Hey all!
I was recently wondering about how to improve weapon focus. In and of itself, it's kind of weak - just a flat +1 to hit. It doesn't really do much.
Back in AD&D it was weapon specialization if you added the second proficiency and got +1/+2 (hit/dmg), so it was certainly more of an impact.
I'm not talking about changing it to grant "to hit" damage (although that could work just as easily), but I'm wondering about making it a more functional feat overall - like so: rather than grant a flat +1 "to hit" have it grant a +1 to BAB with whatever the weapon in question is. Same thing with Greater WF as well.
So, thoughts? How much would/could this muck with other game dynamics?
IMO, it'll grant the same bonus with a *small* bump in allowing iterative attacks to progress a *tiny* bit faster, but only for people that put in the effort to learn the weapon well (ie: use a feat for it).
rather than grant a flat +1 "to hit" have it grant a +1 to BAB with whatever the weapon in question is. Same thing with Greater WF as well.
Yes, this will already go a long way, especially for rogues and multiclassed characters.
Alternatively, that '+1 to hit' could scale with levels, so that it becomes +2 at one point (level 5th?), and then +3 and eventually +4. Have GWF double whatever WF grants...
Hmm… that's a nice idea actually. I don't see any problems with it as long as you don't mind PCs qualifying for certain feats 1 or 2 levels sooner (that would apply only for that specific weapon until their normal BAB catches up). This would be my only concern. You could write it in such a way to address this issue.
I myself have expanded it for fighters: when they choose it, they can choose one of their weapon groups instead of a specific weapon.
I did think about scaling in general, and just deleting the Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization feats outright. I'd just have it grant a bonus scaling with overall character levels or something.
Wpn Focus becomes the one feat for "hitting better" and would get a +1 base and an additional +1 for every 4 levels (thus, at the earliest availability of Greater Weapon Focus, it equals what would have been gained w/out the feat-sink tree/feat tax on fighters). I'd probably do something similar for Greater Weapon Specialization as well - let it be subsumed into Weapon Specialization outright - grant a +2 to damage by 4th level (earliest available) and gain an additional +2 for every 8 levels gained thereafter (ie: equate to Greater's bonus by level 12, and cap out at +6 by level 20).
I'm just not that big a fan of feats with an absolute minimum gain and ever increasing lack of utility.
I'm not sure how this would play havock with anything if applied to BAB instead of granting a blanket bonus. I guess iterative attacks would occur more frequently for any class that picks up focus, and it'll make fighty-types fight even better - but that's a good thing. I'm not sure on the others, though ... by level 20, it adds a full +5 bab overall in progression - it could end up giving a rogue a "full bab" by that time, and yet he'd still pale in comparison to the existing full bab class anyway ... :shrugs:
I'm not much of a #'s guy, honestly. I'm more into the concepts and such.
Weapon Groups vs. specific weapons is a fantastic idea as well. I LOVE UA's "Weapon Group" proficiencies so much more. Ideally, I'd like for every game I play to use it, but not everyone has access, so it gets sidelined for simplicity.
I did think about scaling in general, and just deleting the Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization feats outright. I'd just have it grant a bonus scaling with overall character levels or something.
I'd be cautious about taking away the mainstay Fighter Exclusive feats. Weapon Specialization in particular has always been one of those special treats that only the fighter gets to have.
Now, if you don't think that it should be exclusive to the fighter, go right ahead. I just wanted to point out that there's more to this than spending feats for what appear to be weak benefits.
So then are you also scaling Dodge (in some ways, the "counter" feat to Weapon Focus)?
You are missing one point about Weapon Focus, it also opens up other feats. If weapon Focus is so weak it counts as ¨half-feat¨ at mid levels and higher, it is certainly powerful at levels 1 to 5, the feats it open may be counted as ¨feats and a half¨ so it compensates.
It doesn´t scale with levels per see, but it scaleable through feat chains.
Its not exactly the best desing, since it hampers you until you reach gain the other feat, but thats hardwired into the game.
Humbly,
Yawar
Its not exactly the best desing, since it hampers you until you reach gain the other feat, but thats hardwired into the game.
Humbly,
Yawar
Well, this is exactly what I'm getting at - adjusting the "hard wiring" of the game a bit.
Get rid of feat-taxes (to a certain degree "chains" but not fully), and instead provide more consistent and useful boons from feats overall.
