[3.5] Why is Cleave suboptimal?

[Thurbane]

Hey, just a question that has been nagging at me.

On the boards, I often see people saying Cleave isn't a worthwhile feat, it will rarely ever come into play etc.

Now admittedly our group is generally pretty low-op, but every time a character has taken Cleave in our games, there's rarely a session where it doesn't come into play at least once. A free attack is a free attack, right? And it's not like Power Attack (req feat) isn't virtually a must have have all melee types already?

Maybe I'm missing something?

Cheers - T

[eggynack]

It's an alright feat. It's just not as good as the other major options, like shock trooper, or the improved trip/combat reflexes line. It's really the later feats in the cleave line that get flak, because the situation where you're surrounded by easily murdered opponents isn't exactly the hardest situation in the world to deal with.

[Necroticplague]

I haven't really heard too many bad things about cleave. Great Cleave, yes (because typically if it comes into play, it's only against enemies so weak at to barely be a threat), but not Cleave. Of course, while it does come up on a relatively common basis, the problem is that you can't guarantee to get the attack when you need it. The fact that you have to rely on another condition to get your extra attack is why it isn't as good as something you have more control over, like snap kick. If enemies aren't dropping (because they prefer to run away when near such), its useless. The problems are that it's situational, as opposed to reliable.

[137beth]

If the allowed books are fairly strictly limited, I think Cleave can be a decent feat. It has its place in a core-only build, but it is never going to compete with things like Martial Study. It certainly isn't one of the best out there for a melee character, because it is situational. Most martial builds are fairly feat starved, though, due to the way prerequisites work out. It also doesn't lead anywhere good: there are an awful lot of feat chains in the game, and taking Cleave slows down your progress in feat chains. Unfortunately, the feats for which Cleave is a prerequisite are fairly poor.

[Aquillion]

The problem is that it's just unlikely to go off often enough, and doesn't do enough to make up for those rare activations.

How many opponents do you usually fight at once? Cleave will, at the absolute most, go off one less time than the number of enemies in the fight; and in my experience, most of the really hard fights have a few tough enemies rather than hordes of chaff. On top of this, one of those potential extra attacks is wasted every time an ally kills something, or when you kill an enemy with nobody else nearby to attack; and you generally don't want to position yourself with multiple adjacent enemies if you can avoid it -- if you are being swarmed with enemies, you would probably be better off trying to retreat so you only have to fight one of them at a time.

Finally, as a general rule -- once you've started killing enemies, the fight is probably already going your way, so Cleave is a bit of a "win more" feat. A strategy that helps you early on is much more useful than something that helps you win more when you're already killing people.

Outside of the occasional not-that-hard battle against a mindless swarm of chaff, you might get one or two extra hits with it over the course of an entire fight. It's not completely terrible, but there are much better things you can spend your feats on.

[TheOOB]

Cleave is alright, in many combats it will get you an extra 2 or 3 attacks, but in some combats it will get you none. If you have a lot of spare feats, it's worth taking.

[Angelalex242]

It's a pity great cleave doesn't stack with whirlwind anymore. The Fighter standing in the middle of a bunch of bad guys and spinning like a top to kill them all was kinda funny.

Head Bad Guy:Alright, my 7 loyal minions, surround this guy and let's kill him!
Fighter:Whirlwind! Kill mook one, cleave into HBG, kill mook two, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 3, great cleave again into HBG, kill mook 4, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 5, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 6, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 7, great cleave into HBG, finally, take your standard whirlwind attack at HBG.

You've managed to hit him 8 times at your full BAB thanks to his mooks standing around dying.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Typically it's just not used often enough to be worth taking. You have to be threatening more than one opponent and kill an opponent to be able to use it.

If you're fighting one strong opponent, you won't get to use it. If your opponents are spread out, you won't get to use it.

It encourages getting into melee with multiple opponents at once, which is not a good thing. You're setting yourself up to receive an unnecessary number of attacks, just so you have a chance of gaining one additional attack each round.

Generally speaking, there are many, many better choices out there.

