Talk:Weapon Focus, Variant (3.5e Feat)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


First level fighters can easily have 18/20 Strength (oh, that takes me back, albeit accidentally). You want them hitting (+15 to hit) and killing (2d6+5) everything they face in one hit? -- Jota 12:48, 6 August 2009 (MDT)

Um, I think this may be a problem with wording, and not balance actually. Cause, honestly, why would anybody think that adding +10 to an attack roll at level one would be balanced? Seems that Mr. Mister just forgot the word 'modifier' → Rith (talk) 14:09, 6 August 2009 (MDT)
Even then, I'm not sure that such a feat would be balanced. The thing that stops meleers from hitting most often isn't AC--a meleer can easily get their attack through the roof. It's all the other things, such as concealment, difficult terrain, mobility, illusions, and more. Getting an extra +2 to hit (assuming 18 str) at level 1 is powerful--far more powerful than just about any other feat for most attacking characters at that level, and at many since it scales to +6 by level 20. But it's also boring. Just another vertical enhancement, making something you already do a little better. Furthermore, it's not like druids can't take this--do we really want them making primary fighters, whose only real advantage is a high BAB (makes them hit more often) even worse in comparison? (Add on Owl's Insight, or whatever that spell is in Spell Compendium. Or a cleric with Righteous Might.) Feats that are powerful (perhaps overpowered) but boring aren't that good IMO *shrug* I also think the feat is unbalanced. --Ghostwheel 14:22, 6 August 2009 (MDT)
Whoops, it should be more easily understood now. This feat's balance has never really been an issue whenever we used it. The fighter already sucks, and the original weapon focus feat doesn't benifit him any more than it would any other character, as it probably should have, in the opinion of our group at the very least. This feat is made to actually give a bigger bonus to characters who have invested in their strength or dexterity score, barbarians, and rogues, than to spellcasters, as they will have invested in their mental ability scores and constitution instead of strength or dexterity. Druids are too powerful either way, and they will win any kind of competion that they have time to prepare for, this feat won't have any effect on them. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Mister (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts.
I'm sort of with Ghostwheel on this one regardless of how it is worded (although obviously less so with the revised wording), but feel free to remove the balance template, as what you have now isn't totally out of the realm of reasonable. Also, please remember to sign your posts (adding four tildes (~) will do the trick, but you can also hit the signature button (second from right at top) above the editing box). -- Jota 10:08, 7 August 2009 (MDT)
Thank you, I'll do that now. (Also, thanks for the tip about the signing posts thing) The Mister 12:55, 9 August 2009 (MDT)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!