With scaling Dodge - sure. Ideally, if I were to scale, I'd scale darn near everything feat-wise except things that simply open up options (ie: combat expertise gives an option to exchange bab and ac - w/out it this is impossible, etc. It's ALWAYS useful because it adds an option for use to tactics, etc.).
Zappo - I'd NEVER take specialization away from fighters. I WILL however knock off 2 feat-taxes to specialization. ;-) Making it scalable w/a single feat isn't the same as opening it up for everyone.
On the scaling by bab - intersting ... but this already would do that by level - lower BAB classes have lower BAB bases to add to. I don't see a need to over-complicate it (ie: I can't follow that formula quickly at all, so it's probably too much for what I'm gunning for). Part of the thought here is that a simple scale is easy to implement.
The idea of scaling dodge to ref value ... very interesting. I'll definitely look into this more as it's a solid enough idea. A simple increase, though, is again easier to follow and implement. I really like the concept regardless.
|
I like the idea of pulling greater weapon focus/specialization.
Change the normal Weapon Focus/Specialization so that their bonus doubles at level 10 (like skill focus).
To keep the increased benefit for Fighters, change the Fighter "weapon school" class feature so that they can apply all weapon feats to a weapon group instead of a single specific weapon type. This might be too powerful, given the importance of criticals at higher levels, but Fighters tend to focus on a single weapon anyway.
Wpn Focus, etc applied to "groups" is a neat idea. I'm not sure we need it in addition to wpn training, but it's neat anyway.
On my end, I was thinking that with 2 feats taken out of the "specialization" tree, it would mean 1 more weapon could be "specialized" if you wanted - I mean, AD&D had multiple "specializations" and that extra specialization didn't really come into play until later rules (ie: all you really could do was base-line specialize). That was my 2e experience anyway - fighters w/multiple weapons they were "good" with.
Food for thought Speaker:
I contemplated doing the following before Pathfinder came out, but put it on the back burner to use the new weapon training rules. I'm thinking I may use it as an alternate fighter alongside the Pathfinder version, letting the player choose either.
1) Take out Weapon Spec, Gtr Wpn Focus, Gtr Wpn Spec. (and not use the similar PH II feats: Melee Wpn Mstry, Rngd Wpn Mstry)
2) Whenever a fighter takes Weapon Focus, his bonuses to hit and damage increase as if he had those feats at the appropriate levels.
3) Also at 16th level, the fighter gets an additional +1 to hit; at 20th level, the fighter gets an additional +2 to damage (for a total of +3 to hit, +6 damage from Weapon Focus over 20 levels)
4) Weapon Focus applies to Weapon Groups from UA
4) It would give the fighter a class ability in which the player controls how much he wants to invest in it. Thereby giving the option of freeing up feats. In other words, he can spend one feat to be really good with one group of weapons, or he can spend more feats to be good with a variety of weapon groups. (I envisioned an NPC weapon master who took nothing but weapon focus to specialize in as many groups as possible for fun. He'd be a mentor to a fighter PC for instance :)
Weapon Focus scales just fine as it is. As BAB goes up, it applies to more attacks. Haste/speed/ki-points add more attacks for it to apply to. The damage dealt per attack goes up, increasing the effect of the feat.
Examples:
w/out WF: +5 to hit, 50% hit chance + 5% crits = 3.575 per round
w/WF: +6 to hit, 55% hit chance + 5.5% crits = 3.9325 per round, 10% increase.
For a Greatsword, or two-handed, the % is the same, the amount would be more.
10th level fighter, Str 18, Weapon Training 2, facing an AC 25 creature, with a Flametongue (+1, flaming burst longsword), and improved critical.
w/out WF: +17/+12 to hit, 65%/40% chance to hit, 13%/8% crits = 19.32 per round
w/WF: +18/+13 to hit, 70%/45% chance to hit, 14%/9% crits = 21.16, 9.5% increase
10th level fighter, Str 18, Weapon Training 2, facing an AC 25 creature, hasted with two +1 flaming shortswords, and improved critical & double slice.
w/out WF: +16/+16/+11/+16/+11 to hit, 60%/60%/35%/60%/35% chance to hit, 12%/12%/7%/12%/7% crits = 40.25 per round
w/WF: +17/+17/+12/+17/+12 to hit, 65%/65%/40%/65%/40% chance to hit, 13%/13%/8%/13%/8% crits = 44.275 per round, 10% increase
Same 10th level fighter vs. AC 30:
w/out WF: 21.375 per round
w/WF: 25.65 per round, 20% increase
Same but 11th level with greater TWF vs. AC 25:
w/out WF: 49.105 per round
w/WF: 58.14 per round, 18.4% increase
It essentially adds between 5.5% and 100% more damage depending on how hard a time you're having hitting to begin with. When you can hit on between a 6 and a 15, the range is 6.66% to 16.66%. But that goes higher with iterative attacks.
