Fighters and Weapon Specialization [Archive] - Wizards Community

Fighters and Weapon Specialization [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Bowmore
06-30-07, 04:17 PM So, my group and I are in just about unanimous agreement that the fighter should be tinkered with. I presented this idea to them, and they seemed to like it, so I thought I'd show it to all of you.

Fighters now add half their class level to all weapon damage rolls (melee, ranged, unarmed, etc.) -- they liked this change because it encourages characters to continue to take levels in fighter to boost up that bonus damage and it does a good job of represents the versatility the fighter is supposed to have.

Weapon Specialization now adds +1d6 damage to rolls with that weapon, rather than +2. Greater Weapon Specialization adds an additional +1d6, for a total of +2d6 damage.

Melee and Ranged Weapon Mastery now add an additional +1d6 damage, which stacks with the bonus d6s from Weapon Specialization and its greater version.

With these changes, a fighter who works his way up to one of the Weapon Mastery feats will be dealing +2d6 damage instead of +4.

Feedback is greatly appreciated!
Cheza
06-30-07, 05:02 PM Fighters now add half their class level to all weapon damage rolls (melee, ranged, unarmed, etc.) -- they liked this change because it encourages characters to continue to take levels in fighter to boost up that bonus damage and it does a good job of represents the versatility the fighter is supposed to have.
To each attack??? :eek: This inbalances 2WF vs. 2HF and is a drastic change.

Weapon Specialization now adds +1d6 damage to rolls with that weapon, rather than +2. Greater Weapon Specialization adds an additional +1d6, for a total of +2d6 damage.
If you would use d4, it would be a normal randomization of a fixed value. But weapon specialization is one feat that gives more power to 2WF than to any other fighting style... So if you increase average damage, you know who you will favor. ;)
Bowmore
06-30-07, 05:27 PM To each attack??? :eek: This inbalances 2WF vs. 2HF and is a drastic change.

That damage bonus isn't quite as big as it seems at first glance -- the kicker is that it applies to ALL weapon damage rolls the fighter makes. An 8th level fighter is getting a +4 bonus to damage, and if someone plays a fighter all the way to 20th, then I think they deserve that +10 to damage rolls.

How does a flat bonus to damage imbalance two-weapon fighting versus two-handed fighting? Could you elaborate?

If you would use d4, it would be a normal randomization of a fixed value. But weapon specialization is one feat that gives more power to 2WF than to any other fighting style... So if you increase average damage, you know who you will favor. ;)

But that's the thing -- my group and I all Weapon Specialization just isn't very good. That was why when I suggested increasing the +2 to a +1d6, they agreed. Powering it up like that does give a bigger advantage to two-weapon fighters, but it also gives an advantage to one-handed fighters and sword-and-board fighters, two types that sadly seem to be going extinct. (and no, wielding a weapon two-handed while an animated shield floats in front of you doesn't count as sword-and-board... :mad: )

By powering up Weapon Specialization like that, I'm not necessarily favouring TWF -- I'm just not designing it specifically for 2HF, which would be just as good as it was before.

I know my first reply is basically just defending my position, but I'm also looking for some deeper consequences that these changes will bring about.
shout27
06-30-07, 06:51 PM A truly useful difference would be that a Level 10+ Fighter can ignore the Stat Requirements (ie INT 13, Combat Expertise) that comes attached to Feats, and at Level 17+ can ignore the stat requirements on Epic Feats (Con 25 Fast Healing).

Now, before any says i should walk the plank, think about this a RANGER with 8 DEX can do such a thing already as a CLASS FEATURE. A Paladin while not as obvious needs only 18 CHA, a Headband of +6 CHA, +5 Cloak of Resistance, and Boots of Evasion, to have +15 Fort, +12 REF, +12 Will at level 2. And a Barbarian gets both Rage AND DR at those levels.

It's all well and good to be versatile, but if you can't use that versatility, that versatility is worthless.
Cheza
06-30-07, 07:42 PM How does a flat bonus to damage imbalance two-weapon fighting versus two-handed fighting? Could you elaborate?
If you add this to any damage roll and TWF character has twice as much attacks, he will get twice as much damage rolls. A free +4 damage for a level 8 fighter means that a TWF class will get 3x or 4x that bonus per round if all attacks hit. So I find it unfair in comparison to non-fighters.

