Maybe Weapon Focus is a boring feat choice for a build, but I think it is one of the most important for a "martial" class, especially for one with a 3/4 BAB progression.
Normally you stay with one main weapon your entire career and always benefit from it.
So I wonder, why does it seem that so many builds I see on these boards don't use it? Is it because it's so obvious, because it is boring, or is it because you think you are hitting your enemies often enough without it?
Thanks for your answers in advance.
Part of it is boredom, part of it is that there's better things to be doing with your time.
Basically, from an optimization standpoint (and let's face it, that's what internet build forums are for), there are only 3 classes that can hold their own in physical combat: Fighter, Paladin, and Ranger. These classes can all hit frequently enough, so they're spending feats trying to get more attacks, or deal more damage or somesuch.
Other classes that you might be associating with melee combat (Barbarians, Monks, Clerics, Druids) aren't worth the time and can't hold up to the damage output of the "big three."
As for Rogues, Assassins and other such builds: for them it's about finding ways to be able to Sneak Attack (usually by striking Touch AC), and once you're in that position, your to-hit is usually good enough.
There's just better things to do with your time. Only reason to get Weapon Focus is for a prereq to Weapon Spec. Again, I'm talking optimization (ie "what internet blowhards talk about all day"), not "the way the game is actually fun to play with your friends."
So I wonder, why does it seem that so many builds I see on these boards don't use it? Is it because it's so obvious, because it is boring, or is it because you think you are hitting your enemies often enough without it?
Because people fail at math? Aren't running the DPR spreadsheets? I dunno.
It could be power creep in the system, but I doubt it. If it's better DPR to take feat X over weapon focus for most physical-damage builds (melee and ranged), then take feat X. But usually Weapon Focus causes you to use feat X more consistently (and thus get a higher DPR for it). Especially when multiple attacks are used, Weapon Focus equally benefits both attacks. . .
Only reason to get Weapon Focus is for a prereq to Weapon Spec. Again, I'm talking optimization, not "the way the game is actually fun to play."
I assume you've run these numbers in a DPR spreadsheet?
For a fighter I can see taking it for the fighter specific feats that have it as a prereq: weapon spec and the ignore DR ones. For a class that dosen't have access to those feats chances are good another feat (extra lay on hands come to mind) may serve to augment a secondary role the character utilizes far more than +1 to hit.
|
Other classes that you might be associating with melee combat (Barbarians, Monks, Clerics, Druids) aren't worth the time and can't hold up to the damage output of the "big three."
I simply don't agree with this post-APG. It should be the big four with Barbarians having access to furious weapons, better rage powers and the massive DPR boost Witch Hunter gives.
|
I simply don't agree with this post-APG. It should be the big four with Barbarians having access to furious weapons, better rage powers and the massive DPR boost Witch Hunter gives.Other classes that you might be associating with melee combat (Barbarians, Monks, Clerics, Druids) aren't worth the time and can't hold up to the damage output of the "big three."
+1
I ran some numbers @20th level with post apg material.
Oddly enough the beast totem barbarian ends up with a better to hit than a spec'd fighter, but the fighter deals a few points more damage per hit.
I just find it odd that the raging barb is more accurate while the dedicated fighter is more painful. It works out in a dpr sense, but the raw numbers look backwards
Besides Wpn Spec for Fighters and those-who-partially-count-as-Fighters,
it´s useful for classes whose class abilities mainly comprise situational or especially, limited per/day, attack bonuses,
letting them be more impressive when they CAN´T use those class abilities for whatever reason.
Inquisitors especially would be in this boat. Monks completely need it. Ranged/Archery focused characters will statistically get more out of it, since they can be expected to get Full Attacks more often, and the bonus will be most felt on lower iteratives.
Why people don´t take it? Well, besides that it´s boring itself,
those other ´interesting´ feats are actually very useful on their own.
