Why can Furious Focus only be used with a two handed weapon?


Rules Questions


Really, why? It seems so randomly arbitrary, and Im not really seeing why its needed from a balance perspective. Heck, the feats description doesnt even mention weapon choice at all?

Help me understand the thought process behind this seemingly completely pointless restriction.

(In case you were wondering, I was fiddling with a Bite attack focused Fighter. Having only one attack per round, it really needs to count, and I was rather surprised to find Furious Focus wasnt an option.)

Sczarni

Technically it can also be used with a one-handed weapon being wielded in two-hands.

This doesn't help you, I know...

I have no idea why they did that. Is this for PFS? Because if it isn't I can't imagine a GM in a home game would veto your idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As this is the Rules Questions forum, where we answer questions about how the rules work, not "I wish this rule worked differently", I will give you a straight, rules answer.

Because it says it right there:

Quote:
When you are wielding a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon with two hands, and using the Power Attack feat, you do not suffer Power Attack’s penalty on melee attack rolls on the first attack you make each turn. You still suffer the penalty on any additional attacks, including attacks of opportunity.


RAI you can probably apply furious focus to a primary natural attack that gets 1.5 str bonus, as that is considered the same category as wielding a two-handed weapon, see the power attack description.


My theory would be because of two-weapon fighting and multiple natural attacks. These would benefit over proportionately from furious focus, making it imbalanced. I think the intent was, to enable you to negate the penalty for one attack only, probably with the barbarian in mind.

Grand Lodge

Because it's designed as a feat for a two handed weapon fighter, not a monster. There are a lot of monsters out there with primary attacks and since they only attack once per round with each weapon, each attack would benefit from this feat.

The problem with building feats for your Mr. Bitey is that you may overboost wild shaping druids and/or druid/summoner pets if you're not careful.


Dave_Vader wrote:
My theory would be because of two-weapon fighting and multiple natural attacks. These would benefit over proportionately from furious focus, making it imbalanced. I think the intent was, to enable you to negate the penalty for one attack only, probably with the barbarian in mind.

Being able to use it with a onehanded weapon wielded in one hand wouldnt magically make it apply to more than one attack, two weapon fighting would gain no more from it than a two handed weapon.

LazerX wrote:
Because it's designed as a feat for a two handed weapon fighter, not a monster. There are a lot of monsters out there with primary attacks and since they only attack once per round with each weapon, each attack would benefit from this feat.

The design is hardly apparent. I know flavor text shouldnt impact rules, but when the flavor makes no mention of two handed weapons at all, its hard to see the design intent.

Monsters with multiple natural attacks also wouldnt gain more from this feat either, since its the first attack on your turn, not the first attack with every weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Because it's a stupidly designed feat. I've house-ruled it to all melee weapons. It's not as though 1h melee weapons are overpowered.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why do some people point of deliberate restrictions and ask why? Whatever the reason for the restriction, it appears to be an important part of design.


Mudfoot wrote:
Because it's a stupidly designed feat. I've house-ruled it to all melee weapons. It's not as though 1h melee weapons are overpowered.

Just because you disagree with it does not make it stupid.

Also Just because we can't see the reason, doesn't mean there isn't one.

Could just be flavour - This feat screams out to me of simply powering through the penalty of power attack with sheer brute force and that doesn't sit right with wielding a weapon in one hand.
YMMV.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Why do some people point of deliberate restrictions and ask why? Whatever the reason for the restriction, it appears to be an important part of design.

Because if there's no apparent reason why it would be important to the design, people wonder if they're missing something, or if it's as arbitrary and nonsensical as it seems.

Scarab Sages

Ninja in the Rye wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Why do some people point of deliberate restrictions and ask why? Whatever the reason for the restriction, it appears to be an important part of design.
Because if there's no apparent reason why it would be important to the design, people wonder if they're missing something, or if it's as arbitrary and nonsensical as it seems.

To drive home the point the DPR = Two-handed weapon.

We would not want someone using any other form of melee to think they were comparable.


James Risner wrote:
Why do some people point of deliberate restrictions and ask why? Whatever the reason for the restriction, it appears to be an important part of design.

Not really. Many restrictions are just there 'because'. Look at 99 percent of all racially restricted material. Has nothing to do with the abilities of the race, but, oh look, only elves can use Stabbing Shot.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Why can Furious Focus only be used with a two handed weapon? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions