Weapon Supremacy good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Weapon Supremacy good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Yokinobu
07-06-07, 07:16 PM So I was looking at weapon supremacy, and I thought that the benefits made it a pretty good feat. However, I can't help but think that the pre-reqs are a little steep. Fighter 18th? Come on! They gotta know that there are hardly any good fighter builds that get that far without dipping into more than 2 levels into a PrC. I think it should be BAB +18. Hell, you already need 12 fighter levels just to qualify for all the pre-req feats.

Has anyone house ruled this, or can tell me of a build where this feat is actually useful?
Neutronium_Dragon
07-06-07, 07:21 PM The prerequisite is deliberate. With all of the other fighter abilities that the PHB2 offers - some of the substitution levels become very nasty in combination with PHB2 feats - the intent is to make fighter worth sticking to throughout rather than PrCing at the first possible opportunity.
Steelwill
07-06-07, 07:57 PM Except that even with requirements that ensure the character must be a fighter, Weapon Supremacy isn't a freaking fighter bonus feat. If you don't take it at 18th, you have to wait until lvl 21 for another regular feat. Has anyone seen if this has been corrected, because it really seems like this was an oversight, not intentional.
Neutronium_Dragon
07-06-07, 08:52 PM It's probably intentional. Since it isn't a bonus fighter feat, that means that any fighter who has dipped another class will have to wait for 21st to take it rather than getting it at 18th. In that regard, it rewards you for sticking to fighter.
ZiggZagg
07-06-07, 09:01 PM Sure, I know build that is worth it. Warblade 20:D
Lotus Crane
07-06-07, 09:05 PM Neutronium Dragon is correct. Most D&D settings assume that 18th level fighters exist in the world (and that they statistically outnumber fighter 8/PrC 10's), and Weapon Supremacy is WotC's recent justification for why that should actually be a plausible situation.

3.0 and especially 3.5 mechanics have totally butchered the original concept of the PrC, which was "specialized expertise at the expense of general abilities," or "different but ultimately equal." Fighter 20 was supposed to be just as powerful as (and far more common than) fighter 10/PrC 10, but until the PHB 2, the actual mechanics of the game didn't support this meta-assumption.

Anyway, if you want the power of Weapon Supremacy, be a pure fighter. That's the entire reason it was written in the first place, to make you want to be a pure fighter.

Sure, I know build that is worth it. Warblade 20
Yes, that's actually possible too, though if you go that route, there's really not many feats you can afford to take outside of the Weapon Mastery/Supremacy chain, since warblades don't get nearly as many feats as fighters.
ZiggZagg
07-06-07, 09:09 PM ...or a pure Warblade. That build is very very effective and qualifies for the feat in question, albeit 2 levels later.
jaelis
07-06-07, 09:24 PM How would a warblade 20 take it? You don't get a feat at that level.

Anyway, I wouldn't say that having WS not be a fighter bonus feat was necessarily deliberate. There's a whole bunch of feats in the PHBII that really seem like they should be fighter bonus feats but aren't. You might think they were trying to be clever with WS, but what about Bounding Assault, Crushing Strike, Driving Attack, Overwhelming Assault, Rapid Blitz, and Slashing Flurry? I think they just screwed up.
Yokinobu
07-07-07, 06:05 AM Anyway, if you want the power of Weapon Supremacy, be a pure fighter. That's the entire reason it was written in the first place, to make you want to be a pure fighter.

It's not working. Unless you can tell me that the rest of the PHBII contains a multitude of options that makes sticking with the fighter straight through worth it(I don't know I haven't checked out the rest of it), than I'm going to stick with other builds using PrCs, and Weapon Supremacy will just be another feat that people hardly ever take.

I think that in some cases there are PrCs that are just as good of fighters as fighters. Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case.
penchant
07-07-07, 08:07 AM So you are saying that its not fair that the feat is fighter only, because there is no reason to play a fighter? :confused: So rather than play a fighter, you would just rather have all the fighter only stuff be available to other classes so you can play them and have what the fighter does too?

Riiiighht.

Reasons to play a fighter: Specialization, Greater Spec, Weapon Mastery, Weapon Supremacy, Fighter alternate class features.