If you´re familiar with DPR comparison, a signifigant number that´s sometimes overlooked is the DPR from an extra attack. This can be on the order of +30-40% of full attack damage, because full bab is more likely to hit, and more likely to confirm crits. SO... any feat that either increases your chances of getting more attacks, either on top of a full attack, when you can´t full attack, or as an AoO, is VERY useful to your damage output. Likewise, any feat that let´s you avoid TAKING extra attacks (AoO´s, full attacks), is equally as valuable.
That doesn´t get into feats that help you ignore effects preventing you from acting effectively - save bonus feats, immunities, etc. OR likewise, inflicting similar penalties on enemies. The benefit of Rhino Charge from the Sargava Companion, letting you take a Move Action to position yourself or whatever and then Ready a Partial Charge just can´t be compared to +1 attack from Weapon Focus, because it lets you play a different kind of tactical game. Not to mention feats that allow completely different builds to be extremely competetive, such as Dervish Dance, especially for Maguses.
not to derail but why are furious weapons from the APG considered a buff (ok granted they are...) but Gloves of Duelling for fighters give an identical bonus +2 to fighters without using up a weapon enhancement slot. So in effect Fighters and Barbarians both gain a +2 to hit an ddamage but fighters is at a fixed cost and Barbs scales.
To discuss original post many Barb builds are feat starved...a rage power may be a better choice
not to derail but why are furious weapons from the APG considered a buff (ok granted they are...) but Gloves of Duelling for fighters give an identical bonus +2 to fighters without using up a weapon enhancement slot. So in effect Fighters and Barbarians both gain a +2 to hit an ddamage but fighters is at a fixed cost and Barbs scales.
To discuss original post many Barb builds are feat starved...a rage power may be a better choice
Gloves of Dueling are great, though you only need 4 levels of Fighter to get all of it´s benefit.
Again, the discussion about why Weapon Focus isn´t super popular might lead one to think that attack bonuses are common enough that getting one from one specific source (that has opportunity cost) isn´t the be-all-end-all of an effective character... If you are already getting Weapon Training, is this money best spent here getting even more, or giving you better defenses against Will Save-targetting effects? (or movement restricting effects, etc)Furious is also great because Weapon Enhancement Bonus translates to DR penetration, and with it your Weapon costs half as much as a Weapon with that Enhancement Bonus normally enchanted. I´m not sure if Furious lets you bypass the normal +5 limit or not...? Even if not, you can get an extra +1 weapon property with what you save, or some other un-related item.
...And you´re right, Barbs are Feat-starved (relatively), so they only want to get the most game-changing Feats. In some cases, extra Rage Power qualifies, in some cases a regular Feat does, but Weapon Focus probably doesn´t make the cut... Something like Iron Will may very well, though.
Weapon Focus is always the first feat for my characters. It may not be the best feat but I like to hit. I like to play a character that hits every time. Alot of of times the only reason for roling for my first attack is to see if I roll a one, since I would hit without rolling. Weapon Focus is the feat to take if you like to hit every time, after all every little bit helps.
Thanks for all the replies so far.
I understand that there might be better feats from a mechanical standpoint, but it is still one of the DPR-adding feats; if you e.g. build a fighting character (not a fighter, he needs it for wpn spec. anyway) at around level 10 you have a lot of feats, there should be some place for it.
An Example: In our group a player wanted to play an elf ranger fighting two-handed with shortsword and longsword; I tried to convince her that mechanically this is a bad choice, because she won't hit very often. In play this turned out to be true. She has Weapon Focus for both weapons, without it she would hit even less. Her main problem, alas, is the DR of our opponents, but that's another story.
Power Attack would (in theory) be a good feat for her, but it would even decrease her chance to hit.
My more or less melee focused cleric (someone has to do it) also needs his weapon focus to hit his opponents once in a while.
Other classes that you might be associating with melee combat (Barbarians, Monks, Clerics, Druids) aren't worth the time and can't hold up to the damage output of the "big three."
