Post/Author/DateTime	Post
RancorClaw 07-16-07, 08:23 PM	(Melee Weapon Mastery feat, from the Player's Handbook 2) Do its +2 bonuses to attack and damage with the appropriate damage type stack with the specific Weapon Specialization and Weapon Focus feats that are its prerequisites? Or does this feat merely give you Focus and Specialization for all other weapons that perform the same damage type? (Thus saving you from having to take those two feats yet again, should you choose to change your weapon of choice.) Basically, I'm asking if this feat is worth taking, if I have absolutely no plans of ever changing the specific weapon my brawler is using.
andinel 07-16-07, 09:13 PM	There was an official clarification (at least, I think it was official) that Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and all similar feats stack with Melee Weapon Mastery (if they can). I don't know exactly where this is, though.
Fox Reeveheart 07-16-07, 10:04 PM	Yes they do stack, if it said it doesn't stack it would say so, there is also another reason they stack. Fighter is a dip class and feats like melee/ranged weapon mastery are another reason to take your fighter to higher levels... i mean heck wep spec, improved wep spec, and melee wep mastery are a +6 to damage and +2 to hit >.> i have a fighter that goes archery and will have like +8 from damage feats alone at any time, like crossbow sniper and such. so they are good stuff
risner 07-16-07, 10:24 PM	Do its +2 bonuses to attack and damage with the appropriate damage type stack with the specific Weapon Specialization and Weapon Focus feats that are its prerequisites? Yes it stacks. It stacks for the following reason: 1) The text of the feat clearly indicates it stacks. 2) The FAQ indicate it stacks. 3) There are no indications it does not stack.
Hammersoul 07-17-07, 03:51 AM	Untyped bonuses always stack unless text specifies the contrary
runestar 07-17-07, 04:11 AM	Is there a reason why they made the feat obviously superior to greater weapon focus+spec? Barring that those 2 feats are quite weak to begin with...:P
Lord_Ao 07-17-07, 05:58 AM	I concur, the effects stack. Is there a reason why they made the feat obviously superior to greater weapon focus+spec? Barring that those 2 feats are quite weak to begin with...:P Well, you'd have to ask them personally to get the real answer but I'd say that it's a combination of the fact that because there are a fair few prerequisites to get this feat it should be fairly strong and because, as you said, Greater Wpn Focus/Spec are not very strong and they've realised this so have tried to amend for this by using this feat. Just a theory.
risner 07-17-07, 07:19 AM	Is there a reason why they made the feat obviously superior to greater weapon focus+spec? Barring that those 2 feats are quite weak to begin with...:P I'd like to address the "weak" point. Can you describe to me any other mechanical feat that provides a constant always on improvement to average damage per round that is better than Weapon Specialization? WS and MWM are the top two feats in the game currently. Power Attack is situational (between -10% and +11% or so on monster AC in the proper range (CL+13) which means it is only useful if the monster is extremely high AC or extremely low AC for your level. Flurry becomes better than either starting around 9th level but requires proper AC or lower (CL+13 or less.) TWF can also become better but not as good as Flurry (at a higher level) and also requires proper AC. What else is better?
runestar 07-17-07, 07:42 AM	Can you describe to me any other mechanical feat that provides a constant always on improvement to average damage per round that is better than Weapon Specialization? No, I can't. But that does not mean weapon spec is not weak just because there is nothing "obviously superior" to it. I dislike them as they typically restrict me to a single type of weapon. Early on, I still think you get more bang for your buck taking feats like combat reflexes, cleave or improved trip. In fact, for the few fighters I have played, I find that I rarely have enough feat slots to squeeze in weapon focus/spec, even though a human fighter gets 6 feats over the 1st 4 lvs.
risner 07-17-07, 10:05 AM	Early on, I still think you get more bang for your buck taking feats like combat reflexes, cleave or improved trip. In fact, for the few fighters I have played, I find that I rarely have enough feat slots to squeeze in weapon focus/spec, even though a human fighter gets 6 feats over the 1st 4 lvs. So it is your belief the situation feats (cleave, etc) provide a better improvement than raw constant ADP feats? I have found the exact opposite, and avoid the situational feats (with the exception of Power Attack) as I find their benefit too situational.