[Phelix-Mu]

On the other hand, if the DM wants to challenge someone with Cleave while not totally ignoring their fighting style, it's quite easy to send slightly to extremely oversized groups of CR-appropriate challenges at the party, knowing that the Cleave-guy likes to be in the midst of heavy melee and make the most of extra attacks.

At least that's what I do. If I know/believe that the fighter-type can handle the heat, I pour it on and let the fighter bask in the glory of what he can do well; endless murderface at high speed is a fine art that we shouldn't deny to those that invest in it.

Then again, I remember the 2e bit of optional rule that said that you could attack a number of sufficiently peon-ish enemies each round equal to your HD or something insane like that. Really sped up mass combat with goblins at high level, while creating a narrative scale to the battle, as pretty much any hit was an instant kill, so just roll a handful of d20s, count the hits, and describe how you elaborately dismembered/decapitated/eviscerated that many goblins/kobolds/whatever. Not that Kill Bill-esque encounters are everything. But they certainly are something.:smallsmile:

[Spore]

Cleave is the epitomy of "meh" in feat terms. It barely pulls its cost of one feat. You don't ruin a build with it and you would certainly take it for free/as class feature but other than that PF Cleave could (and should) be substituted. It activates when you successfully hit someone (not down) but you can use the 2. attack only on another creature.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Steel Wind is a first level Iron Heart maneuver in ToB. It lets you attack two targets with one attack, whether or not you hit on the first attack. Once you get higher level and no longer need to do two attacks in a standard action, you can swap out the maneuver, or just not ready it. Pathfinder cleave is like Steel Wind, but at will, not as good per application, and much harder to swap out. I'd actually rather have 3.5 cleave, which at least can be used during a full attack. Hell, I'd rather have something like 4e's cleave, where you deal automatic (but lesser) damage to a nearby foe.

Also, 3.5 cleave actually gets much better if you're using standard melee optimization tricks (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?127026-3-X-Person-Man-s-Guide-to-Melee-Combos). If you're large and use a reach weapon, you're more likely to have another foe in reach if you drop the one you're currently attacking. If you do lots of damage, you're more likely to be dropping enemies with your attacks.

[ericgrau]

Probably the assumption that you can only one shot foes at low level. But actually I've noticed it takes 2-1/2 rounds to fell a foe, and 1 round with ubercharger tricks. So that's still a free attack once or more per fight, which is nice. I do wonder why more ubercharger builds don't automatically include cleave and maybe even great cleave. Add in a reach weapon and go to town.

Great cleave does suffer from diminishing returns because your chances of facing 3+ foes are less than your chances of facing 2 foes, and your cleave attack is unlikely to 1 shot a foe if you even hit.

[sideswipe]

i can see it being very useful on an uber charger. just cleave or with great cleave.

take travel devotion.

charge in to the group of enemies.

attack, for a few hundred damage. kill no.1
cleave into next and next and the next until you run out of enemies.
activate as a swift (so free action once a round) and move up to your full movement into another few enemies or the boss of the encounter and then repeat/ rest of your attacks.

[Feint's End]

i can see it being very useful on an uber charger. just cleave or with great cleave.

take travel devotion.

charge in to the group of enemies.

attack, for a few hundred damage. kill no.1
cleave into next and next and the next until you run out of enemies.
activate as a swift (so free action once a round) and move up to your full movement into another few enemies or the boss of the encounter and then repeat/ rest of your attacks.

>Use build above
>Combine with Warmind 5 with sweeping strike for extra fun
>Wear a helmet to prepare for books flying your way

[Gwendol]

It is not sub-optimal. There are few feats that grant an extra attack without a penalty to hit. As usual though, it pays off to think a little how best to make use of it. As others have noted, getting reach will increase your threatened area and also the likelihood of another enemy to hit. Being able to hit hard will increase the frequency of the feat to trigger, so chargers will typically do well. Also, martial adepts should consider cleave.

Finally, for melee fighters the game gives so very few opportunities to hit several enemies in a round. Why not take those given?