I am sorry? could you please explain this?
I am sorry? could you please explain this?
Other classes that you might be associating with melee combat (Barbarians, Monks, Clerics, Druids) aren't worth the time and can't hold up to the damage output of the "big three."
He is saying the Fighter, Ranger, and Paladin outdamage everyone. What he forgot though is that since the animal companion is a class feature it's damage counts also. The druid + the companion bring the pain, or they can if they are built to.
Weapon Focus is very good for a fighter due to the tree that it leads you down when a fighter giving you weapon specialisation, greater weapon focus and greater weapon specialisation.
I've found weapon focus is still worth it as even though you could argue it's just a +1, it is very good at first level when you need that little bit more attack to hit your targets.
And Druid + Companion can bring the pain far better on surprise rounds and rounds when they cannot full attack, thanks to pounce. This is also true of the Beast Totem Barbarian, but i'm not sure the mobile fighter (not seen the DPR on it) has particularily good DPR on its version of pounce.
I GMed a barbarian with pounce, combat reflexes, greater overrun, the overbearing onslaught line and CaGM. The DPR was different versus a single target or several ('tough he one-rounded almost anything with pounce + falcata, if charge was available).
APG is out from a while. Seriously.
AND, yeah right about druids.
@OP: sorry for the derail. IME for builds with some hit issue (in my group, a TWF ranger and an inquisitor) weapon focus is a decent choice.
people tend to don't take it because prefer, as said, rely on other bonus
source and take stuff only feat grant (say, a maneuver). The inquisitor of my group as an example after learning how buff himself and use the class properly, almost regretted the choice. Almost because is not that lucky with dice so the feat sometime came useful anyway! And, he has not always time to be full buffed. :D
This does no mean taking the feat is inherently wrong.
|
|
i usually play 3/4 classes with some sort of spells, psionics, martial strikes, whatever, or at least 4 levels of such if multiclassing and i find that 3/4 & 14 str is not dependable. i try to take wf asap along with making my first treasure purchase a mw weapon. i find 3/4 to be pooor as opposed to average with 1/2 being completely dependant on either touch att or dumb luck. 3/4 caster classes requirement of point buy on at least a 14 mental stat also hurts their physical stats, usually str also making them lag behind in the to hit & damage comparisons.hence their need to get those extra +1 here & there. i never find hitting to be board. i also firmly believe all those fancy damage modifications mean nothing when you miss. so work on hitting first and add damage later
Because, and I can only speak for myself, I'd rather be slightly less "optimized" then horribly boring.
Case in point, I don't play fighters, and no amount of damage they deal per round can really change that.
Meh...it off sets some of the -2/-2 from TWF and Rapid Shot...good enough to me...I want to be able to hit things not nearly hit them
Why DON'T people take Weapon Focus more often?
- It's a feat that is great at low levels, but barely noticeable at high.
- Players often like to take feats that tree off into bigger, better feats. The only tree for Weapon Focus that EVERYONE can take is Dazzling Display, which is suitable only for certain builds. Otherwise, you have to be a Fighter to get the full benefits of the Weapon Focus tree (going out to Greater Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization, etc.), and ironically the Fighter has the least need for these feats because they also get weapon training, which is like Weapon Focus but better. Some Fighter builds absolutely can and do use the Weapon Focus tree, but they don't need it to be effective and may often favor other feat trees depending on their build (combat maneuver and power attack based feats, for example). If everyone could just even take Greater Weapon Focus (change the prereq from Fighter level 8 to BAB 8--or even drop it to BAB 6, it's not that powerful), it might look more attractive.
- It's a good feat but if you aren't human nor a fighter or other class that gets bonus combat feats, it is easy to pass up in favor of other feats. It's a great feat, but say, if even a melee cleric is looking at Weapon Focus versus Extra Channeling or Improved Channeling or combat casting, etc. you might understand why the cleric makes it a lower priority.