Gwumph 03-03-08, 10:16 PM	what happens if you are using a weapon that has 2 damage types slashing and pearcing. If you took MWM twice, once for each damage type would the attack bonus and damage bonus stack for e every attack?
zeratulcraft 03-03-08, 10:19 PM	Bonuses from the same source (in this case a feat) don't stack unless they say they do.
Cartigan 03-03-08, 11:09 PM	To make a short story long... It was errata'd that it stacks.
StruckingFuggle 03-04-08, 02:08 AM	To make a short story long... It was errata'd that it stacks. They stacked before the errata, too. I'd like to address the "weak" point. Can you describe to me any other mechanical feat that provides a constant always on improvement to average damage per round that is better than Weapon Specialization? WS and MWM are the top two feats in the game currently. How do you make the leap from "the only feats that provide 'constant always-on' (isn't that redundant?) improvement to AD/R" to "top two feats in the game"?
Akharu 03-04-08, 03:14 AM	what happens if you are using a weapon that has 2 damage types slashing and pearcing. If you took MWM twice, once for each damage type would the attack bonus and damage bonus stack for e every attack? No, unfortunately not per the errata.
wonlee76 03-04-08, 11:20 AM	Is there a reason why they made the feat obviously superior to greater weapon focus+spec? Barring that those 2 feats are quite weak to begin with...:P Its power creep + the Weapon Focus/Spec line of feats are generally considered pretty weak probably because for weapon spec and the greater versions of weapon focus/spec required a certain # of fighter levels. MWM just gives an incentive to take at least 4 levels of fighter to get a better return (meet the pre-reqs of MWM) then to meet the pre-reqs of Greater WF/Spec though Greater WF/Spec still is useful for a fighter willing to go down that path since those bonuses stack with MWM as well.
Cartigan 03-04-08, 12:16 PM	They stacked before the errata, too. Of course, that is why there were 12 posts before mine.
TravisOfTheCosmose 03-05-08, 01:42 AM	So it is your belief the situation feats (cleave, etc) provide a better improvement than raw constant ADP feats?I thought it was pretty much basic theory that pumping ADP was pretty much the least efficient way to "win" at D&D? On the one hand, feats like Combat Reflexes and Cleave aren't necessarily granting you more damage given their situational nature, but on the other, aren't Weapon Focus/Specialization kind of situational themselves? Saying you're always getting the benefit of either feat is like saying your chosen weapon is always in hand, and always applicable to the situation. If you always fight creatures that just stand in one place and trade blows, yeah, Weapon Specialization is better than a feat that's not doing anything at all, though if you find yourself fighting monsters that aren't always conveniently rooted to the ground, you're probably a little better off exerting what little battlefield control you can pull out of a feat like Combat Reflexes.Its power creep + the Weapon Focus/Spec line of feats are generally considered pretty weak probably because for weapon spec and the greater versions of weapon focus/spec required a certain # of fighter levels.That's really only half right. Is it a bigger issue that it takes 8 levels of fighter to get a particular feat, or that the feat itself only provides a marginal bonus? It's not really even a power creep issue, given this has been the status quo since day one.
Gwumph 03-05-08, 04:16 AM	Cartigan Can you point me in the direction of the errata?? Cheers Gwumph
Merestil Haye 03-05-08, 04:55 AM	The errata is available through the D&D website errata page (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata). The errata did not change anything, however. It had the effect of silencing people who argued that "WotC didn't mean that because it makes GWF/GWS obsolete" and that's all.