BTW: What makes the barbarian too powerful that he doesn't deserve this bonus???

And if you think, +2 damage has no worth, what's about DR 1???
Tomkin
06-30-07, 08:52 PM Well, lots of people think TWF is weaker than THF right now, so it's not necessarily bad.

A fighter fix idea I had recently was to let them retrain - by training for eight hours consecutively, they could change their fighter bonus feats to others for which they met the prerequisites. I also like the ignoring stat requirements, though I would say instead "treat a fighter's stats as 2 times his fighter level for the purpose of taking feats if this would be beneficial". For example, a 7th-level fighter could take Combat Reflexes regardless of Int, while a 10th-level could take Greater TWF even with 8 Dex. These ideas go a long way towards making the fighter the "feat monkey" that he should be.
Ranger REG
06-30-07, 09:16 PM So, my group and I are in just about unanimous agreement that the fighter should be tinkered with. I presented this idea to them, and they seemed to like it, so I thought I'd show it to all of you.

Fighters now add half their class level to all weapon damage rolls (melee, ranged, unarmed, etc.) -- they liked this change because it encourages characters to continue to take levels in fighter to boost up that bonus damage and it does a good job of represents the versatility the fighter is supposed to have.

Weapon Specialization now adds +1d6 damage to rolls with that weapon, rather than +2. Greater Weapon Specialization adds an additional +1d6, for a total of +2d6 damage.

Melee and Ranged Weapon Mastery now add an additional +1d6 damage, which stacks with the bonus d6s from Weapon Specialization and its greater version.

With these changes, a fighter who works his way up to one of the Weapon Mastery feats will be dealing +2d6 damage instead of +4.

Feedback is greatly appreciated!
I'm spoiled by Star Wars Saga Edition, so I prefer all heroic classes (i.e., PCs and maybe some BBEG NPCs) should have a damage bonus progression ... all of them.
Bobson
07-01-07, 03:39 AM To each attack??? :eek: This inbalances 2WF vs. 2HF and is a drastic change.

At the risk of harping on a topic I've already covered at length here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=874856), the +4 attack and +8 damage from taking the full Weapon Focus chain (WF, WS, GWF, GWS, and Melee Weapon Mastery) makes a pretty significant difference in the 2WF vs. 2HF comparison. However, for a pure fighter who has feats to burn, and can take all the TWF feats and all the Weapon Focus feats, it only increases the difference in average damage between the two fighting styles by 9%, which is really insignificant compared to other comparisons I made. Given that 2WF is rather weak now, I have no problem with the weapon focus feats improving it more than they improve 2HF.

As far as this specific idea goes, 1d6 instead of +2 is an average increase of 1.5. On average, this gives 2% more of an advantage to 2WF - practically insignificant.

I say go for it.
Cheza
07-02-07, 07:33 AM At the risk of harping on a topic I've already covered at length here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=874856), the +4 attack and +8 damage from taking the full Weapon Focus chain (WF, WS, GWF, GWS, and Melee Weapon Mastery) makes a pretty significant difference in the 2WF vs. 2HF comparison. However, for a pure fighter who has feats to burn, and can take all the TWF feats and all the Weapon Focus feats, it only increases the difference in average damage between the two fighting styles by 9%, which is really insignificant compared to other comparisons I made. Given that 2WF is rather weak now, I have no problem with the weapon focus feats improving it more than they improve 2HF.

As far as this specific idea goes, 1d6 instead of +2 is an average increase of 1.5. On average, this gives 2% more of an advantage to 2WF - practically insignificant.

I say go for it.
The statement "drastic change" wasn't about WS +1d6 instead of +2. It was about +1/2 class levels to damage for fighters. So I think, if a fighters gets a +10 Bonus on each damage roll @ lvl 20, it IS unbalanced.
Bobson
07-02-07, 12:44 PM The statement "drastic change" wasn't about WS +1d6 instead of +2. It was about +1/2 class levels to damage for fighters. So I think, if a fighters gets a +10 Bonus on each damage roll @ lvl 20, it IS unbalanced.

