Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6634262" data-attributes="member: 6787650">I agree, but I think measuring against ASI is a reasonable baseline for measuring damage-oriented feats. After all, you typically have non-offensive needs as well, such as Lucky, Alert or Resilient. Anything worse than an ASI, in my opinion, is unlikely to get chosen over the opportunity cost. Even a offense-oriented dual wielder should find Mounted Combatant or Sentinel more attractive than Savage Attacks or Dual Wielder. I did like the idea from earlier in this thread about making Dual Wielder allow dual attacks on a -5; my only concern in that case, aside from the increased complexity that always results from introducing a house rule, is that it would make Dual Wielder almost as good as GWM and Polearm Master combined, which seems like a rather large swing from PHB rules, especially on a DX-based chassis. If it took your bonus action as well I suspect it would be fine.One more comment: you've mentioned before that you like -5/+5. I'm curious what you think of the notion of allowing -5/+5 on heavy weapons/missile weapons to everybody as an option, no feat required, and making the feat be what grants -5/+10. I view -5/+5 as so marginal as to be almost worthless, so I wouldn't bundle it into a feat--but you seem to view it as highly worthwhile, so wouldn't offering it for free to everyone help even out any disparity? Just a thought.YMMV.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6634262, member: 6787650"] I agree, but I think measuring against ASI is a reasonable baseline for measuring damage-oriented feats. After all, you typically have non-offensive needs as well, such as Lucky, Alert or Resilient. Anything worse than an ASI, in my opinion, is unlikely to get chosen over the opportunity cost. Even a offense-oriented dual wielder should find Mounted Combatant or Sentinel more attractive than Savage Attacks or Dual Wielder. I did like the idea from earlier in this thread about making Dual Wielder allow dual attacks on a -5; my only concern in that case, aside from the increased complexity that always results from introducing a house rule, is that it would make Dual Wielder almost as good as GWM and Polearm Master combined, which seems like a rather large swing from PHB rules, especially on a DX-based chassis. If it took your bonus action as well I suspect it would be fine. One more comment: you've mentioned before that you like -5/+5. I'm curious what you think of the notion of allowing -5/+5 on heavy weapons/missile weapons to everybody as an option, no feat required, and making the feat be what grants -5/+10. I view -5/+5 as so marginal as to be almost worthless, so I wouldn't bundle it into a feat--but you seem to view it as highly worthwhile, so wouldn't offering it for free to everyone help even out any disparity? Just a thought. YMMV. [/QUOTE]

Verification