Vrellum 03-05-08, 02:31 PM	I'd like to address the "weak" point. Can you describe to me any other mechanical feat that provides a constant always on improvement to average damage per round that is better than Weapon Specialization? WS and MWM are the top two feats in the game currently. Power Attack is situational (between -10% and +11% or so on monster AC in the proper range (CL+13) which means it is only useful if the monster is extremely high AC or extremely low AC for your level. Flurry becomes better than either starting around 9th level but requires proper AC or lower (CL+13 or less.) TWF can also become better but not as good as Flurry (at a higher level) and also requires proper AC. What else is better? A few disagreements: WS and WF are not always on, you must be using the correct weapon for them to give a benefit. Better isn't always about what lets me do a couple more HP of damage per round more damage. Partial list of feats that are better. Cleave is probably better (though great cleave is almost surely worse) Combat Reflexes (for much of the game, especially when combined with a reach weapon) Melee Weapon Supremacy Improved Trip (AoO when they get up or crawl away, -4 to attacks and AC while prone) Spirited Charge (if your campaign lets you use it) Combat Brute Leap Attack Not to mention things like: combat expertise elusive target Robilar's Gambit Combat Vigor I'm sure there's a lot more. You state that you don't think that situational feats are all that useful. Let's look at cleave. If you're always fighting big, single beasts, then no, its not that good. But if there's several bad guys pretty often when you drop one, you'll be able to attack another one. Odds are your fighter (since they're the only ones with WS) can average more than 10 pts per hit, even at low levels, so it would take 5+ hits for WS to match cleave. In my experience, cleave results in more damage than WS.
StruckingFuggle 03-05-08, 02:43 PM	Spirited Charge (if your campaign lets you use it) ...People ban Spirited Charge enough for this to bear mentioning?
Cartigan 03-05-08, 03:29 PM	...People ban Spirited Charge enough for this to bear mentioning? Do people use mounted combat enough for the feat to come up to bear mentioning it?
Gwumph 03-06-08, 02:52 AM	Well since this thread is getting sidetracked anyways, Yes mounted combat comes in fairly regularly. Mostly with small characters on a medium mount, a dog, a pony or a dire bat etc. Most of theses mounts can overcome dungeon or terrain problem with a couple of low price magic items such as horseshoe of zephyr or collar of resizing. Now to combat....a combination of 3 feats make a small mounted character extremlely deadly. Spirited Charge+ Power attack + Headless charge (i.e. Shock Trooper) At 9th level a half decently equiped character (str +4 item (20 str), +1 weapon) Would do on a charge with Full power attack (roughly) 80+3D6 with a +20 to hit. I have a 9th level Halfling Paladin that use mounted charges and he uses a wooden lance that often gets brambles cast on it + haste and lets say recitation. My charge with holy smite and full power attack does does 120+3d6 damage with +25 to hit. In almost every encounter I get at least 1 charge in, and that charge usually makes the encounter. I.E. We had an encounter with a Hill giant with Barbarian level raging and a dire bear companion. The 2 of them together would have been tough. But i dropped the bear with a single charge and that made the hill giant much more managable. A feat (shock trooper) that allows you to full power attack while still retaining your full BAB is just wrong!! :)
TheSeventhStooge 03-06-08, 01:54 PM	Melee Weapon Supremacy Is this the Weapon Supremacy that is mentioned in the PHII that you need to get to 18th level as a fighter to get? Or is this another feat that I have never heard of? Sorry about the question but the word "melee" in front of the feat threw me off. Just curious. Thanks! TheSeventhStooge...
Vrellum 03-06-08, 02:47 PM	Is this the Weapon Supremacy that is mentioned in the PHII that you need to get to 18th level as a fighter to get? Or is this another feat that I have never heard of? Sorry about the question but the word "melee" in front of the feat threw me off. Just curious. Thanks! TheSeventhStooge... Yeah, its that one. I guess I was thinking too much about "melee"
TheSeventhStooge 03-06-08, 08:25 PM	Yeah, its that one. I guess I was thinking too much about "melee" No sweat. I wouldn't have even asked if it wasn't for the fact that there are so many books out there with so many feats that to me it was perfectly possible for there to be a "Melee Weapon Supremacy" and a "Weapon Supremacy." TheSeventhStooge...