[Adverb]

I've found that at low levels, if you're playing a high-strength THF fighter, Cleave is the single best feat around.

[HunterOfJello]

Pros:
Free attack during a fight

Cons:
Must be the person to have the killing blow on the enemy
Must be standing within melee range of another enemy
Maintains any penalties or bonuses accrued during the round to attack and damage (Power Attack, Two Weapon Fighting, etc.)


~~~~~~~~~

Overall the feat becomes overly situational. There are better methods of gaining extra attacks out there and better feats that a melee character (especially non-Fighters) can be investing in.

[Techwarrior]

I've found that at low levels, if you're playing a high-strength THF fighter, Cleave is the single best feat around.

THF Rogues get pretty amazing use out of it at low levels as well, even if that's not always the best way to build a Rogue.

[Snowbluff]

Basic rules.

If you're outnumbered, your enemies suck.

You can already hit multiple targets if you have multiple attacks.

[Phelix-Mu]

Basic rules.

If you're outnumbered, your enemies suck.

You can already hit multiple targets if you have multiple attacks.
Emphasis mine.

While I think the bolded is generally true, some DMs (like me) like to regularly push the envelop on encounter sizes, going with what is logical in-world as opposed to what the EL calculator pumps out. I like to eyeball challenges and go with gut feeling about just how many enemies can bring the party close to withdrawing/dying without that being unavoidable by bravery/tactics/self-sacrifice/role play. My players don't mind me gunning for them and putting the proverbial fear of death into their characters; as a veteran of 2e, that's much more the gaming style that I was raised on, so I have a good feel for just when to lay off the accelerator.

So, while generally more enemies drops their CR substantially, this is not even necessarily mostly the case. There are many methods for running, and for fighting, combats, so generalizing is hard when we consider actual gameplay, as opposed to what the EL charts indicate.

Plus, as I mentioned before, if my player invests in being a mob-slaying frontliner, I will indulge him/her at every opportunity (even to that character's occasional detriment, as it is supposed to be a high-risk tactic).

[aleucard]

To summarize, Cleave isn't a good feat for several reasons.

1, you need to be either flanked or 1 5-ft. step away from it in order to use it without a reach weapon.

2, you need to either have at least 1 of the targets be nearly dead already or be able to otherwise kill at least 1 of them in a single hit that's valid for this use.

3, you need to have at least 2 targets in melee range in order to do anything.

What this ends up meaning is that the only practical uses for this are the newbie-levels where several weapons are capable of killing basically anyone in a single hit even without Strength modifiers, when you're on after-action cleanup where few if any of the valid targets are in any position to be threatening, and when you're fighting goon swarms that individually you wouldn't even get exp for squishing, but have a high tendency towards bunching up around you. All of these save the first are situations where either nothing is really threatening or the only threatening thing is attrition (in which case, you probably have better things to do than be a living blender). The Pathfinder version of the feat is much better for normal use, obviously. Really, the only possible use for 3.5 Cleave I can think of is if you talk with your DM about alternative meanings of 'drop', such as Knockback or Trip. That can get cheesy quickly, though, so practice caution.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Again, PF Cleave is worse.

PF Cleave requires a standard action to activate and still only provides a benefit on a hit. That means you can't full attack with it, you can't charge with it, and you can't even use stuff like Vital Strike with it. You can full attack with 3.5 cleave. That means once your full attack is relevant, which can be as early as level 1, PF Cleave becomes a seldom used waste, while 3.5 cleave still provides a no-action benefit.

[aleucard]

Again, PF Cleave is worse.

PF Cleave requires a standard action to activate and still only provides a benefit on a hit. That means you can't full attack with it, you can't charge with it, and you can't even use stuff like Vital Strike with it. You can full attack with 3.5 cleave. That means once your full attack is relevant, which can be as early as level 1, PF Cleave becomes a seldom used waste, while 3.5 cleave still provides a no-action benefit.