That said, Turgan is right that it is a good feat, especially for martially oriented d8/3/4 BAB classes. These classes aren't going to win the DPR race necessarily, but there are other reasons you want to be able to hit with a weapon and do at least some damage sometimes. Example:
Rogue: Anything that makes it more likely that you will hit with a sneak attack is worth it. Sure Rogues are going to be targeting flat footed AC and/or getting a flanking bonus to hit, but especially on high AC creatures, every thing helps. Also Rogues are good candidates for a TWF build, and as Spacelard noted, every off-set helps, especially at low levels when your BAB hasn't built up much yet. And indeed, that's probably one of the reasons Rogues can take the feat as a Rogue talent.
Bard: Martial bards need a good to hit bonus also to support in melee--it's good to be able to stand next to the party tank and hold your own in between performing. You may not be dealing the most damage, but the point is you're in there. It can especially be useful for Arcane Duelists--who eventually get the Disruptive and Spellbreaker feats for free. Then, their ability to hit isn't about dealing damage at all--it's about hitting to disrupt spellcasters. Bards in general are good candidates to take the Dazzling Display tree because of their high Cha and Intimidate as a class skill, and Weapon Focus is a prereq.
Cleric: A melee support cleric again isn't going to do major damage (without buffing) but they are one of the best melee support classes there is. They should be able to hold their own in combat in between slapping a cure spell or buff on a neighboring tank.
I wonder if Ultimate Combat will offer more feat options treeing off of weapon focus.
Well, it's probably because most 3/4 classes bring their own buffs.
Bard- Inspire Courage+Good Hope+Haste
Inquisitors- Judgements and Gtr Bane
Cleric- Divine Power Caps at +6 to hit and damage.
Oracles- If they go battle, they get it for free.
Rogues, Monks take it a lot in our games because they don't bring their own buffs.
Wpn Fcs is really only awesome for those classes and fighters.
Rogues, Monks get a lot out of it because TWF/Flurry benefits more (more attacks to benefit from it).
Fighters love it because the Gtr Wpn Fcs/Spec tree (along with Wpn training/gloves) slowly builds to +8 to hit, +10 to damage all the time.
Pally's, Rangers also bring their own buffs,
Divine Favor, Smite, Instant Enemy, Wolf trip pet.
Cavalier's benefit from it because their challenge adds damage but not to hit (Order of the Shield excepted)
Finally, also because Big Game Hunter is a much better feat.
+1 to hit and +2 damage vs anything large or bigger (re: Most of the beastiary) and works with anyweapon. Especially good non matched TWF (Scimitar/Kukri or Sword/Shield builds).
It doesn't scale to level like Power Attack. If it did then it'd be a great feat, but it doesn't so instead you have to pass it by or hold your nose as you take it.
That's a really good idea. *noted*
I took it on my Rogue/Fighter with a weapon I wound up never using at end game. But I had enough feats on that character that a couple wasted feats weren't a major deal, and it did help for a while early on.
I took it on my Bard/Paladin to qualify for Spear Dancer (mostly for the flavor of it), and until I *do* get all those buffs running listed above, I'll need all the help I can get with hitting.
Symar´s post raises a good point.
If you are taking a good number of Fighter levels,
you can take it early on via a Fighter Bonus Feat,
and later on re-train out of Weapon Focus and select another Feat.
I don't think of Weapon Focus as +5% to hit.
I think of it as +5% to damage, because I'm damaging 5% more often.
That being said, +5% damage doesn't matter very much at lower levels, so I often reserve it for a mid-level slot, after I've pretty much become married to a single weapon type.
I don't think of Weapon Focus as +5% to hit.
I think of it as +5% to damage, because I'm damaging 5% more often.
That being said, +5% damage doesn't matter very much at lower levels, so I often reserve it for a mid-level slot, after I've pretty much become married to a single weapon type.