The more reliably you can hit, the less you need weapon focus. But also the more reliably you can hit with weapon focus, the more you can power attack or deadly aim, increasing damage even further.
It's not the strongest feat in the book, but as a mostly 1st level feat, it shouldn't be. It easily holds its own against the majority.
I like Majubas math a lot here. Reminds me of another game where the pros simply shake their numbers and everyone copies their tactics.
So, Weapon Focus IS pretty strong all by itself. It opens up other feats, it lets you dish out more damage on average and so on.
Why not just add something in that's not too unbalanced to make it more appealing, if you absolutely have to?
Say, every 4th level, you can add one of the following to your stats when wielding the weapon focused weapon:
- +1 CMB
- +1 CMD
- +2 dodge bonus to AC against AoOs
- +2 Initiative
Stuff like that and just my 2 cents.
I will be coming out with a PDF which grants different special abilities to each weapon based upon the level of proficiency the user has.
For example a dagger wielder might be able to double toss two daggers with one action since he's got Greater Weapon Focus (dagger)
I have recently had the time to work on it, and, as I have some forced vacation to take this week, I might be able to get it into Beta.
How fast do you level to not have time in between to adjust your regular stats? ^^
And it's not harder to figure out than your attack bonus with any weapon BUT the one that you chose Weapon Focus in.
Last but not least, the above were only suggestions. Not Suggestions, so you don't have to save against anything. ;-)
Yeah - I've seen the #'s before on just wpn focus base, and I can't disagree more strongly with the conclusion that is already "scales" as is.
1) Tree's are not a scale - they are resource consumers, demanding a great expenditure of limited resources (Feats) in order to achieve some desired effects in game - some with relatively little impact compared to others, yet all are handicapped by "entry requirements".
2) +1 to hit a level 1 is HUGE! It's a +100% to your chance to strike for every class, period. It fully doubles full BAB's, and even the 3/4, and 1/2 guys as well. It's HUGE down there. Up higher, when the character has a base +20, +21 is only like a 5% bonus ... yeah. Pretty terrible "scale" effect there.
What I've suggested would change it from +1 to a gradually increasing +5. The % effect depends on when it's selected, BUT fighter's would get the most out of it still (+25% in the highest levels vs. 5% flat). Point being, it's an investment beyond "feat tax" with my changes.
The existing rule is not even remotely "scaling" at all. Not even a little.
@Rezdave: Got it! Your format/layout initially threw me and made my eyes cross. ;-) Matter of fact, I do like basing it on BAB value over level now - much better idea. Consider it adopted! I'm keeping my every 4 points of BAB though (vs. levels) to replicate the original feat dynamics and then just scale it up.
1) Tree's are not a scale - they are resource consumers, demanding a great expenditure of limited resources (Feats) in order to achieve some desired effects in game - some with relatively little impact compared to others, yet all are handicapped by "entry requirements".
Feat trees are indeed one way in which feats scale with level. They allow the designers to include feats that would otherwise be too good, by adding prerequisites. By taking the initial feat, you improve the options available to your character as they continue to level. Each time you choose another feat that you would have been unable to take otherwise, you are reaping an additional benefit from the initial feat.
2) +1 to hit a level 1 is HUGE! It's a +100% to your chance to strike for every class, period. It fully doubles full BAB's, and even the 3/4, and 1/2 guys as well. It's HUGE down there. Up higher, when the character has a base +20, +21 is only like a 5% bonus ... yeah. Pretty terrible "scale" effect there.
I'm afraid you've badly misunderstood the math on this. What matters isn't the scale of the bonus from weapon focus compared to the scale of your base attack bonus and bonuses to hit, what matters is the scale of the bonus from weapon focus compared to your odds of hitting the AC of the foes you're facing.
Your BAB might improve by 19 from level 1 to level 20, but the AC of the foes you're trying to hit improves by an average of 25.
What I've suggested would change it from +1 to a gradually increasing +5. The % effect depends on when it's selected, BUT fighter's would get the most out of it still (+25% in the highest levels vs. 5% flat). Point being, it's an investment beyond "feat tax" with my changes.