While some can be had with a few certain PrC's (Pious Templar, Ex) the best way to get really good at a weapon is fighter. I know people are all "warblade" this and "warblade" that but in order for the WB to do what the fighter does, then he must really spend feats on nothing else. The fighter can take some of the warblades abilities as well and has the feats to do it. The reason they allowed the warblade to qualify for fighter feats at +2 level while the fighter qualifies for WB at +5 level is because if they were even, the fighter would quickly dominate. Some argue thats the way it should be, but I don't know. I remeber the class kits in 2nd ed and they truly suxed. The premise was that a kit can't be equal to a regular class so they don't overshadow the core classes. So you traded effectiveness for a few trix and some fluff. That approach did not sell books or make players happy. So this is what we have now.

My, Its ramble o'clock, so I'll get to bed now.
Lotus Crane
07-07-07, 10:47 AM It's not working. Unless you can tell me that the rest of the PHBII contains a multitude of options that makes sticking with the fighter straight through worth it(I don't know I haven't checked out the rest of it), than I'm going to stick with other builds using PrCs, and Weapon Supremacy will just be another feat that people hardly ever take.

I think that in some cases there are PrCs that are just as good of fighters as fighters. Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case.
I already explained the original purpose of PrC's to you; you can confirm it by going back and reading some 3.0 articles on the subject. Pure fighters are supposed to be able to do something that fighter PrC's can't. You're obviously very upset that you have to put up with just taking levels of fighter, because you do want to take Weapon Supremacy. Good, because it's supposed to be a hard choice. You're not supposed to have an easy time choosing between pure fighter for Weapon Supremacy or PrC's for other benefits; you get one or the other, and they're supposed to be equally tempting choices that make you rip out your hair in frustration because you can't have both.

If you want some worthwhile pure fighter builds, you should really go ask around the Character Optimization boards (http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=339), which are all about this sort of thing. There actually are some potent fighter builds which do utilize all 18 feats available to a pure fighter, without any silly redundancies (like taking Weapon Specialization for 2 different weapons, which is really a "benefit" only a newbie would appreciate). Complete Warrior, PHB II, and Races of Stone really help make pure fighters competitive with fighter/PrC builds.
Yokinobu
07-07-07, 04:04 PM So you are saying that its not fair that the feat is fighter only, because there is no reason to play a fighter? :confused: So rather than play a fighter, you would just rather have all the fighter only stuff be available to other classes so you can play them and have what the fighter does too?

No I'm not saying it's not fair. Are you saying its wrong for me to want a good feat to be available to a better build than a straight fighter can offer? I'm just saying that adding a couple of exclusive feats does not make a fighter a good class, and the designers should know that. And in general terms, other classes can ALREADY do what a fighter does, just to a lesser extent because they have fewer feats.

I already explained the original purpose of PrC's to you; you can confirm it by going back and reading some 3.0 articles on the subject. Pure fighters are supposed to be able to do something that fighter PrC's can't. You're obviously very upset that you have to put up with just taking levels of fighter, because you do want to take Weapon Supremacy. Good, because it's supposed to be a hard choice. You're not supposed to have an easy time choosing between pure fighter for Weapon Supremacy or PrC's for other benefits; you get one or the other, and they're supposed to be equally tempting choices that make you rip out your hair in frustration because you can't have both.

You are correct that I want Weapon Supremacy within reach, but I can guarantee that it isn't a hard choice.

It's is if someone took a small bag of gold and launched onto a sheer rocky plateau.
They would say: "If you want that bag of gold, you can climb that plateau and get it.

Then I would say: "You know damn well I'm not gonna waste my time and jeopardize my well-being by climbing that thing, now I'm just going to miss what I could have had if you hadn't thrown it up there. Now nobody can have it until some desperate ignorant fool comes along, and when/if he gets up there, he'll just be stuck with something that he'll later realize wasn't really worth what he could have had if he hadn't spent all his time climbing that plateau."

I know that was a little convoluted, but I think it sums up my feelings accurately.
MerlintheTuna
07-07-07, 04:09 PM Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case.Cool. Talk to your DM about it. Welcome to why D&D is good.
Daeva
07-07-07, 06:44 PM i dunno i find it hard to think a swashy fighter with daring warrior, or a ninja warrior with martial stalker are that bad of a path to the feat.

or at least better than fihgter 20
Neutronium_Dragon
07-07-07, 07:47 PM > Are you saying its wrong for me to want a good feat to be available to a
> better build than a straight fighter can offer?

Yes.

Especially since, by your own admission, you don't know what else the fighter gets out of the PHB2. He gets a lot, especially once you start synergizing it all.

