This guy has Heroes of the Feywild.

[cignus_pfaccari]

So this two handed weapon feat.

Is it +1 damage per tier, or more ?

And stacks with Goliath Great Weapon prowess ??

+1/tier, same as the other new Expertise feats.

And it's untyped, so it stacks with Weapon Focus, Dwarven Weapon Expertise, and Goliath Greatweapon Prowess.

Interestingly, it also stacks with Spear Expertise, as both bonuses are untyped, and therefore stack.

Brad

 

[Zuche]

Wow, that arid land berserker gets a +3 untyped bonus to AC...
IMHO that is too much... together with unarmored agility and hafted defense and mabe a defensive weapon, you really get some high AC...

Aren't defenders supposed to have a high AC? Besides, of that list of defense boosts, the only one that can't be taken by armored defenders is the Unarmored Agility feat. Combine that feat with a starting Dexterity of 16 and you've got a defender with an AC of 18 at 1st level. Sure, it will get better as that Dexterity climbs, but even another 10 points of Dexterity and Hafted Defense by 30th level put you on par with someone other defender's masterwork plate armor and a heavy shield. Admittedly, you can pull ahead with a chain shirt, but that ties to problems that already exist between most defenders and such striker classes as the avenger.

 

[Vael]

Actually, Berserkers also get +2 AC when their Defender's Aura is up. So, at first level with a 16 DEX, you can get an AC of 20 (10 base + 3 (dex) + 3 (arid bonus) + 2 (aura) + 2 (Unarmored Agility)). That's the equivalent of Plate and heavy shield.

 

[Zuche]

Weird, I thought I'd counted the aura in my calculations. Good enough to start, then, and it's about time some defender could keep up with a defensively optimized avenger.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If you like, you can get hafted defense and 18 dex, and you are at AC 22... which is far beyond plate and heavy shield...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I´d rather have a scaling bonus to AC beginning at +2 or unarmored agility as a bonus feat and a +2 bonus... It is just not balanced right now... especially that avengers and whirling barbarians can get too high for virtually no cost...

 

[Zuche]

If you like, you can get hafted defense and 18 dex, and you are at AC 22... which is far beyond plate and heavy shield...

When, and at what cost? If you want those things at 1st level, you'll have to play a human with no better than a 16 Strength, or you're going to have to add melee training to the mix as well. A mere 10% boost to AC isn't worth what you're giving up for that.

A half-orc could manage this by 2nd level, or could go the temperate route, opt for 20 Strength, and take one of the Expertise feats with one to spare, such as proficiency with a bastard sword. Said character would get hit about 15% more often than the character you find too powerful, but would in turn hit opponents 15% more often for an extra 3 points of damage each time (assuming you were using a pike or halberd). Which do you think enemies are more likely to ignore: the defender they can't hit or the one more likely to hit them--and hit them harder?

I'll admit that shields and heavy armor could do with more love in the rules (and perhaps feats), but you're overstating the power-to-cost benefit of that AC.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No, i don´t think i am overstating... i just believe, that this bonus should be a shield bonus, as all other classes who are not alowed to wield a shield for the bonus get from essentials forward... it is calculated in, that the shield is forbidden, there should be no way around it...
(and to be honest, a common design ..principle should be applied here... and actually the avenger´s and the monk´s bonus should be a shield bonus as well)

Not that it may be totally desirable to build te character that way. But missing 10% less with a base attack that still deals 1d10+1d8+3 damage does not mean, that you are no thread...
actually you can easily go into flanking position and gain yourself and your striker CA and make it a lose lose situation...
Contrary to common believe, a defender with high AC is a pita for the DM if he at least threatens with enough damage...

 

[Zuche]

No, i don´t think i am overstating... i just believe, that this bonus should be a shield bonus, as all other classes who are not alowed to wield a shield for the bonus get from essentials forward... it is calculated in, that the shield is forbidden, there should be no way around it...

It makes sense to give those unable to use a shield options to gain a shield bonus. It makes sense to give those unable to wear armor options to gain an armor bonus.

It also makes sense to give those who use shields or armor options to improve those bonuses.

It doesn't make sense to give a character a shield bonus that applies only if the character doesn't wear armor, especially if the character happens to be proficient with shields.

(and to be honest, a common design ..principle should be applied here... and actually the avenger´s and the monk´s bonus should be a shield bonus as well)

Not that it may be totally desirable to build te character that way. But missing 10% less with a base attack that still deals 1d10+1d8+3 damage does not mean, that you are no thread...

The same holds true for a berserker with a 10 Strength score that could still hit for 1d10+1d8 damage. It's still not a good option.

actually you can easily go into flanking position and gain yourself and your striker CA and make it a lose lose situation...

It's still better for the more accurate defender. Examples that improve the situation equally don't help your case. Accuracy provides the greater threat.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think we just disagree...


if you are attacked all the time because your armor is too low, your defender mechanism is worth nothing, and YOU are the healing sink...

and defender that dies because he is too sticky and does not have enough armor is no threat because he is dead soon enough... better have another striker then... because you at least did some damage before you died...