats from the PHB. Feel free to disagree to your heart's content.


Well, how often do the players in your group complain about stuff? I suspect there are frenzed berserkers out there that nobody's complained about either. Do you consider folks letting stuff slide to be a reliable benchmark of balance?

We have a note card with the word WHINE written on it that we pass out humorously to players when they complain, probably once or twice per session. If they whine again, someone will usually ask if they'd like some cheese to go with that whine. We've never used the Frenzied Berserker, and frankly I don't see what that has to do with this discussion. Also, I don't get the point of your last question. Who's letting what slide where? Actually, nevermind. I think you're taking this too seriously. I'm just one person, and it's just my opinion. Happy gaming.
 


This many be a silly question, but I'm still new so:

Why is everyone saying a fighter can take this feat at lvl 4? It seems a lvl 4 fighter only has a base attack bonus of 4, not 8. Are you allowed to factor in other things like your str modifier?
 

I think they mean you just need to have four fighter levels, to qualify for weapon specialization. My character is a Rogue 13/Fighter 4, for example.
 

KingCrab said:
Why is everyone saying a fighter can take this feat at lvl 4?
Who's saying that? Perhaps they're saying you merely need 4 levels of Fighter (plus another 4 BAB from somewhere else) rather than 8 level of Fighter (as you would need for Improved Weapon Focus, which sucks in comparison)?

Cheers, -- N
 

Remove ads

Top