No, it does not solve all of the problems with the fighter class, but he's very much back in the running with what the book gives him.
Ages_Defiance
07-07-07, 08:21 PM i think a goliath or half giant fighter with a really big hammer is pretty awesome. and with weap suprem you can wield it in a grapple. now i dont know about you but thats enough right there. they dont get their dex and you get a full round of attacks versus their one light weapon, or crush or what have you. raptor school and combat strike or crushing strike are always a good choice. you can make a fighter pretty awesome problem is your standard fighter is obsolete at 5th level, if the player knows what theyre doin itll be more like 12th level. that said i do like fighters.
Yokinobu
07-07-07, 10:19 PM > Are you saying its wrong for me to want a good feat to be available to a
> better build than a straight fighter can offer?

Yes.

Especially since, by your own admission, you don't know what else the fighter gets out of the PHB2. He gets a lot, especially once you start synergizing it all.

No, it does not solve all of the problems with the fighter class, but he's very much back in the running with what the book gives him.

Well, then I suppose since it's apparently wrong for wanting something an apology is in order. Nevermind the fact that I'm not the only one with dissatisfactions about certain rules for sourcebooks, and that I only desire the fighter to be on par with the other classes.

Anyway, I went to Borders and started thumbing through the PHBII. I liked what I saw so I bought it and actually just got back, so I'm about to actually start perusing through it now. This better be good. :smirk:
magmer2
07-07-07, 11:07 PM How would a warblade 20 take it? You don't get a feat at that level.

Your soul is worth 2 feats, and a 5% increase in wealth.
jaelis
07-08-07, 02:12 AM I think that in some cases there are PrCs that are just as good of fighters as fighters. Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case.
Actually, I think the cool way to handle that is to package some of the WS benefits as exotic weapon master tricks.
Neutronium_Dragon
07-08-07, 07:24 AM > Well, then I suppose since it's apparently wrong for wanting something an
> apology is in order. Nevermind the fact that I'm not the only one with
> dissatisfactions about certain rules for sourcebooks, and that I only desire the
> fighter to be on par with the other classes.
>
> Anyway, I went to Borders and started thumbing through the PHBII. I liked
> what I saw so I bought it and actually just got back, so I'm about to actually
> start perusing through it now. This better be good.

It is. He's still no "big four", but the a bit focus of the PHB2 was on things which help the fighter, or at least which help the fighter even more than they help everyone else. He could still do with some more tune-ups, but with the PHB2 available I'd actually started playing fighters again and seeing them in games I run (as more than a two-level dip), which was a pretty major change.
penchant
07-08-07, 12:11 PM You are correct that I want Weapon Supremacy within reach, but I can guarantee that it isn't a hard choice.

It's is if someone took a small bag of gold and launched onto a sheer rocky plateau.
They would say: "If you want that bag of gold, you can climb that plateau and get it.

Then I would say: "You know damn well I'm not gonna waste my time and jeopardize my well-being by climbing that thing, now I'm just going to miss what I could have had if you hadn't thrown it up there. Now nobody can have it until some desperate ignorant fool comes along, and when/if he gets up there, he'll just be stuck with something that he'll later realize wasn't really worth what he could have had if he hadn't spent all his time climbing that plateau."

I know that was a little convoluted, but I think it sums up my feelings accurately.

How big of a bag of gold?

Every splat book thats come out since the Core rules has expanded every other class exclusinvely. Sorc/Wizard spells, Metamagic feats, Wild feats and druid spells, cleric stuff, LOTS of rogue luvin, even monk only stuff. But since the fighter works solely on feats which is a universal mechanic, everyone else can benefit on what was given for the fighter to have and still get their PrC goodies too. Since there are feats and features exclusively for other classes to get, it just make sense that there should be fighter only things as well.
Yokinobu
07-08-07, 07:14 PM Yeah, you're right, the fighter should have something exclusive to itself if the other classes do. It only makes sense, but I guess I'm just kinda frustrated that the fighter gets cool stuff like this but its not enough to put it on par with the other classes. It's like, the designers are trying to help the fighter, they just aren't quite doing enough.
Vaelan
07-08-07, 09:22 PM Weapon Supremacy is a waste of space for one simple reason: it requires you to be level 18. I don't know about you, but I would rather have something that you can use for more than three levels unless you play Epic, in which case you just don't matter anyway.