Ooh, I missed that. It would favor TWF more than 2HF, yes. Better to make it class level bonus to strength for purposes of damage rolls. That works out to the same benefit for 2H, and doesn't overpower with TWF.
The Livewire
07-06-07, 07:47 AM Well another option would be to allow X1.5 for two handed, so 15 points at level 20. but it seems to me you're still leaving the one handed and sword and board fighters behind. Maybe a style specialization instead? Give each style advantages.
Neutronium_Dragon
07-06-07, 05:57 PM One potentially annoying side-effect of replacing the flat +2 with a +1d6 is that it will no longer be multiplied on a critical. This will impact the desirability of high threat/high-multiplier weapons for a fighter, since they're no longer getting as much mileage out of those weapons.
Xorial
07-08-07, 02:18 PM Complaining that a fighter with 2wf deals twice the damage with this option doesnt make sense. The rogue with 2wf that gets sneak attack gets his bonus damage on every attack. That has the potential to be even higher. SOOOO, I dont buy the argument.
theotherdraxen
07-08-07, 04:01 PM Nice changed, but fighters already do plenty of damage. Giving them more damage, especially a bonus as small as +10/+2d6, isn't going to help them at all.

Take a look at Tome of Battle; you'll notice that none of the damaging effect there outstrip what a fighter or barbarian can already do. What they do instead is add other effects (stunning, paralysis, granting extra actions, healing, ect.). Also, they deal full-attack equivalent damage as standard actions, letting them increase their mobility and thus tank better.
claypigeons
07-08-07, 06:49 PM Complaining that a fighter with 2wf deals twice the damage with this option doesnt make sense. The rogue with 2wf that gets sneak attack gets his bonus damage on every attack. That has the potential to be even higher. SOOOO, I dont buy the argument.

With this variant, fighters can compete with rogues for TWF (and rock the house against crit immune baddies, compared to a rogue). It also makes the TWF fighter more than a reliable way to land hits with the Wounding property... Now you can lower their Con AND deal decent damage. Double the effectiveness.

full-attack equivalent damage

...full-attack competitive damage...
Barbarians still beat them because of rage. But the difference in damage is offset by the ability to move and do something other than damage (as you said... stun, heal, etc.).

