[3.5] Re-do Feats (starting with Weapon Focus)

[Umael]

(This was originally posted in the middle of another thread. I'm come back and splice in the link.)

I know it would not make Weapon Focus good enough, but I was wondering how good of a fix this solution would be:

The bonus for Weapon Focus improves by one for every +5 BAB the PC has after taking it. So if the PC took Weapon Focus as a 2nd-level fighter (BAB +2), then when the PC got to be a 7th-level fighter (BAB +7), the Weapon Focus would give an additional +1 to hit.

(Yes, I know, the caster STILL dominates. I'm trying to judge how GOOD of a benefit this is.)

EDIT: Here is where the discussion began. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=156155&page=5)

[Jack Zander]

Give weapon focus a to a group of weapons (axes, light blades, bows, etc.) and give it the benefits of both weapon focus and weapon specialization. At level 11 give it the benefits of the greater versions of those two feats.

[PersonMan]

Shouldn't this go in the Homebrew sub-forum?

[Umael]

Give weapon focus a to a group of weapons (axes, light blades, bows, etc.) and give it the benefits of both weapon focus and weapon specialization. At level 11 give it the benefits of the greater versions of those two feats.

Okay.

You realize that you didn't address my idea at all, just substituted your own? With nothing to back why you think your idea would be better?



Shouldn't this go in the Homebrew sub-forum?

I'm looking at modifying something for 3.5, not creating a new system. I want this viewed from the eyes of "Will this work in my D&D game? Will this work in someone else's D&D game?"

[Zore]

I'm looking at modifying something for 3.5, not creating a new system. I want this viewed from the eyes of "Will this work in my D&D game? Will this work in someone else's D&D game?"

Most of the homebrew forum is exactly that, homebrew classes, feats or fixes for classes or feats for 3.5. The rest is people homebrewing for other systems or their own system.

[Il_Vec]

This should be in the Homebrew, really.
That said, commenting on your feat: I feel having to keep track of the level you took a feat is unnecessary. And that weapon focus should function for weapon categories.

I saw your arguments made for people who start using the weapon in different levels getting different returns. I respectfully disagree. In D&D 3.x, there is no mechanical benefit from "long-time training". There is no relation between time and level, either.
If you from level 1 always put max ranks in one skill, and someone who does not have any ranks in the same skill, just now level-ups and sinks all of his points in that skill, you both now know exactly the same about using that skill.

You may think that aspect of the feat is "logical", but in contrast with the rest of the system, it is clunky. There would be no harm in making it only related to character level, and it would improve the simplicity and consistence of the feat.

[Fawsto]

This should be in HB forum.

Scalonating Feats are generaly better than their "one time" counterparts. If takes away the simplicity some people like, however.

Your idea seems to look a lot like one I had a few weeks ago. In my HB, WF scalonated at BAB 5, 10, 15 and 20. Being +1 to attack and damage and endind as +5 to attack and damage at BAB 20. Also, GWF doubled that bonus and WEspecialization gives you bonus to your AC with the same progression (Deflection, maybe? Have not decided yet), GWEsp, again, doubles the bonus.

[LibraryOgre]

The bonus for Weapon Focus improves by one for every +5 BAB the PC has after taking it. So if the PC took Weapon Focus as a 2nd-level fighter (BAB +2), then when the PC got to be a 7th-level fighter (BAB +7), the Weapon Focus would give an additional +1 to hit.

(Yes, I know, the caster STILL dominates. I'm trying to judge how GOOD of a benefit this is.)


While it's helpful, I think the way you have it written makes it too much bookkeeping and less appealing at higher level. If you're married to the +5 idea, make it instead per +5 of BAB, period... so once you get a +6 BAB, you get +2, etc. That makes it attractive at higher levels (i.e. I can pick it up as my 20th level fighter feat to get really good at my weapon of choice), and reduces bookkeeping (I don't have to keep track of when I got it, just that I have it).

[Shhalahr Windrider]

If you're married to the +5 idea, make it instead per +5 of BAB, period... so once you get a +6 BAB, you get +2, etc. That makes it attractive at higher levels (i.e. I can pick it up as my 20th level fighter feat to get really good at my weapon of choice), and reduces bookkeeping (I don't have to keep track of when I got it, just that I have it).
This exactly.

Aside from the book-keeping thing, the only other time in D&D when you take something matters is what your build is at 20 just before you hit epic. Basic feats don’t mess with you like that. For instance, a 10th level fighter can take Power Attack and start making a 10-point conversion right away. He isn’t just limited to Power Attacking for 1 until higher levels.

It makes sense from an in-character flavor standpoint, too. When you’re good at something, learning new things in that subject becomes easier and easier. I would expect a 10th level fighter to take to and get more out of a basic feat like Weapon Focus or Power Attack much more quickly than I would expect a 1st level fighter would. And a 20th level fighter should be good enough to have near-instant mastery over just about any new combat feat.

[Fawsto]

PA streches the "scalonating feat" concept so well that it is one of the only feats that allow you to scalonate back whenever you want. That's one of the reasons why it is such a good feat.