aelryinth 03-07-08, 01:38 PM	A few disagreements: You state that you don't think that situational feats are all that useful. Let's look at cleave. If you're always fighting big, single beasts, then no, its not that good. But if there's several bad guys pretty often when you drop one, you'll be able to attack another one. Odds are your fighter (since they're the only ones with WS) can average more than 10 pts per hit, even at low levels, so it would take 5+ hits for WS to match cleave. In my experience, cleave results in more damage than WS. This is a math fallacy. Remember, WF and WS are on every attack. You would have to add up their effect on every swing, vs. how often you get a Cleave attack that hits. Hitting more often results in higher DOT. (i.e. 90/65/40/15% chance of hitting goes to 95/70/45/20, which is a 20% dmg increase). Hitting harder results in higher DOT. (every swing +2 dmg. If you avg 10 pts a swing, then you'd need to cleave 1/5 hits to equal spec). Cleaving 1) means YOU have to be the one to drop a foe and 2) means there MUST be a second target next to you. At lower levels, where you might face easy to kill enemies, cleave is okay. In a military campaign, where you are guaranteed fodder, it's awesome. For an adventurer, tons of low level mooks you can cleave attract the attention of the mage's AoE's. Monsters get big and might only have one in range, and you might be the one to drop them, you might not. Cleave is called situational becase the DM is the one in charge of seeing if it is effective. With WF/WS, the bonuses apply to every attack, and there's no question of when they apply. === And yes, MWM is in there because they finally realized that two feats for +1/+2 with a specific weapon sucked bad. ==Aelryinth
Vrellum 03-07-08, 03:28 PM	This is a math fallacy. Remember, WF and WS are on every attack. You would have to add up their effect on every swing, vs. how often you get a Cleave attack that hits. Hitting more often results in higher DOT. (i.e. 90/65/40/15% chance of hitting goes to 95/70/45/20, which is a 20% dmg increase). Hitting harder results in higher DOT. (every swing +2 dmg. If you avg 10 pts a swing, then you'd need to cleave 1/5 hits to equal spec). Cleaving 1) means YOU have to be the one to drop a foe and 2) means there MUST be a second target next to you. At lower levels, where you might face easy to kill enemies, cleave is okay. In a military campaign, where you are guaranteed fodder, it's awesome. For an adventurer, tons of low level mooks you can cleave attract the attention of the mage's AoE's. Monsters get big and might only have one in range, and you might be the one to drop them, you might not. Cleave is called situational becase the DM is the one in charge of seeing if it is effective. With WF/WS, the bonuses apply to every attack, and there's no question of when they apply. === And yes, MWM is in there because they finally realized that two feats for +1/+2 with a specific weapon sucked bad. ==Aelryinth I'd like to address a couple of points. 1st. I'm sure what math fallacy you are referring to. We said basically the same thing, maybe I wasn't clear? Though both of us were slightly wrong, the actual number is about 4, not 5. 2nd. WF/WS do not apply to every attack. You must be using the correct weapon. Sometimes you can't or its not a good choice. ex. fighting a rakasha. Do you use your greatsword or a blessed piercing weapon? ex. you need to do a ranged attack, WS greatsword won't help you. 3rd. Cleave does not require another enemy to be next to you. You only need to be able to reach a square it occupies. Not the same thing if you have reach. 4th. Math fallacy. You have assumed that the 5% increase to hit from the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th attack all add equally to the amount of damage done. That is not true. Actual value will vary depending on the liklihood of a hit, but with the example that you gave the actual damage increase is about 9%.