The feat as it stands scales very well with level. It may always be a fairly consistent 7-12% bump in total damage, but the damage output that it is a percentage of increases every level.
1) Tree's are not a scale - they are resource consumers, demanding a great expenditure of limited resources (Feats) in order to achieve some desired effects in game - some with relatively little impact compared to others, yet all are handicapped by "entry requirements".Feat trees are indeed one way in which feats scale with level. They allow the designers to include feats that would otherwise be too good, by adding prerequisites. By taking the initial feat, you improve the options available to your character as they continue to level. Each time you choose another feat that you would have been unable to take otherwise, you are reaping an additional benefit from the initial feat.
2) +1 to hit a level 1 is HUGE! It's a +100% to your chance to strike for every class, period. It fully doubles full BAB's, and even the 3/4, and 1/2 guys as well. It's HUGE down there. Up higher, when the character has a base +20, +21 is only like a 5% bonus ... yeah. Pretty terrible "scale" effect there.I'm afraid you've badly misunderstood the math on this. What matters isn't the scale of the bonus from weapon focus compared to the scale of your base attack bonus and bonuses to hit, what matters is the scale of the bonus from weapon focus compared to your odds of hitting the AC of the foes you're facing.
Your BAB might improve by 19 from level 1 to level 20, but the AC of the foes you're trying to hit improves by an average of 25.
What I've suggested would change it from +1 to a gradually increasing +5. The % effect depends on when it's selected, BUT fighter's would get the most out of it still (+25% in the highest levels vs. 5% flat). Point being, it's an investment beyond "feat tax" with my changes.The feat as it stands scales very well with level. It may always be a fairly consistent 7-12% bump in total damage, but the damage output that it is a percentage of increases every...
7-12% increase in dmg output...
What is the average HP increase of monsters?
7-12% increase in dmg output...
What is the average HP increase of monsters?
Doesn't matter, as long as the average damage output of the PC scales at least as well as the increase in their opponents HP. And for most characters, damage output scales much more quickly than the average HP of monsters of their CR.
Even if the average HP of the foes you faced scaled enormously, it wouldn't actually matter to this argument, because that 7-12% bump is always a percentage increase in the base damage you would be dealing at each level, so it scales at the same rate as your damage scales.
For example, at 1st level, when you might only be averaging 7 points of damage in a round, it might get you an extra 1/2 an hp of average damage each round.
By 10th level, when you're averaging 60 or 70 points of damage on a full attack, that same +1 to hit is adding an average 7 or 8 points of damage every round.
If your base damage doubles, the total benefit of weapon focus doubles. If it triples, the benefit of weapon focus triples. The feat scales perfectly fine as is because the damage PCs can do scales perfectly fine as is.
...So, just to be clear:
You've looked at the math, which plainly shows Weapon Focus as one of the most useful damage-dealing feats, at any level, in PF Core, and that it gets better as you go up in level and gain iterative attacks?
And you still feel that it doesn't "scale"?
There's probably a problem a reason that most people who have done the basic math are staying away from this thread like the plague. =)
-Cross
Not quite. Did the math, found Wpn Focus to give a +1, period to be insignificant in design vs. other feats that provide definite features, scalable features, or simply add options. Wpn Focus does none of that, so it needs an adjustment.
I'm not a hard #'s guy - admitted before, but what #'s I've run show this to be a "tax" in the extreme. It's constantly a flat +1 and always burns up a feat.
The idea itself of feat-taxing is partially what I'm challenging/changing here. I don't like it - at all.
Asserting that "everything's fine, move along" is not engaging this design/revision at all.
Hit me with something specific if you're here to complain and point things out.
As far as I'm concerned, making feats a "tax" is crap design (never liked it in 3.x). Making a limited resource (feats) provide a catastrophically minimal impact in the game is likewise, crap design. I'm not a fan of that, never have been. I'm finally getting around to challenge it mechanically, though, and proposing my own alternative.
+1 to hit - is really not a big deal at all, especially when it's always +1 from level 1 up to level 20 - completely insignificant, IMO. Feats should be useful for the life of the character and never be looked at like a "tax" only.
I'm fine w/feat trees, IF each feat in the tree behaves in a manner to make each feat beneficial, and consistently a worthy investment of resources. The skill-adder feats and PF's adjustment to those is one of the best moves they made in feat revision, IMO.