I'd move it to level 12 and make it a Fighter bonus feat. Then it would be worthwhile.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Yokinobu 07-06-07, 07:16 PM	So I was looking at weapon supremacy, and I thought that the benefits made it a pretty good feat. However, I can't help but think that the pre-reqs are a little steep. Fighter 18th? Come on! They gotta know that there are hardly any good fighter builds that get that far without dipping into more than 2 levels into a PrC. I think it should be BAB +18. Hell, you already need 12 fighter levels just to qualify for all the pre-req feats. Has anyone house ruled this, or can tell me of a build where this feat is actually useful?
Neutronium_Dragon 07-06-07, 07:21 PM	The prerequisite is deliberate. With all of the other fighter abilities that the PHB2 offers - some of the substitution levels become very nasty in combination with PHB2 feats - the intent is to make fighter worth sticking to throughout rather than PrCing at the first possible opportunity.
Steelwill 07-06-07, 07:57 PM	Except that even with requirements that ensure the character must be a fighter, Weapon Supremacy isn't a freaking fighter bonus feat. If you don't take it at 18th, you have to wait until lvl 21 for another regular feat. Has anyone seen if this has been corrected, because it really seems like this was an oversight, not intentional.
Neutronium_Dragon 07-06-07, 08:52 PM	It's probably intentional. Since it isn't a bonus fighter feat, that means that any fighter who has dipped another class will have to wait for 21st to take it rather than getting it at 18th. In that regard, it rewards you for sticking to fighter.
ZiggZagg 07-06-07, 09:01 PM	Sure, I know build that is worth it. Warblade 20:D
Lotus Crane 07-06-07, 09:05 PM	Neutronium Dragon is correct. Most D&D settings assume that 18th level fighters exist in the world (and that they statistically outnumber fighter 8/PrC 10's), and Weapon Supremacy is WotC's recent justification for why that should actually be a plausible situation. 3.0 and especially 3.5 mechanics have totally butchered the original concept of the PrC, which was "specialized expertise at the expense of general abilities," or "different but ultimately equal." Fighter 20 was supposed to be just as powerful as (and far more common than) fighter 10/PrC 10, but until the PHB 2, the actual mechanics of the game didn't support this meta-assumption. Anyway, if you want the power of Weapon Supremacy, be a pure fighter. That's the entire reason it was written in the first place, to make you want to be a pure fighter. Sure, I know build that is worth it. Warblade 20 Yes, that's actually possible too, though if you go that route, there's really not many feats you can afford to take outside of the Weapon Mastery/Supremacy chain, since warblades don't get nearly as many feats as fighters.
ZiggZagg 07-06-07, 09:09 PM	...or a pure Warblade. That build is very very effective and qualifies for the feat in question, albeit 2 levels later.
jaelis 07-06-07, 09:24 PM	How would a warblade 20 take it? You don't get a feat at that level. Anyway, I wouldn't say that having WS not be a fighter bonus feat was necessarily deliberate. There's a whole bunch of feats in the PHBII that really seem like they should be fighter bonus feats but aren't. You might think they were trying to be clever with WS, but what about Bounding Assault, Crushing Strike, Driving Attack, Overwhelming Assault, Rapid Blitz, and Slashing Flurry? I think they just screwed up.
Yokinobu 07-07-07, 06:05 AM	Anyway, if you want the power of Weapon Supremacy, be a pure fighter. That's the entire reason it was written in the first place, to make you want to be a pure fighter. It's not working. Unless you can tell me that the rest of the PHBII contains a multitude of options that makes sticking with the fighter straight through worth it(I don't know I haven't checked out the rest of it), than I'm going to stick with other builds using PrCs, and Weapon Supremacy will just be another feat that people hardly ever take. I think that in some cases there are PrCs that are just as good of fighters as fighters. Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case.
penchant 07-07-07, 08:07 AM	So you are saying that its not fair that the feat is fighter only, because there is no reason to play a fighter? :confused: So rather than play a fighter, you would just rather have all the fighter only stuff be available to other classes so you can play them and have what the fighter does too? Riiiighht. Reasons to play a fighter: Specialization, Greater Spec, Weapon Mastery, Weapon Supremacy, Fighter alternate class features. While some can be had with a few certain PrC's (Pious Templar, Ex) the best way to get really good at a weapon is fighter. I know people are all "warblade" this and "warblade" that but in order for the WB to do what the fighter does, then he must really spend feats on nothing else. The fighter can take some of the warblades abilities as well and has the feats to do it. The reason they allowed the warblade to qualify for fighter feats at +2 level while the fighter qualifies for WB at +5 level is because if they were even, the fighter would quickly dominate. Some argue thats the way it should be, but I don't know. I remeber the class kits in 2nd ed and they truly suxed. The premise was that a kit can't be equal to a regular class so they don't overshadow the core classes. So you traded effectiveness for a few trix and some fluff. That approach did not sell books or make players happy. So this is what we have now. My, Its ramble o'clock, so I'll get to bed now.