ashmanonar 03-07-08, 08:41 PM	This is a math fallacy. Remember, WF and WS are on every attack. You would have to add up their effect on every swing, vs. how often you get a Cleave attack that hits. Hitting more often results in higher DOT. (i.e. 90/65/40/15% chance of hitting goes to 95/70/45/20, which is a 20% dmg increase). Hitting harder results in higher DOT. (every swing +2 dmg. If you avg 10 pts a swing, then you'd need to cleave 1/5 hits to equal spec). Cleaving 1) means YOU have to be the one to drop a foe and 2) means there MUST be a second target next to you. At lower levels, where you might face easy to kill enemies, cleave is okay. In a military campaign, where you are guaranteed fodder, it's awesome. For an adventurer, tons of low level mooks you can cleave attract the attention of the mage's AoE's. Monsters get big and might only have one in range, and you might be the one to drop them, you might not. Cleave is called situational becase the DM is the one in charge of seeing if it is effective. With WF/WS, the bonuses apply to every attack, and there's no question of when they apply. === And yes, MWM is in there because they finally realized that two feats for +1/+2 with a specific weapon sucked bad. ==Aelryinth I'm really regretting taking the PA-Cleave-Great Cleave feat chain now that we're fighting Bugbears with 25+ AC and enough hitpoints to make dropping them a challenge. I may need to retrain soon, if the DM will allow it.
aelryinth 03-07-08, 11:49 PM	I'd like to address a couple of points. 1st. I'm sure what math fallacy you are referring to. We said basically the same thing, maybe I wasn't clear? Though both of us were slightly wrong, the actual number is about 4, not 5. 2nd. WF/WS do not apply to every attack. You must be using the correct weapon. Sometimes you can't or its not a good choice. ex. fighting a rakasha. Do you use your greatsword or a blessed piercing weapon? ex. you need to do a ranged attack, WS greatsword won't help you. 3rd. Cleave does not require another enemy to be next to you. You only need to be able to reach a square it occupies. Not the same thing if you have reach. 4th. Math fallacy. You have assumed that the 5% increase to hit from the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th attack all add equally to the amount of damage done. That is not true. Actual value will vary depending on the liklihood of a hit, but with the example that you gave the actual damage increase is about 9%. 2) it's assumed you are using your favorite weapon, or, in this day, a weapon with Aptitude on it so your feats apply. 3) Let's just say close enough to strike (which is what I actually meant). Note that you still only get a 5' step with Supreme Cleave, and it's still the Dm's call if someone was stupid enough to stay in your reach, not yours. 4) No, you're looking at the example math wrong. You add together their total chance to do dmg. 90+65+40+15 = 210% of base dmg. Add in weapon focus, and it's 230% of base dmg. You're right in that it's about 10% Improvement. It's 20% of the BASE, however. So, we're both right. ==Aelryinth
aelryinth 03-07-08, 11:52 PM	I'm really regretting taking the PA-Cleave-Great Cleave feat chain now that we're fighting Bugbears with 25+ AC and enough hitpoints to make dropping them a challenge. I may need to retrain soon, if the DM will allow it. Yeah, although Power Attack is always useful. You just have to keep maximizing your bonus To Hit, and you can always swap it out. WF becomes +2 Dmg, if you are using a two hander (although you are generally better off hitting multiple times then upping dmg). ===Aelryinth
Vrellum 03-09-08, 01:10 PM	Great Cleave is rarely a good choice. Kinda sad that the prereqs are so much better than the cap stone feat.
risner 03-12-08, 08:57 PM	Wow, resurrect a VERY old thread. 2nd. WF/WS do not apply to every attack. You must be using the correct weapon. 4th. Math fallacy. You have assumed that the 5% increase to hit from the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th attack all add equally to the amount of damage done. That is not true. Actual value will vary depending on the liklihood of a hit, but with the example that you gave the actual damage increase is about 9%. 2# They apply to every attack, or enough for the ones they don't apply to not matter. 4# Situation wise, Cleave is very hard to exploit (with reach) compared to a static +5% to hit. what happens if you are using a weapon that has 2 damage types slashing and pearcing. If you took MWM twice, once for each damage type would the attack bonus and damage bonus stack for e every attack? They never stacked, obviously. They don't stack now and didn't stack when printed. Same source can't stack. So there was no rules based argument that MWM stacked with itself when printer, after the FAQ, and after the Errata (which was required because some ignored the rules and argued they stacked.)