Alright, so it's a tossup. 3.5 Cleave still has the problems I mentioned, though. You have much better crap to do with your feats than something that on the few occasions where it's helpful, the vast majority is either in cleanup (where it only saves you a round or two of already-foregone conclusions) or when fighting Zerg Swarms (where you are probably best served by NOT standing there like an idiot trying to become one with your inner blender). If your DM has to tailor-make his encounters to your toon so you are relevant, then you are not doing it right.

[Gemini476]

Emphasis mine.

While I think the bolded is generally true, some DMs (like me) like to regularly push the envelop on encounter sizes, going with what is logical in-world as opposed to what the EL calculator pumps out. I like to eyeball challenges and go with gut feeling about just how many enemies can bring the party close to withdrawing/dying without that being unavoidable by bravery/tactics/self-sacrifice/role play. My players don't mind me gunning for them and putting the proverbial fear of death into their characters; as a veteran of 2e, that's much more the gaming style that I was raised on, so I have a good feel for just when to lay off the accelerator.

So, while generally more enemies drops their CR substantially, this is not even necessarily mostly the case. There are many methods for running, and for fighting, combats, so generalizing is hard when we consider actual gameplay, as opposed to what the EL charts indicate.

Plus, as I mentioned before, if my player invests in being a mob-slaying frontliner, I will indulge him/her at every opportunity (even to that character's occasional detriment, as it is supposed to be a high-risk tactic).

Have you seen what kind of encounters 3.5 puts in the monster manual?
I mean, let me take Centaurs as an example:

Organization: Solitary, company (5-8), troop (8-18 plus 1 leader of 2nd-5th level), or tribe (20-150 plus 30% noncombatants plus 10 3rd-level sergeants, 5 5th-level lieutenants, and 1 leader of 5th-9th level)
See that tribe? I haven't checked what dice work out to that spread, but that means an average of 85 CR 3 dudes, 10 CR 6, 5 CR 8, and 1 Cr 10 centaur.
EL increases by +2 for every doubling of the amount - so if we collapse them that's 1 CR 15 (+1 CR 11, +1 CR 5, +1 CR 3), 1 CR 12 (+1 CR 8), 1 CR 12 (+1 CR 8), 1 CR 10. Collapse that further for 1 CR 15, 1 CR 14, 1 CR 12, 1 CR 11, 1 CR 5, 1 CR 3.
DMG p.49 gives more information on CR, so that's something like CR15+CR12=CR16, CR14+CR11=CR15. CR15+CR16=CR17, probably.

So that centaur tribe is something like EL 17, although the math really breaks down with such large numbers. It's also presumably in EL15 random encounter tables for temperate forests, which is kind of crazy.
However, it's also something where the Fighter can honestly just Great Cleave their way to genocide through the eighty-five AC14/26hp Centaurs.

I'm not certain that this is in any way intended, but the inferred setting looks pretty damn crazy to me. Assuming that you go with the more organic worldbuilding than tailored one, that is. I'm currently working on sorting through and making some big encounter tables for the various biomes and wow. There sure are a lot of critters with numbers listed in the tens and hundreds.
Like, really. Here are some goblins.

Organization: Gang (4-9), band (10-100 plus 100% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults and 1 leader of 4th-6th level), warband (10-24 with worg mounts), or tribe (40-400 plus 100% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults, 1 or 2 lieutenants of 4th or 5th level, 1 leader of 6th-8th level, 10-24 worgs, and 2-4 dire wolves)

[Phelix-Mu]

What I meant by "logical in-world" was something more like having six godslayers of Tiamat (with extra HD and custom, non-crappy feat selection) guard the entrance to a major plot objective. Because six of them means they can break down into two groups of three each, one for pursuing any problems that crop up, and the other to maintain guard while the others chase down whatever. That's what I mean by "logical." Screw the CRs and ELs; as has been pointed out many times on this and other forums, the math they have can't be extrapolated, and really doesn't even hold up in the restricted sense in which they show it (mainly because they assume a very, very low baseline of char op).

