| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I believe this is a good FAQ candidate since the intention is clear to me that this is supposed to work with effects like Heroism, but is a poor choice until it gets a clarification.
: While the barbarian is raging, any
morale bonuses or bonuses for flanking she gains on attacks
rolls are added to her damage rolls instead of her attack
rolls. They are still morale bonuses, and they don’t stack with
other morale bonuses on damage rolls.
Most effects that provide a Morale Bonus affect BOTH Attack and Damage Rolls. Is Lesser Cult Totem Adding to Damage Rolls instead of Attack Rolls, or is it a separate Morale Bonus and thus, would not stack even though it is from the same source?
Edit: Changed Inspire Courage to Heroism, I had a durpy moment when I first made the post.
As written, it removes the bonus to attack roles and applies it to damage rolls. It would be a separate (non-stacking) instance of a morale bonus.
While there are probably morale bonuses to attack only, the bards ability certainly applies to both and thus it wouldn't be helpful to have this totem if you have a bard in the party.
Inspire courage doesn't give a morale bonus to attack rolls, just to saves on charm and fear. It gives a competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls.
Oh, that's a good point
Bless gives a +1 morale bonus to attack but not damage.
I included this in the HA errata thread. We might see a FAQ dump in the next few months.
... but ithe increased STR gives you a bonus to attack and damage, I'm asking would those bonuses be morale as well?
You aren't getting a bonus to attack and damage. You're getting a bonus to strength, which just so happens to affect attack and damage.
You could have a moral bonus to strength, and a morale bonus to melee attacks and they stack because they're not the same thing even though the bonus to strength will affect your attack roll.
No Rysky, the chained barbarian's bonus is to Strength, and therefore increases your Strength bonus to attack and damage. Unchained barbarian's bonuses, however, are morale bonus. It just doesn't say so in the rage class feature itself because of some mistake or another. But if you scroll down to Indomitable Will, it does mention that the Will save bonus from raging is morale, which implies that the other bonuses are also morale.
While in a rage, a barbarian gains a +2 bonus on melee attack rolls, melee damage rolls, thrown weapon damage rolls, and Will saving throws. In addition, she takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class.
At 14th level, the barbarian gains a +4 bonus on Will saves to resist enchantment spells while raging. This bonus stacks with all other modifiers, including the morale bonus on Will saves she gains during her rage.
Emphasis mine. There was a screwup somewhere, it happens, but rage bonuses were clearly intended to be morale bonuses, just like they are for non-unchained.
|
The only morale bonus I can think of that applies to both attack and damage is from good hope. I don't think that is a crippling loss.
Any others come to mind?
Contagious Zeal, Blood Scent, Heroic Invocation, Shared Wrath
Most of which are decent aoe buff spells in a fairly limited category
An interesting list, thanks!
There is no need for a FAQ, the ability is clear, just horrible. Morale bonuses to attack are changed to morale bonuses to damage which would not stack with other morale bonuses to damage even if an effect (i.e. Good Hope) provides both.
Overall, the cult totem line is a steaming pile of garbage that should never be taken.
The lesser totem converts attack to damage 1:1 which is generally a horrible trade off, and can cause overlapping bonuses, which is bad as well. Taking this makes your character worse than not taking it, let alone taking a useful totem line.
The Totem is a weird cross between bodyguard and CaGM, but once/day per target makes it bad, but at least it doesn't actually make your character worse.
The Greater totem is diehard as a rage power, yawn.
That is kinda my point. The feat does not seem like it is intentionally making you worse,which is not what feats are supposed to do, it is actually trying to do something and I think errata is probably the direction needed to be able to use the feat the way it was intended.
I honestly cannot see why the author of the feat would want it to operate as written.
Okies, it was just an assumption I've had this whole time so I figured I'd ask.
Thankies for all the replies.
If it worked that way, enhancement bonuses to Str and Dex wouldn't stack with weapon or armor enhancement bonuses.
It may not be the best, but I, personally, don't think it's that bad.
I'm a low level barabarian with tons of STR and can hit most enemies. What do I need a flanking bonus for? I'll take +2 damage, thanks. +3 if our divine caster casts one of the most common group buffs (Bless).
Is that better than two primary claw attacks? Probably not, but it's probably better than Powerful Blow or Scent and definitely better than Raging Climber.
Greatsword = 2d6
22 Strength = +6 (*1.5, for 9)
Power Attack = +2 (*1.5, for 3)
Total = 2d6+12 (min 14, max 24, average 19)
It would in fact be expected, not maximum.
it may not be optimized to take a penalty to attack at 1:1, but I still don't see it making you worse (my DEX-based Urban Barbarian/Vivisectionist only needed flanking to get SA damage, the rest of my crew provided enough buffs that I hit reliably and this power would have made her damage more).
However, the other thing that I keep in mind is that not all feats/class options are designed for PCs. The do add content that they expect will primarily be used by enemies, they just don't label them as such and put all things in the same section (Class section, Feats section, etc). For example, the Life Channeler Druid archetype does not benefit an adventuring Druid much, but it makes a nice villain to encounter.
The feat says "instead" so the effect of the feat is clear and unambiguous to me.
It makes you worse if you receive a morale buff to damage and hit, like Good Hope. You lose the hit bonus and get nothing in return.