We (my group) dont use it for pathfinder, but what we used to use in 3.5 might interest you. Any combat feat that gives a numeric bonus (weapon spec, weapon focus, sheild focus, dodge) gives an additional +1 for every 3 other combat feats you have. So if someone has weapon focus, weapon spec, power attack and cleave, weapon focus gives +2 and weapon spec gives a +3. We also eliminated greater versions of such feats.
Not sure if this is exactly what you want, but it is along those lines, and it worked well for us in 3.5.
Asserting that "everything's fine, move along" is not engaging this design/revision at all.
Yes, yes it is. You've presented an idea for a houserule, and given a list of reasons why you feel it would improve your game. Critical feedback pointing out flaws in your reasoning or math are perfectly valid responses.
Hit me with something specific if you're here to complain and point things out.
Ok, making weapon focus scale up to +5 will cause it to scale too well. The additional bonus to hit, on top of the scaling it's already receiving from extra attacks, higher base damage, haste effects, and the like will move it from being an underrated but reasonable feat that is perfectly in line with feats like Toughness and Dodge, to being a must-take feat for everyone who makes any sort of attack roll (which is pretty much everyone).
By almost guaranteeing that every primary melee character will hit on anything but a 1 by the time they're max level, it will also alter the balance of feats like power attack and combat expertise, essentially canceling out their costs and just leaving the (now overpowered) benefit.
+1 to hit - is really not a big deal at all, especially when it's always +1 from level 1 up to level 20 - completely insignificant, IMO. Feats should be useful for the life of the character and never be looked at like a "tax" only.
So long as the AC of foes you face and your attack bonuses scale at roughly the same rate, weapon focus remains relevant all the way to twenty, as I detailed earlier.
Two things to keep in mind if you make this change:
1) Characters will be able to qualify for prestige classes more quickly if the pclass has a BAB requirement.
2) Characters will gain iterative attacks earlier.
3) The change means makes a SIGNIFICANT difference to someone with a +5, +10, or +15 BAB because in addition to the +1 to hit, they also get an extra attack.
#3 is the weirdest and most problematic. We try not to put things in the game that have one effect on one character and a noticeably different effect on an almost-identical character.
Since he hit it pretty clearly, +1 to Rez Dave's details. He hits my points and I need not re-hash.
@BG: monster hd doesn't matter, eh? Ooo ... Kay. 8-0
Seriously, got NOTHING to respond to if that's where you are.
Toughness - already been changed to a feat that scales (one of the better design choices - again! Well done, Piazo!). It's only not as "potent" because HP are ablative anyway. I, seriously, have NO suggestions for making this scale as that's ALREADY it's mechanic.
Dodge - I'm taking RD's idea of scaling by base Ref Save value, so it, too, will scale.
Only missing on the 1 - every extra attack is BY DEFAULT -5 from what comes before ... what's your point? The "extra attacks" in 3.x got hit w/the nerf bat big-time from 2e anyway. What's the point of having extra "missed ya!" attacks? This would attempt to address it a bit (just messing w/an additional +5 to all strikes making them more relevant vs. AC's of appropriately high CR's).
In general - your post was specific, but I wasn't replying to your post. ;-p {read the addressee - that was completely non-specific}
@Sean: thanks for that info. In my final implementation, BAB req's go off of the full "base value" not 1-weapon specific skills, so it'll have no real impact there. 2) giving some additional utility was the point (thus bab vs. "to hit") 3) characters should/will be different based upon feat selections anyway - I don't really see this as a balance issue ... thanks for the heads up, though.
@shield: yes - any of the "greaters" I'd like to condense somehow, including spell focus. And skill focus already scales ...
@BG: monster hd doesn't matter, eh? Ooo ... Kay. 8-0
Seriously, got NOTHING to respond to if that's where you are.
Wow, really? Are you even reading my posts? Someone asked if the percentage bonus from weapon focus was enough to keep up with monster HD scaling, and I was simply showing why it didn't really matter for balancing weapon focus. (Whether what you're fighting has 100 hp or 10,00 hp, all that matters is that you're doing significantly more damage than you would be without weapon focus. As long as the amount of bonus damage you're dealing is in line with the benefits other feats can provide, it's balanced.)
Toughness - already been changed to a feat that scales (one of the better design choices - again! Well done, Piazo!). It's only not as "potent" because HP are ablative anyway. I, seriously, have NO suggestions for making this scale as that's ALREADY it's mechanic.