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bowmore 06-30-07, 04:17 PM	So, my group and I are in just about unanimous agreement that the fighter should be tinkered with. I presented this idea to them, and they seemed to like it, so I thought I'd show it to all of you. Fighters now add half their class level to all weapon damage rolls (melee, ranged, unarmed, etc.) -- they liked this change because it encourages characters to continue to take levels in fighter to boost up that bonus damage and it does a good job of represents the versatility the fighter is supposed to have. Weapon Specialization now adds +1d6 damage to rolls with that weapon, rather than +2. Greater Weapon Specialization adds an additional +1d6, for a total of +2d6 damage. Melee and Ranged Weapon Mastery now add an additional +1d6 damage, which stacks with the bonus d6s from Weapon Specialization and its greater version. With these changes, a fighter who works his way up to one of the Weapon Mastery feats will be dealing +2d6 damage instead of +4. Feedback is greatly appreciated!
Cheza 06-30-07, 05:02 PM	Fighters now add half their class level to all weapon damage rolls (melee, ranged, unarmed, etc.) -- they liked this change because it encourages characters to continue to take levels in fighter to boost up that bonus damage and it does a good job of represents the versatility the fighter is supposed to have. To each attack??? :eek: This inbalances 2WF vs. 2HF and is a drastic change. Weapon Specialization now adds +1d6 damage to rolls with that weapon, rather than +2. Greater Weapon Specialization adds an additional +1d6, for a total of +2d6 damage. If you would use d4, it would be a normal randomization of a fixed value. But weapon specialization is one feat that gives more power to 2WF than to any other fighting style... So if you increase average damage, you know who you will favor. ;)
Bowmore 06-30-07, 05:27 PM	To each attack??? :eek: This inbalances 2WF vs. 2HF and is a drastic change. That damage bonus isn't quite as big as it seems at first glance -- the kicker is that it applies to ALL weapon damage rolls the fighter makes. An 8th level fighter is getting a +4 bonus to damage, and if someone plays a fighter all the way to 20th, then I think they deserve that +10 to damage rolls. How does a flat bonus to damage imbalance two-weapon fighting versus two-handed fighting? Could you elaborate? If you would use d4, it would be a normal randomization of a fixed value. But weapon specialization is one feat that gives more power to 2WF than to any other fighting style... So if you increase average damage, you know who you will favor. ;) But that's the thing -- my group and I all Weapon Specialization just isn't very good. That was why when I suggested increasing the +2 to a +1d6, they agreed. Powering it up like that does give a bigger advantage to two-weapon fighters, but it also gives an advantage to one-handed fighters and sword-and-board fighters, two types that sadly seem to be going extinct. (and no, wielding a weapon two-handed while an animated shield floats in front of you doesn't count as sword-and-board... :mad: ) By powering up Weapon Specialization like that, I'm not necessarily favouring TWF -- I'm just not designing it specifically for 2HF, which would be just as good as it was before. I know my first reply is basically just defending my position, but I'm also looking for some deeper consequences that these changes will bring about.
shout27 06-30-07, 06:51 PM	A truly useful difference would be that a Level 10+ Fighter can ignore the Stat Requirements (ie INT 13, Combat Expertise) that comes attached to Feats, and at Level 17+ can ignore the stat requirements on Epic Feats (Con 25 Fast Healing). Now, before any says i should walk the plank, think about this a RANGER with 8 DEX can do such a thing already as a CLASS FEATURE. A Paladin while not as obvious needs only 18 CHA, a Headband of +6 CHA, +5 Cloak of Resistance, and Boots of Evasion, to have +15 Fort, +12 REF, +12 Will at level 2. And a Barbarian gets both Rage AND DR at those levels. It's all well and good to be versatile, but if you can't use that versatility, that versatility is worthless.
Cheza 06-30-07, 07:42 PM	How does a flat bonus to damage imbalance two-weapon fighting versus two-handed fighting? Could you elaborate? If you add this to any damage roll and TWF character has twice as much attacks, he will get twice as much damage rolls. A free +4 damage for a level 8 fighter means that a TWF class will get 3x or 4x that bonus per round if all attacks hit. So I find it unfair in comparison to non-fighters. BTW: What makes the barbarian too powerful that he doesn't deserve this bonus??? And if you think, +2 damage has no worth, what's about DR 1???
Tomkin 06-30-07, 08:52 PM	Well, lots of people think TWF is weaker than THF right now, so it's not necessarily bad. A fighter fix idea I had recently was to let them retrain - by training for eight hours consecutively, they could change their fighter bonus feats to others for which they met the prerequisites. I also like the ignoring stat requirements, though I would say instead "treat a fighter's stats as 2 times his fighter level for the purpose of taking feats if this would be beneficial". For example, a 7th-level fighter could take Combat Reflexes regardless of Int, while a 10th-level could take Greater TWF even with 8 Dex. These ideas go a long way towards making the fighter the "feat monkey" that he should be.