[Jack Zander]

You realize that you didn't address my idea at all, just substituted your own? With nothing to back why you think your idea would be better?

Okay.

The feat you suggested is still terrible and no melee character should ever take it. The bookkeeping of BAB after taking the feat is clunky. The changes I suggested still make for a terrible feat, but I removed the bookkeeping (while still trying to keep the scaling), and at least gave players a little incentive to nab it with specialization thrown in there. Also, weapon groups are the way to go (especially if you like to roll for randomized treasure, which I personally believe is one of the greatest joys of DMing).

[Merk]

Three ideas:

1) Weapon Focus

PRQ: BAB +1

Gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls with a selected weapon group, bonus improves by +1 every for every 5 points of base attack bonus possessed. (max +6)

2) Dodge

PRQ: Dex 13+

As an immediate action once per round, may gain a +1 dodge bonus against one attack, bonus improves by +1 for every 2 points of base reflex save possessed. (max +7)

3) Two-Weapon Fighting

PRQ: Dex 15+

You may choose to make an attack with your off-hand weapon for each normal attack you make with your main hand weapon ("normal attack" defined as one generated by base attack, and not from "extra" effects like haste or flurry). Your penalties on attack rolls with your main hand weapon are reduced by 2 and reduced by 6 in your off hand. ((This wording is intended to allow off-hand attacks on all iteratives and even on attacks of opportunity.))

[Umael]

That said, commenting on your feat: I feel having to keep track of the level you took a feat is unnecessary. And that weapon focus should function for weapon categories.

It would be keeping track of the BAB, not the level, but that's a small issue.

Also, I agree with you on a gut-level with weapon focus applying to weapon categories.



I saw your arguments made for people who start using the weapon in different levels getting different returns. I respectfully disagree. In D&D 3.x, there is no mechanical benefit from "long-time training". There is no relation between time and level, either.

(I hope you don't mind if I snipped your explanation.)

This was a very well-worded and constructed disagreement. While I do not like the fact that there IS no relation between time and level, save whatever you want to call "experience", your example pointed out that the game philosophy upon which D&D 3.x is built agrees with you. If you assumed that you could level once per year (big assumption), it still doesn't explain why you go from having zero ranks to having four in effectively an eyeblink.



You may think that aspect of the feat is "logical", but in contrast with the rest of the system, it is clunky. There would be no harm in making it only related to character level, and it would improve the simplicity and consistence of the feat.

The trouble with tying the feats to level is that you run the risk of dead levels - unless you tie the feats to prime levels (2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19).

The reason I was looking into Weapon Focus this way is that I was thinking of a system of revising feats so that they scale up in power. To give more flexibility to feat selection, I wanted to see if there could be way to make the same feat selection change the outcome depending on the sequence.

For example, say Toughness granted 3 hit points +1 per additional level, while Weapon Focus granted +1 to hit per additional level. Two fighters, both take each feat once, but in reverse order. Fighter A picked Toughness 1st level and WF 2nd, so has +4 hit points, +1 to hit, while Fighter B reversed that order so has +3 hit points, +2 to hit.

D&D 3.0 introduced feats as a means of making the fighter a more customizable class, but if you have two people intent on making, say, a chain-tripper, the feats and the order in which they take seem to be always the same.

[Magikeeper]

In my game I changed weapon focus to be 1 +1/5 levels (ignoring bab and when you got it). It is a prereq feat that isn't really supposed to be very good, but +3 at level 11 is not worthless. PCs with lower bab or certain builds might even want it. My players are okay with needing weapon focus for some things now.

Since what I am using is strictly better than your version, and I can confirm from actually using the rule in a game that it is a minor benefit, your version is not strong enough IMO.

Players have a lot of incentive to take weapon focus as it allows you to enter a number of prestige classes, take a number of feats, etc. I was somewhat afraid of making it an awesome feat in its own right.

Although having it apply to a weapon group is a good idea. I’ll add that to the feat.

-----------------------------

Response to Merk:
Why the caps? Do you hate epic PCs for some reason? There is no reason to cap the feats. The point is for it to stay useful at higher levels.

Your dodge has to use an immediate action, which is a big strike against it. Swift and immediate actions are becoming more plentiful in homebrew and even normal games allowing all of the books will see melee fighters using those actions. Also, your ability makes using all of the dodge-based feats a PAIN for people using the feats that depend on your dodge target. You have to use all of your immediate actions to use diverting defense (from Elusive Target)? For PCs that actually use dodge I would pick the original over this one. Having it based on reflex isn’t helping either.

I haven’t fixed dodge yet, but maybe:
Dodge
PRQ: Dex 13
As a free or immediate action once per round you may designate an opponent as your dodge target. You get a +1 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent’s attacks. This bonus improves by 1 every 4 levels (+2 at level 4, +3 at level 8, +4 at level 12, +5 at level 16, etc)

It is still on the weak side, but dodge has the same issues as weapon focus.