Lotus Crane 07-07-07, 10:47 AM	It's not working. Unless you can tell me that the rest of the PHBII contains a multitude of options that makes sticking with the fighter straight through worth it(I don't know I haven't checked out the rest of it), than I'm going to stick with other builds using PrCs, and Weapon Supremacy will just be another feat that people hardly ever take. I think that in some cases there are PrCs that are just as good of fighters as fighters. Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case. I already explained the original purpose of PrC's to you; you can confirm it by going back and reading some 3.0 articles on the subject. Pure fighters are supposed to be able to do something that fighter PrC's can't. You're obviously very upset that you have to put up with just taking levels of fighter, because you do want to take Weapon Supremacy. Good, because it's supposed to be a hard choice. You're not supposed to have an easy time choosing between pure fighter for Weapon Supremacy or PrC's for other benefits; you get one or the other, and they're supposed to be equally tempting choices that make you rip out your hair in frustration because you can't have both. If you want some worthwhile pure fighter builds, you should really go ask around the Character Optimization boards (http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=339), which are all about this sort of thing. There actually are some potent fighter builds which do utilize all 18 feats available to a pure fighter, without any silly redundancies (like taking Weapon Specialization for 2 different weapons, which is really a "benefit" only a newbie would appreciate). Complete Warrior, PHB II, and Races of Stone really help make pure fighters competitive with fighter/PrC builds.
Yokinobu 07-07-07, 04:04 PM	So you are saying that its not fair that the feat is fighter only, because there is no reason to play a fighter? :confused: So rather than play a fighter, you would just rather have all the fighter only stuff be available to other classes so you can play them and have what the fighter does too? No I'm not saying it's not fair. Are you saying its wrong for me to want a good feat to be available to a better build than a straight fighter can offer? I'm just saying that adding a couple of exclusive feats does not make a fighter a good class, and the designers should know that. And in general terms, other classes can ALREADY do what a fighter does, just to a lesser extent because they have fewer feats. I already explained the original purpose of PrC's to you; you can confirm it by going back and reading some 3.0 articles on the subject. Pure fighters are supposed to be able to do something that fighter PrC's can't. You're obviously very upset that you have to put up with just taking levels of fighter, because you do want to take Weapon Supremacy. Good, because it's supposed to be a hard choice. You're not supposed to have an easy time choosing between pure fighter for Weapon Supremacy or PrC's for other benefits; you get one or the other, and they're supposed to be equally tempting choices that make you rip out your hair in frustration because you can't have both. You are correct that I want Weapon Supremacy within reach, but I can guarantee that it isn't a hard choice. It's is if someone took a small bag of gold and launched onto a sheer rocky plateau. They would say: "If you want that bag of gold, you can climb that plateau and get it. Then I would say: "You know damn well I'm not gonna waste my time and jeopardize my well-being by climbing that thing, now I'm just going to miss what I could have had if you hadn't thrown it up there. Now nobody can have it until some desperate ignorant fool comes along, and when/if he gets up there, he'll just be stuck with something that he'll later realize wasn't really worth what he could have had if he hadn't spent all his time climbing that plateau." I know that was a little convoluted, but I think it sums up my feelings accurately.
MerlintheTuna 07-07-07, 04:09 PM	Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case.Cool. Talk to your DM about it. Welcome to why D&D is good.
Daeva 07-07-07, 06:44 PM	i dunno i find it hard to think a swashy fighter with daring warrior, or a ninja warrior with martial stalker are that bad of a path to the feat. or at least better than fihgter 20
Neutronium_Dragon 07-07-07, 07:47 PM	> Are you saying its wrong for me to want a good feat to be available to a > better build than a straight fighter can offer? Yes. Especially since, by your own admission, you don't know what else the fighter gets out of the PHB2. He gets a lot, especially once you start synergizing it all. No, it does not solve all of the problems with the fighter class, but he's very much back in the running with what the book gives him.