Ranger REG 06-30-07, 09:16 PM	So, my group and I are in just about unanimous agreement that the fighter should be tinkered with. I presented this idea to them, and they seemed to like it, so I thought I'd show it to all of you. Fighters now add half their class level to all weapon damage rolls (melee, ranged, unarmed, etc.) -- they liked this change because it encourages characters to continue to take levels in fighter to boost up that bonus damage and it does a good job of represents the versatility the fighter is supposed to have. Weapon Specialization now adds +1d6 damage to rolls with that weapon, rather than +2. Greater Weapon Specialization adds an additional +1d6, for a total of +2d6 damage. Melee and Ranged Weapon Mastery now add an additional +1d6 damage, which stacks with the bonus d6s from Weapon Specialization and its greater version. With these changes, a fighter who works his way up to one of the Weapon Mastery feats will be dealing +2d6 damage instead of +4. Feedback is greatly appreciated! I'm spoiled by Star Wars Saga Edition, so I prefer all heroic classes (i.e., PCs and maybe some BBEG NPCs) should have a damage bonus progression ... all of them.
Bobson 07-01-07, 03:39 AM	To each attack??? :eek: This inbalances 2WF vs. 2HF and is a drastic change. At the risk of harping on a topic I've already covered at length here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=874856), the +4 attack and +8 damage from taking the full Weapon Focus chain (WF, WS, GWF, GWS, and Melee Weapon Mastery) makes a pretty significant difference in the 2WF vs. 2HF comparison. However, for a pure fighter who has feats to burn, and can take all the TWF feats and all the Weapon Focus feats, it only increases the difference in average damage between the two fighting styles by 9%, which is really insignificant compared to other comparisons I made. Given that 2WF is rather weak now, I have no problem with the weapon focus feats improving it more than they improve 2HF. As far as this specific idea goes, 1d6 instead of +2 is an average increase of 1.5. On average, this gives 2% more of an advantage to 2WF - practically insignificant. I say go for it.
Cheza 07-02-07, 07:33 AM	At the risk of harping on a topic I've already covered at length here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=874856), the +4 attack and +8 damage from taking the full Weapon Focus chain (WF, WS, GWF, GWS, and Melee Weapon Mastery) makes a pretty significant difference in the 2WF vs. 2HF comparison. However, for a pure fighter who has feats to burn, and can take all the TWF feats and all the Weapon Focus feats, it only increases the difference in average damage between the two fighting styles by 9%, which is really insignificant compared to other comparisons I made. Given that 2WF is rather weak now, I have no problem with the weapon focus feats improving it more than they improve 2HF. As far as this specific idea goes, 1d6 instead of +2 is an average increase of 1.5. On average, this gives 2% more of an advantage to 2WF - practically insignificant. I say go for it. The statement "drastic change" wasn't about WS +1d6 instead of +2. It was about +1/2 class levels to damage for fighters. So I think, if a fighters gets a +10 Bonus on each damage roll @ lvl 20, it IS unbalanced.
Bobson 07-02-07, 12:44 PM	The statement "drastic change" wasn't about WS +1d6 instead of +2. It was about +1/2 class levels to damage for fighters. So I think, if a fighters gets a +10 Bonus on each damage roll @ lvl 20, it IS unbalanced. Ooh, I missed that. It would favor TWF more than 2HF, yes. Better to make it class level bonus to strength for purposes of damage rolls. That works out to the same benefit for 2H, and doesn't overpower with TWF.
The Livewire 07-06-07, 07:47 AM	Well another option would be to allow X1.5 for two handed, so 15 points at level 20. but it seems to me you're still leaving the one handed and sword and board fighters behind. Maybe a style specialization instead? Give each style advantages.
Neutronium_Dragon 07-06-07, 05:57 PM	One potentially annoying side-effect of replacing the flat +2 with a +1d6 is that it will no longer be multiplied on a critical. This will impact the desirability of high threat/high-multiplier weapons for a fighter, since they're no longer getting as much mileage out of those weapons.
Xorial 07-08-07, 02:18 PM	Complaining that a fighter with 2wf deals twice the damage with this option doesnt make sense. The rogue with 2wf that gets sneak attack gets his bonus damage on every attack. That has the potential to be even higher. SOOOO, I dont buy the argument.
theotherdraxen 07-08-07, 04:01 PM	Nice changed, but fighters already do plenty of damage. Giving them more damage, especially a bonus as small as +10/+2d6, isn't going to help them at all. Take a look at Tome of Battle; you'll notice that none of the damaging effect there outstrip what a fighter or barbarian can already do. What they do instead is add other effects (stunning, paralysis, granting extra actions, healing, ect.). Also, they deal full-attack equivalent damage as standard actions, letting them increase their mobility and thus tank better.
claypigeons 07-08-07, 06:49 PM	Complaining that a fighter with 2wf deals twice the damage with this option doesnt make sense. The rogue with 2wf that gets sneak attack gets his bonus damage on every attack. That has the potential to be even higher. SOOOO, I dont buy the argument. With this variant, fighters can compete with rogues for TWF (and rock the house against crit immune baddies, compared to a rogue). It also makes the TWF fighter more than a reliable way to land hits with the Wounding property... Now you can lower their Con AND deal decent damage. Double the effectiveness. full-attack equivalent damage ...full-attack competitive damage... Barbarians still beat them because of rage. But the difference in damage is offset by the ability to move and do something other than damage (as you said... stun, heal, etc.).