Wouldn't it be +100% to damage, 5% of the time? :?
Symar´s post raises a good point.
If you are taking a good number of Fighter levels,
you can take it early on via a Fighter Bonus Feat,
and later on re-train out of Weapon Focus and select another Feat.
I didn't know about retraining at the time (I think it was the DM's first Pathfinder game, although it had been running for about a year when I joined in, and I don't think he had any Fighters prior to me) or I would have retrained 2 or 3 feats right out.
And would probably have still taken Weapon Focus, but in a weapon I was using all the time (Rapier).
It doesn't scale to level like Power Attack. If it did then it'd be a great feat, but it doesn't so instead you have to pass it by or hold your nose as you take it.
Technically speaking, the moment you get additionnal iterative or off-hand attacks, the power of the feat augments, affecting more attacks.
I don't think of Weapon Focus as +5% to hit.
I think of it as +5% to damage, because I'm damaging 5% more often.
Actually, you can check the DPR Olympics thread, and the numbers are pretty clear that +1 to hit is more comparable to +2% damage for most builds. And that was under a restricted, unrealistic set of assumptions for testings sake, so if you consistently have group buffs (cleric, haste, bard) giving you attack bonuses, an ADDITIONAL +1 will be worth less.
Wouldn't it be +100% to damage, 5% of the time? :?
Which works out to +5% damage, globally. Though see above on actual amount.
Technically speaking, the moment you get additionnal iterative or off-hand attacks, the power of the feat augments, affecting more attacks.
And Power Attack applies to all attacks as well, in addition to scaling it`s amount.
Weapon Focus does help lower iteratives hit more often IN COMBO with Power Attack`s penalty, though.
|
The more attacks that +1 is relevant on the more interesting it becomes.
For an eidolon with 4 claw attacks that have a 70% chance of hitting Weapon Focus is a great feat.
For two handed weapon barbarian who has a 95% chance to hit on his first attack and an 80% chance to hit on his second, it's not very exciting.
With those same creatures hasted the comparison only gets worse.
As with many feats it's not universally appealing but can be good in the right situation.
Its important to realize that in an actual campaign several things either are, or probably are, true that are *not* true in any given "super build" or DPR thread.
Such as:
Not having WBL.
having WBL but no magic marts.
Not having a super point buy.
having a decent point buy, but being unwilling to start with a 20 strength so you aren't a walking, drooling wall of muscle.
The lower your ability scores are (through lower WBL, unwillingness to dump stats, or lower point buy to begin with), the more things like Weapon Focus are important and actually useful. Sure that 20 str fighter may yawn at weapon focus when he can go pick up that +3 sword at the magic mart but the guy with a 15 point buy and the 14 strength looks at Weapon Focus in and entirely different light.
It isn't a bad feat or a weak feat, it just isn't a "good feat" for doing the DPR.. Because the DPR isn't how the game is actually played out.
-S
All this highlights, how much people need to look at
1. Does the class I'm playing bring it's own buffs?
2. Can I build on Wpn Fcs? (Either Gtr Wpn Spl or Deadly Stroke)
3. What is my Wpn style?
4. What level am I going to?
1. If the class has early access to buffs- Bard, Cleric, Oracle, Paladin, Ranger, Barbarian, Inquisitor. It may not be needed.
2. If a fighter, samurai, magus, Battle Oracle or other class with access to Deadly Stroke or GTR WPN SPL-it is worth it.
3. If I'm dual wielding matched weapons- Yes. If I'm TWF with different weapons (Scimitar/Kukri or Weapon/Shield etc.) or If I'm swapping weapons alot (going from mounted w/lance to on foot with greatsword or a barb who gets hurling charge to throw a jav, then attack with something else or a TWF/thrower), in these cases Big Game Hunter is better since it applies to anything your holding.
