What's Really Wrong with Melee Weapon Mastery

[comrade raoul]

Thanks to some recent threads I've been thinking more about the Melee Weapon Mastery PHB feat. I actually don't have a problem with its power level: I think fighters really should have some distinct direct damage advantages over, say, barbarians. There are, however, two fundamental problems with the feat as written:

1. It's too accessible to other characters. A character with four levels of anything else can take four levels of fighter to get +3 to attack and +4 to damage with a favored weapon and +2 to damage for a bunch of others. This is a ridiculously good deal.
2. It's too good compared to other feats. Improved Critical is a fine feat for its level--or would be, given sensible stacking rules--and Melee Weapon Mastery is way, way better. This means that the presence of the feat problematically reduces meaningful choices, punishes inexperienced players (who might choose "incorrectly"), and limits the freedom players have to develop their archetypes the way they want to. A choice in which one option is drastically better than all of the others isn't really a choice.

Accordingly, I think sensible DMs ought to prohibit the feat. If they think fighters need a power boost, they ought to provide the power boost in other ways, perhaps by providing constant attack and damage bonuses with increasing fighter levels.

 

[griff_goodbeard]

Just add the Prerequ's: Gr Weapon Focus, Gr Weapon Spec. and you should be right as rain.

 

[Crothian]

There are plenty of characters that 4 levels of fighter is not a good deal for. 4 levels of anything is a pretty big cost.

 

[Darklone]

There are plenty of characters that 4 levels of fighter is not a good deal for. 4 levels of anything is a pretty big cost.

Agreed. Not one of the last 20 chars I made for myself would have taken 4 fighter levels instead of something else.

And the ftr4/bardX archer build had 4 fighter levels before I knew that feat. And he didn't need it to rock

 

[Angerland]

I have to throw my voice in with the others who don't believe that anything is wrong with this feat. As stated, 4 levels of a class, especially fighter are quite a bit more than a "dip".

To respond to your statement that this feat limits a players meaningful choices for other feats, punishes new players and limits the character concept someone has for their characters is quite bold, as well as a bit of overstatement. While the feat is quite good I really don't think it is a MUST have feat if it(and it's ranged equivalent) do not fit your character concept.

In our last campaign, post PHBII, our ranger never even considered it and he dominated the combat portion of our games with his bow of exit wounds.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

I think the OP is overstating things. Three feats for +3 to hit and +4 to damage is not much at all. And if you tkae those four levels of fighter, there go those three bonus feats you just got. So you take a good BAB, nice HD, and no special abilities whatsoever to get that +3/+4

Seriously sub-optimal in my opinion.

 

[Obergnom]

I, too, don't think anything is wrong with that feat, but I do not like the way it "scales" the fighter. (Serious bump at level 8)

In my campaign we do not use it, but double the bonus of Improved Weapon Focus and Improved Weapon Spec. (Thus, the result is the same)

Melee Weapon Masters does what the Table Text says. It gives you your specialisation bonus to all weapons of a damage type.

 

[eamon]

Since fighters have an overload of feats, The reduction in choice isn't a huge issue - it's not a good thing, but it's not a problem either. As for the fact that it is so easy for for instance a barbarian to take a four level dip - well, that's true, but is does have a cost in terms of hitpoints, skill points, and barbarian class feature progression.

So all in all - yes, this feat isn't the best designed of feats, but it's not problematic. I wouldn't bother deviating from the rules as written therefore.

@obergnom: those modifications sound fine, but does anyone ever take melee weapon mastery like that? Since 3.5 fighters are quite attached to their feat chain, and pretty hopeless with other weapons, and on the off-chance they do choose another weapon temporarily, it's often ranged or of another damage type for tactical reasons (and melee weapon mastery is useless there), so, if melee weapon mastery only spreads out WF and Wp.Spec, does anyone pick it? If they do, is it a normally suboptimal choice they made for role-playing or campaign style reasons?

 

[Obergnom]

@obergnom: those modifications sound fine, but does anyone ever take melee weapon mastery like that? Since 3.5 fighters are quite attached to their feat chain, and pretty hopeless with other weapons, and on the off-chance they do choose another weapon temporarily, it's often ranged or of another damage type for tactical reasons (and melee weapon mastery is useless there), so, if melee weapon mastery only spreads out WF and Wp.Spec, does anyone pick it? If they do, is it a normally suboptimal choice they made for role-playing or campaign style reasons?

Well, first of all I made the choice to spare the avarage fighter a feat, but I make it spread the whole Weapon Spec Chain (The Improved Feats, too), so it is quite interessting for 2-Weapon Fighters who do not want to use the same weapon in both hands.
And I think that it is fine, this way. I removed Weapon Mastery as a prereq for Weapon Supremacy and the 12th Level Weapon Feats (Slashing FUry etc.), too.
So mostly, we ignore the feat.

 

[sdt]

The way the feat is written it does not stack with Weapon Specialization and Weapon Focus. If you allow the bonuses to stack then it is too good.