------------------
Edit: The issue with taking them in a different order is that the feats are too weak for order to matter. If they were strong enough to be worth the bookeeping they would be on par with class abilities.

[Susano-wo]

Why exactly is WF a feat that no melee should take?
Is it just that full BAB doesn't need the extra attack, and the feat is better spent on XYorZ feat?

IT seems that P.A. would make it nice to have extra points that you can freely sack for damage (yeah, I Know the most efficient PA scheme is ShockTrooper/Leap Attack, but its not always taken, and you can't always utilize it). IF you have, say, 5 more attack bonus than you really need to reliably hit, and you had 1 more, than really, that's just like adding 2 damage, right? Probably a lot of better things to do overall, but it doesn't sound like a waste.

And that's only the original version. I am quite interested in seeing if my GM's will Ok the upgraded WF :P

also, while I'm at it: What is P.E.A.C.H.? aside from some sort of crazy, Cyborg Princess build? :P

[Knaight]

Why exactly is WF a feat that no melee should take?
Is it just that full BAB doesn't need the extra attack, and the feat is better spent on XYorZ feat?

Weapon Focus doesn't give an extra attack, it gives a small bonus that is way weaker than anything that gives new abilities. Compare it to something like Combat Reflexes for instance, which adds a whole bunch of AoOs. A flat bonus is rarely worth much.

That said, if Weapon Focus added to actual BAB, then it might become useful. Lets say it applies to a category of weapons, and adds 1 BAB/5 BAB without weapon focus. Suddenly people are getting extra attacks earlier, and at level 20 a fighter gets 25 BAB and a 5th iterative. It also helps with applying for prestige classes. But just a bonus that gets better occasionally? Not worth much.

[Susano-wo]

SOrry that I wasn't clear. I meant your attack score, more properly called attack bonus.:smallredface:

SO its basically its just that other feats, like combat reflexes/improved X give you another option/options in combat, whereas WF just gives you a 5% better chance at your current options. But once you total it to a, say +1 per iterative attack you have, doesn't that make it not so minor? also, wouldn't it be good for under BAB'ed melee classes, such as Monk or ROgue? Your Monk's Ora Ora Ora (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzpyfpkAG9I) might actually hit a few times with a plus 2 or 3 to BAB, right?

[Rithaniel]

Dodge

PRQ: Dex 13+

As an immediate action once per round, may gain a +1 dodge bonus against one attack, bonus improves by +1 for every 2 points of base reflex save possessed. (max +7)

Ew, no-no-no-no-no, that's nasty.

First off, dodge itself is a lack-luster feat, as it uses up a feat slot to give you a tiny +1 to AC against only one opponent. This does even less, as it gives a tiny bonus to AC against only one attack, and it eats an immediate/swift action just to do this. The only way this helps is that it gives a bigger boost to AC, but it's only bigger for characters who have good reflex saves. It's not clear where you're aiming this thing, but, the OP stated something to the effect of 'make these feats actually useful'. If you were making something with that kind of a goal, then here are a few versions:

Mercurial Dodge
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13+
Benefit: Once per round, as a free action, after an attack roll against you has been declared, but before it's been rolled, you may make that attack roll automatically miss, regardess of what the roll comes up as.
Special: This feat counts as the Dodge feat for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Close Combat Dodge
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13+
Benefit: You gain a +3 dodge bonus to AC against opponents within 15 feet of you.
Special: This feat counts as the Dodge feat for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Blinding Dodge
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13+
Benefit: At the beginning of your turn each round, you may select a single opponent you can see, as a free action. Until the beginning of your next round, you have total concealment from that opponent.
Special: This feat counts as the Dodge feat for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

[Milskidasith]

Ew, no-no-no-no-no, that's nasty.

First off, dodge itself is a lack-luster feat, as it uses up a feat slot to give you a tiny +1 to AC against only one opponent. This does even less, as it gives a tiny bonus to AC against only one attack, and it eats an immediate/swift action just to do this. The only way this helps is that it gives a bigger boost to AC, but it's only bigger for characters who have good reflex saves. It's not clear where you're aiming this thing, but, the OP stated something to the effect of 'make these feats actually useful'. If you were making something with that kind of a goal, then here are a few versions:

Mercurial Dodge
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13+
Benefit: Once per round, as a free action, after an attack roll against you has been declared, but before it's been rolled, you may make that attack roll automatically miss, regardess of what the roll comes up as.
Special: This feat counts as the Dodge feat for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Close Combat Dodge
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13+
Benefit: You gain a +3 dodge bonus to AC against opponents within 15 feet of you.
Special: This feat counts as the Dodge feat for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Blinding Dodge
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13+
Benefit: At the beginning of your turn each round, you may select a single opponent you can see, as a free action. Until the beginning of your next round, you have total concealment from that opponent.
Special: This feat counts as the Dodge feat for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Mercurial dodge is overpowered; it's about as good as Wings of Cover (which is an incredibly powerful spell, despite it's low slot) but doesn't need any action at all. Blinding dodge is decent. Close Combat Dodge is also decent, since it's a pretty good AC boost.