4. If starting at or playing a lot above CR9, most bestiary creatures are large or bigger. Also certain APS, like rise of the runelords use a lot of big creatures. Again, Big GameHunter is better
Another reason is that you simply can't fit it in.
I'm about to take Leadership to get a ranger that uses teamwork feats with his animal companion.
I'm already looking at needing 3 feats for the teamwork feat aspect (Combat Reflexes, Paired Opportunists, Outflank), and then I'll need to get some feats to help out my weapons. Improved Critical, Power Attack, and Blinding Critical (Etc) seem to help out a lot more than Weapon Focus will, especially since my main character is a bard that can pump out Inspire Courage, Good Hope, and Haste all in one round.
The more attacks that +1 is relevant on the more interesting it becomes.
For an eidolon with 4 claw attacks that have a 70% chance of hitting Weapon Focus is a great feat.
For two handed weapon barbarian who has a 95% chance to hit on his first attack and an 80% chance to hit on his second, it's not very exciting.
With those same creatures hasted the comparison only gets worse.
As with many feats it's not universally appealing but can be good in the right situation.
Yes. TWF'ers like this for the bonus on both attacks, as well as any iteratives they get. The more you're swinging, the more that extra +1 matters.
Technically speaking, the moment you get additionnal iterative or off-hand attacks, the power of the feat augments, affecting more attacks.And Power Attack applies to all attacks as well, in addition to scaling it`s amount.
Weapon Focus does help lower iteratives hit more often IN COMBO with Power Attack`s penalty, though.Yeah, that's the big problem. Because WF doesn't scale it's always behind PA in it's value. Further compounding the problem is that as you go up in level the +1 becomes less and less meaningful.
At low levels WFs +1 bonus might represent 25% of your attack bonus. At 20th level it's only contributing perhaps 3% to your attack bonus. If it scaled the value would still decrease as you gained levels, but you might still keep it at a healthy level, say above 10% of the contribution.
Absolutely wrong. A 10% increase in attack bonus is not equivalent to a 10% increase in damage output. For lower levels, it will be less, and for higher levels it will often be significantly more.
For instance, a lvl 16 fighter type full attacking an AC 40 wyrm black dragon (CR 17) at +36/+31/+26/+21 will do 28.9% more damage per round if he gets a +3 bonus on attack rolls. A mere +1 on attack rolls, as from weapon focus, grants him a 10.5% increase in damage against such a foe. Power attack, on the other hand, lowers damage output in this case.
Power attack helps a lot for killing low AC creatures quickly. Weapon focus, on the other hand, helps with hitting high AC creatures more frequently. Weapon focus shines best against the toughest opponents, where power attack shines best against the weakest ones (AC-wise). Both are very useful for martial combatants to have.
Yes. TWF'ers like this for the bonus on both attacks, as well as any iteratives they get. The more you're swinging, the more that extra +1 matters.
Just a quibble, but it's actually the average attack roll bonus you have that matters, not the sheer number of attacks. Haste gives you an extra attack, but because that attack is at full BAB, it raises your average attack roll and actually makes weapon focus less important. It's the two-weapon penalties, not the additional attacks, that make weapon focus better for two-weapon fighters.
Yes. TWF'ers like this for the bonus on both attacks, as well as any iteratives they get. The more you're swinging, the more that extra +1 matters.Just a quibble, but it's actually the average attack roll bonus you have that matters, not the sheer number of attacks. Haste gives you an extra attack, but because that attack is at full BAB, it raises your average attack roll and actually makes weapon focus less important. It's the two-weapon penalties, not the additional attacks, that make weapon focus better for two-weapon fighters.
I left that out, but you're right. Nice as haste is, you don't always have it working for you, so a +1 to however many attacks you have isn't a waste.
A TWF rogue needs to hit, which is not all that easy for him. With a non-magical +1 to hit with both his short swords or whatever, he'll do better over his entire career.