Dodge - I'm taking RD's idea of scaling by base Ref Save value, so it, too, will scale.
Weapon Focus- Roughly equivalent to two extra Str (or Dex for ranged weapons) when calculating attack bonus.
Toughness- Roughly equivalent to two extra Con when calculating HP.Dodge- Roughly equivalent to two extra Dex when calculating AC.
Spell Focus- Roughly equivalent to two extra Int/Wis/Cha when calculating spell DC.
There are solid reasons why these feats are all roughly +2 to one stat (in a specific circumstance that comes up fairly often). They represent really the baseline for a lot of the other feats, providing a useful but not overpowering advantage that applies almost all the time for characters that tend to take the feat.
As feats become more specific, and limited in the circumstances they apply to, they tend to become more powerful. (Hence the reason feats like Iron will and Self Sufficient are the rough equivalent of +4 to a stat for the purpose of calculating one save or a pair of skills and feats like Skill Focus are the equivalent of +6 to a stat for the purpose of calculating that one skill bonus).
In other posts I (and others) went through the math on why this is a bad idea and why Weapon Focus is not only balanced, it's one of the best feats you can take for dealing damage. Now I've gone over the basic design philosophy that feats seem to follow. If none of that is enough to persuade you, have at it, it's your game after all and there's nothing necessarily wrong with running it any way you want, I'd just suggest preparing for some really, really seriously broken PCs (and potentially some very broken encounters if you extend these changes to creatures as well.)
IMO, having Weapon Focus scale would be fine if you take out some of the feats it leads to, namely Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization and limit it to the Fighter class. The end result is that it makes feats that would have been spent in this particular feat tree available for something else. It's a slight bump in power to the fighter class. That's how I saw it in 3.5 at least when the fighter was starving for some sort of class feature. I'm not sure it's necessary in Pathfinder though, because now the fighter has Weapon Training. Having all those bonuses stack at the cost of one feat (as opposed to 4) is a little too good for me, but it'd make a nice house rule for some groups I suspect.
Weapon Focus- Roughly equivalent to two extra Str (or Dex for ranged weapons) when calculating attack bonus.
Toughness- Roughly equivalent to two extra Con when calculating HP.
Dodge- Roughly equivalent to two extra Dex when calculating AC.
Spell Focus- Roughly equivalent to two extra Int/Wis/Cha when calculating spell DC.
There are solid reasons why these feats are all roughly +2 to one stat (in a specific circumstance that comes up fairly often).
No. Not quite. I'd take feat that gave +2 to a stat over any of these feats any day. At best, they perform equal to a portion of what a +2 bonus to a stat would do, and then, in some instsances, in a limited fashion. Not saying that's bad, just pointing out that they aren't equivalent.
No. Not quite. I'd take feat that gave +2 to a stat over any of these feats any day. At best, they perform equal to a portion of what a +2 bonus to a stat would do, and then, in some instsances, in a limited fashion. Not saying that's bad, just pointing out that they aren't equivalent.
Right.. which is exactly what I said. That these baseline feats were "roughly equivalent to +2 to <attribute> when calculating <derived attribute X>". Heck, you even quoted the part where I said "roughly +2 to one stat (in a specific circumstance that comes up fairly often)"
No. Not quite. I'd take feat that gave +2 to a stat over any of these feats any day. At best, they perform equal to a portion of what a +2 bonus to a stat would do, and then, in some instsances, in a limited fashion. Not saying that's bad, just pointing out that they aren't equivalent.Right.. which is exactly what I said. That these baseline feats were "roughly equivalent to +2 to <attribute> when calculating <derived attribute X>". Heck, you even quoted the part where I said "roughly +2 to one stat (in a specific circumstance that comes up fairly often)"
Sorry BG, it looked like you were putting them on even footing at 1st glance. I see your point more clearly now.
Sorry BG, it looked like you were putting them on even footing at 1st glance. I see your point more clearly now.
No worries, looking back at the old post it was pretty easy to miss those bits.
Said Math basically saying that Weapon Focus is equal to 1/2 of a 2 pt stat increase, which means basically equal to a 1 pt stat increase...which is an EPIC FEAT.
DO the math.
At low levels, you can swap WF for PA. That's either a +1 or +2 dmg bonus. That can easily be a 10-20% dmg increase.
People lose sight of that as their base dmg becomes higher...whats another +1 or +2 when you're doing 15-20? 5-10%?
They then forget about iteratives.