Ages_Defiance 07-07-07, 08:21 PM	i think a goliath or half giant fighter with a really big hammer is pretty awesome. and with weap suprem you can wield it in a grapple. now i dont know about you but thats enough right there. they dont get their dex and you get a full round of attacks versus their one light weapon, or crush or what have you. raptor school and combat strike or crushing strike are always a good choice. you can make a fighter pretty awesome problem is your standard fighter is obsolete at 5th level, if the player knows what theyre doin itll be more like 12th level. that said i do like fighters.
Yokinobu 07-07-07, 10:19 PM	> Are you saying its wrong for me to want a good feat to be available to a > better build than a straight fighter can offer? Yes. Especially since, by your own admission, you don't know what else the fighter gets out of the PHB2. He gets a lot, especially once you start synergizing it all. No, it does not solve all of the problems with the fighter class, but he's very much back in the running with what the book gives him. Well, then I suppose since it's apparently wrong for wanting something an apology is in order. Nevermind the fact that I'm not the only one with dissatisfactions about certain rules for sourcebooks, and that I only desire the fighter to be on par with the other classes. Anyway, I went to Borders and started thumbing through the PHBII. I liked what I saw so I bought it and actually just got back, so I'm about to actually start perusing through it now. This better be good. :smirk:
magmer2 07-07-07, 11:07 PM	How would a warblade 20 take it? You don't get a feat at that level. Your soul is worth 2 feats, and a 5% increase in wealth.
jaelis 07-08-07, 02:12 AM	I think that in some cases there are PrCs that are just as good of fighters as fighters. Take the weapon master and exotic weapon master PrC's for example. They specialize in fighting with certain types of weapons, and that is exactly what this feat is about. I can't think of a reason why levels in those classes shouldn't count as fighter levels in this case. Actually, I think the cool way to handle that is to package some of the WS benefits as exotic weapon master tricks.
Neutronium_Dragon 07-08-07, 07:24 AM	> Well, then I suppose since it's apparently wrong for wanting something an > apology is in order. Nevermind the fact that I'm not the only one with > dissatisfactions about certain rules for sourcebooks, and that I only desire the > fighter to be on par with the other classes. > > Anyway, I went to Borders and started thumbing through the PHBII. I liked > what I saw so I bought it and actually just got back, so I'm about to actually > start perusing through it now. This better be good. It is. He's still no "big four", but the a bit focus of the PHB2 was on things which help the fighter, or at least which help the fighter even more than they help everyone else. He could still do with some more tune-ups, but with the PHB2 available I'd actually started playing fighters again and seeing them in games I run (as more than a two-level dip), which was a pretty major change.
penchant 07-08-07, 12:11 PM	You are correct that I want Weapon Supremacy within reach, but I can guarantee that it isn't a hard choice. It's is if someone took a small bag of gold and launched onto a sheer rocky plateau. They would say: "If you want that bag of gold, you can climb that plateau and get it. Then I would say: "You know damn well I'm not gonna waste my time and jeopardize my well-being by climbing that thing, now I'm just going to miss what I could have had if you hadn't thrown it up there. Now nobody can have it until some desperate ignorant fool comes along, and when/if he gets up there, he'll just be stuck with something that he'll later realize wasn't really worth what he could have had if he hadn't spent all his time climbing that plateau." I know that was a little convoluted, but I think it sums up my feelings accurately. How big of a bag of gold? Every splat book thats come out since the Core rules has expanded every other class exclusinvely. Sorc/Wizard spells, Metamagic feats, Wild feats and druid spells, cleric stuff, LOTS of rogue luvin, even monk only stuff. But since the fighter works solely on feats which is a universal mechanic, everyone else can benefit on what was given for the fighter to have and still get their PrC goodies too. Since there are feats and features exclusively for other classes to get, it just make sense that there should be fighter only things as well.
Yokinobu 07-08-07, 07:14 PM	Yeah, you're right, the fighter should have something exclusive to itself if the other classes do. It only makes sense, but I guess I'm just kinda frustrated that the fighter gets cool stuff like this but its not enough to put it on par with the other classes. It's like, the designers are trying to help the fighter, they just aren't quite doing enough.
Vaelan 07-08-07, 09:22 PM	Weapon Supremacy is a waste of space for one simple reason: it requires you to be level 18. I don't know about you, but I would rather have something that you can use for more than three levels unless you play Epic, in which case you just don't matter anyway. I'd move it to level 12 and make it a Fighter bonus feat. Then it would be worthwhile.