Sure that 20 str fighter may yawn at weapon focus when he can go pick up that +3 sword at the magic mart but the guy with a 15 point buy and the 14 strength looks at Weapon Focus in and entirely different light.
You've got it backwards. Being able to have the magic items you actually want makes Weapon Focus better, not worse.
Let's say I take Weapon Focus: Falcata, the GM is running Curse of the Crimson Throne, and he's disallowing crafting and magic item purchasing. I have a useless feat. I will literally never see a magic falcata.
Sure that 20 str fighter may yawn at weapon focus when he can go pick up that +3 sword at the magic mart but the guy with a 15 point buy and the 14 strength looks at Weapon Focus in and entirely different light.
You've got it backwards. Being able to have the magic items you actually want makes Weapon Focus better, not worse.
Let's say I take Weapon Focus: Falcata, the GM is running Curse of the Crimson Throne, and he's disallowing crafting and magic item purchasing. I have a useless feat. I will literally never see a magic falcata.
That's an oddly specific set of requirements, and makes me wonder why you would choose Falcata before you knew if you could even use one.
It doesn't scale to level like Power Attack. If it did then it'd be a great feat, but it doesn't so instead you have to pass it by or hold your nose as you take it.
Try making a level 6 raging barbarian equivalent (8 Str mod) with a greatsword vs. AC 22. When you add +1 to hit to a full attack action, you gain more DPR than adding Power Attack. If you lower the AC a point or two, Power Attack overtakes Weapon Focus -- but only by a fraction of one DPR. If you lower the AC a huge amount, yes Power Attack clearly wins. Most monsters around CR 7 have 20-22 AC range. That's a "challenging" encounter, not very difficult for this level.
What does this mean?
Power Attack is better when CRs are easy. Weapon Focus is better when CRs are harder.
What would you rather have? Something that helps you out when things are easy -- or something that helps you out when things are harder?
That's an oddly specific set of requirements, and makes me wonder why you would choose Falcata before you knew if you could even use one.
Point being, in a campaign in which you don't get to pick/buy/craft your magic items (which isn't most games, but isn't that rare either), weapon focus is a complete crapshoot. Will you ever see the kind of weapon you spent a feat on? Who knows!
So in that kind of game that'd be a reason not to pick it, and I understood the OP to be looking for some such reasons.
|
Maybe Weapon Focus is a boring feat choice for a build, but I think it is one of the most important for a "martial" class, especially for one with a 3/4 BAB progression. Normally you stay with one main weapon your entire career and always benefit from it.
One does not appreciate WF until one has iteratives attacks, and needs to confirm their crits.
I.e., it's 6th level and I'm fighting a guy who has stepped adjacent (when I'm using a reach-weapon); let's say I am unable to 5ft retreat (difficult terrain, ledge, etc), meaning two attacks are available with the weapon haft (assuming I don't have armor-spikes) at -4 nonproficiency. Let's say I roll a 20 and then a 16 confirm-roll with my -5 iterative. Did I confirm the crit at -9?
You really want Weapon Focus in those kinds of situations; and they comes up more often than you'd think.
What would you rather have? Something that helps you out when things are easy -- or something that helps you out when things are harder?
Agreed. It never ceases to amaze me that people roast 13 build points for an 18 pre-mod STR but then don't take Weapon Focus (and every other attack bonus they can find). -- Do you really need to do 18pts of damage to a "bandit" to drop them in a 1st-level encounter?
As I explore my latest build (not yet published), I'm coming to the conclusion that Power Attack, Furious Focus and Weapon Specialization are the least useful.
Eh, that statement doesn't factor CRs are that are difficult because they're a composite of a number of lesser CR opponents. In that case, they'd probably have lower AC and Power Attack would be a better choice.
Weapon Focus is better for a fight against a big dragon -- or something where ACs are high for your level.
I'm not saying Power Attack or Weapon Focus are weak -- I'm saying that they're strong in different ways for different purposes. For most purposes they probably end up equivalent.