WF is +5% to hit. That +5% is reflected across every potential attack. 90% of 20 dmg is 18/rd. 95% is only 19/rd...but 90/65/40/15 is 210%, and 95/70/45/20 is 230%...adding +20% of base dmg, or +4, not just +1. As your base dmg goes up, WF just gets more and more important.
The fact is, there are more and larger ways to increase TH then this measley +1. But if you look at 4E, where you can't polymorph into something with a 39 Str, or toss Bite of The Werebear on someone, WF is a precious and mandatory feat. Magic does not replace skill. BEcause 3.5 is far more liberal about giving out TH bonuses, WF is lost in the shuffle.
WF is fine for what it does. What you might want to do is say that if it is taken as a Fighter Bonus feat, you automatically get WS for +2 dmg at Fighter/4. Then allow GWF as a feat for anyone, but if you take it as a FIghter bonus feat, it grants you GWSpec.
Or alternatively just let it scale at levels 4,8 and 12 to reduce the feat cost further.
===Aelryinth
If none of that is enough to persuade you, have at it, it's your game after all and there's nothing necessarily wrong with running it any way you want, I'd just suggest preparing for some really, really seriously broken PCs (and potentially some very broken encounters if you extend these changes to creatures as well.)
:shrugs:
Honestly, I found nothing new in there to me. I still disagree, even if I understand. I'm not a fan of the original design precepts.
That stated, you're still focusing upon the wrong angle as to what I would like to see - ie: specifics about what changes. You keep trying to sell me the same old lines "works just fine as is!" I disagree with this and stated it already - why go over it ... again? Basic precepts, for me = FAIL. {why I'm using this stuff in the first place)
Insisting that it's "fine" likewise = fail. I will not relent on this.
Explaining what changes = NOW we're talking. If you're such a # cruncher - crunch the new #'s and tell me how it breaks?
Nay saying and defending the status quo is the OPPOSITE of helpful here.
:shrugs:
Didn't look at the whole thing Speaker but if it scales to +5 or something AC becomes even more ridiculously bad. We should think about fixing AC for ALL Classes, then we could think about something like that.
Said Math basically saying that Weapon Focus is equal to 1/2 of a 2 pt stat increase, which means basically equal to a 1 pt stat increase...which is an EPIC FEAT.
DO the math.
At low levels, you can swap WF for PA. That's either a +1 or +2 dmg bonus. That can easily be a 10-20% dmg increase.
People lose sight of that as their base dmg becomes higher...whats another +1 or +2 when you're doing 15-20? 5-10%?
They then forget about iteratives.
WF is +5% to hit. That +5% is reflected across every potential attack. 90% of 20 dmg is 18/rd. 95% is only 19/rd...but 90/65/40/15 is 210%, and 95/70/45/20 is 230%...adding +20% of base dmg, or +4, not just +1. As your base dmg goes up, WF just gets more and more important.
The fact is, there are more and larger ways to increase TH then this measley +1. But if you look at 4E, where you can't polymorph into something with a 39 Str, or toss Bite of The Werebear on someone, WF is a precious and mandatory feat. Magic does not replace skill. BEcause 3.5 is far more liberal about giving out TH bonuses, WF is lost in the shuffle.
See -- still defending the status quo.
WF is fine for what it does. What you might want to do is say that if it is taken as a Fighter Bonus feat, you automatically get WS for +2 dmg at Fighter/4. Then allow GWF as a feat for anyone, but if you take it as a FIghter bonus feat, it grants you GWSpec.
Or alternatively just let it scale at levels 4,8 and 12 to reduce the feat cost further.
===Aelryinth
Ok - here's something useful/helpful. This is the "good stuff" I'm looking to hear about. Not defending the status quo - thanks!
Didn't look at the whole thing Speaker but if it scales to +5 or something AC becomes even more ridiculously bad. We should think about fixing AC for ALL Classes, then we could think about something like that.
This is not exactly "weapon focus" (ie: thread title), but you're right, and that suggestion about scaling the Dodge feat (by Ref Save value, too!) is a good, solid idea. So ... on helping AC - working on that with scaling Dodge, but you're right - there should be some sort of ... non-equipment way to handle that, or maybe just reduce costs of the existing stuff so that it's not SOOOO ridiculous to get magically pumped up defensive gear going.
Still, this can only go but so far as AC is meant to be "hittable" given that HP are ablative and more a measure of stamina vs. "health points" or the like. If you make AC too high, too many whiffs will happen and combat will take much longer than needed ... one of the oddities of D&D/D20/inflating hp's in general I think.
Didn't look at the whole thing Speaker but if it scales to +5 or something AC becomes even more ridiculously bad. We should think about fixing AC for ALL Classes, then we could think about something like that.This is not exactly "weapon focus" (ie: thread title), but you're right, and that suggestion about scaling the Dodge feat (by Ref Save value, too!) is a good, solid idea. So ... on helping AC - working on that with scaling Dodge, but you're right - there should be some sort of ... non-equipment way to handle that, or maybe just reduce costs of the existing stuff so that it's not SOOOO ridiculous to get magically pumped up defensive gear going.
Still, this can only go but so far as AC is meant to be "hittable" given that HP are ablative and more a measure of stamina vs. "health points" or the like. If you make AC too high, too many whiffs will happen and combat will take much longer than needed ... one of the oddities of D&D/D20/inflating hp's in general I think.
I think at least 1/3 BAB to Ac is the minimun that should happen. Not reflex really cause I think those who fight better dodge better, just a thought. But to be REALLY fair, there should be an AC bonus for everyclass, like in conan and Starwars. I was against this before, but now that we can see the numbers I'm all in favor.
I think at least 1/3 BAB to Ac is the minimun that should happen. Not reflex really cause I think those who fight better dodge better, just a thought. But to be REALLY fair, there should be an AC bonus for everyclass, like in conan and Starwars. I was against this before, but now that we can see the numbers I'm all in favor.
Yes - I'm actually a big fan of the "class defense bonus" thing.
Especially as implemented in the Wheel of Time D20 game. Armsmen (fighters basically) had an ability where they could add their CDB and their armor/shield/etc bonuses together (where normally it's an either/or proposition).
That stated, you're still focusing upon the wrong angle as to what I would like to see - ie: specifics about what changes. You keep trying to sell me the same old lines "works just fine as is!" I disagree with this and stated it already - why go over it ... again? Basic precepts, for me = FAIL. {why I'm using this stuff in the first place)
Insisting that it's "fine" likewise = fail. I will not relent on this.
Explaining what changes = NOW we're talking. If you're such a # cruncher - crunch the new #'s and tell me how it breaks?
And if I crunch the numbers and the math shows that the house rule you're thinking of implementing is vastly unbalanced? What then?
Nay saying and defending the status quo is the OPPOSITE of helpful here.
Pointing out that some of your assumptions about and impressions of the status quo are flawed was my intent. I'm not saying "You must leave everything as is" I'm saying "the changes you're making are based on some bad assumptions, here's some info (and evidence backing it up) so that you can make informed design decisions."
Aggressively running off anyone that disagrees with you after you've asked for feedback just turns the whole process into a hall of mirrors.
My 'defending the status quo' is about the math proving that WF is fine as a feat as it is.
My 'new stuff' is more a nod that feats gained as a Fighter should be special, and more powerful then other feats,and you get supplemental stuff with them. Spending 4 fighter feats or more for the spec tree is eminently stupid. A single 12th level feat should be able to give GWS at +2/+4...a nod that this was so was Weapon Mastery at 8 giving +2/+2 to a whole range of weapons!
Remove Deflection bonuses and Enhancement bonuses to Nat AC from the game,and you can easily institute +1 AC every other level. It's what they did in 4E. Also, Nat AC and Armor are the same thing, they don't stack...so you can't morph into a Firbolg for a free +12 NAt AC, and then throw up Improved Mage armor and shield and put the AC of the party fighter to shame.
They also made Saves in all categories increase by +1 per level, and you get to choose your 'strong save' (+2 bonus). Resistance bonuses to saves were done away with in favor of even progression, and stat bonuses basically defined your best saves. Note that a Weak Save +5 is +11 at 20, which is basically +1 every other level. Strong Save is basically that, +2 for choice, +PF's save feats, for +6 extra.
Of course, to make this work you have to severely limit ability scores that blow requirements out of the water, or open up other save bonuses to compensate. Thus, the 30ish cap on ability scores for all creatures in 4E...and they also reduced base weapon dmg by size, in order to bring the damage back into control. They also made Touch AC based on your Reflex save...and shields stacked with it. Shields, however, gave a fixed bonus and could not be enhanced.
There's some really good balance ideas in 4E that should have seen play in 3.75, but they just didn't bother to correct things that way.
===Aelryinth