So, when it turns out that six godslayers is a crazy metric tonne of whopass, even for a ECL 16-18 party, well, that's not such a big deal; the stonechild fighter/elemental warrior has proven to be quite the damage dealer, as well as being able to soak more than a few hits. Here's an opportunity for the group to stress-test their tactics and ability to cooperate, even properly judging when to withdraw if things don't go well. I marked up their xp awards appropriately when they managed to kill most of them and drive the others away from their guardpost, since death had been quite close, and significant resources were expended.

He did get to cleave a couple times, but godslayers have insane reach, so not as many times as he normally would have been able to (they kept using Awesome Blow and such to knock him away from positions where he could hit more than one).

[chaos_redefined]

In magic: the gathering, there are a kind of card called "win-more". They do awesome things when you are already ahead, but if you're behind, they are pretty useless.

Cleave is similar. It is only useful when you have taken the lead, and before that, it literally does nothing. In comparison, other feats help me out all the time, even when I'm losing.

If you think Cleave is a worthwhile feat, then ask yourself the following:
1) How often do your attacks drop an enemy, per combat, and there is another enemy who you could hit? (i.e. how often would cleave come up?)
2) How often per combat do you miss on an attack roll by 1? (i.e. how often would weapon focus come up?)
If your answer to #2 is larger than your answer to #1, then Weapon Focus is a better feat for you. And weapon focus is a pretty crappy feat.

[Killer Angel]

Regardin the issue about "targets in melee range", if you have a weapon with reach, at least that problem is somehow mitigated.
For the feat to be worthwhile, IMO you should threaten 3 squares.

[ericgrau]

There are exceptions but I'd say in general you get the free PF cleave attack more often than the 3.5 cleave attack. They can't all be full attacks. Well, not without pounce. With pounce then I'd want 3.5 cleave.

Are there any ubercharger builds out there that combine with a ridiculous reach build and great cleave? That sounds like it could be "do I have 10 feet of run way?" Ok, boom, everything dies.

[Gwendol]

If you think Cleave is a worthwhile feat, then ask yourself the following:
1) How often do your attacks drop an enemy, per combat, and there is another enemy who you could hit? (i.e. how often would cleave come up?)
2) How often per combat do you miss on an attack roll by 1? (i.e. how often would weapon focus come up?)
If your answer to #2 is larger than your answer to #1, then Weapon Focus is a better feat for you. And weapon focus is a pretty crappy feat.

Cleave is a feat best used for someone who focuses on melee combat, thus:
1) Every combat, on average, and likely more than once (unless we're talking about 1-3 enemies only)
2) Not often, and even so it is questionable if that would make Weapon Focus the better feat.

Great Cleave on the other hand is not a useful feat, and is likely best used for NPC's (with DM fiat).

[Psyren]

Again, PF Cleave is worse.

PF Cleave requires a standard action to activate and still only provides a benefit on a hit. That means you can't full attack with it, you can't charge with it, and you can't even use stuff like Vital Strike with it. You can full attack with 3.5 cleave. That means once your full attack is relevant, which can be as early as level 1, PF Cleave becomes a seldom used waste, while 3.5 cleave still provides a no-action benefit.

On the other hand, PF Cleave lets you hit a second target continuously throughout the combat instead of needing your first one to be at death's door already. You can cleave every round, instead of only on the round that drops the primary target. Siimilarly, PF Great Cleave is usable any time you're surrounded, even vs. foes that aren't weak enough to crumple in one blow.

[Snowbluff]

On the other hand, PF Cleave lets you hit a second target continuously throughout the combat instead of needing your first one to be at death's door already. You can cleave every round, instead of only on the round that drops the primary target. Siimilarly, PF Great Cleave is usable any time you're surrounded, even vs. foes that aren't weak enough to crumple in one blow.

When you have more than 1 attack, you should be abiding by proper strategy and limiting your opponents option's. For a melee character, that means killing one of the 3 guys rather than dealing damage to all 3.

[Psyren]

When you have more than 1 attack, you should be abiding by proper strategy and limiting your opponents option's. For a melee character, that means killing one of the 3 guys rather than dealing damage to all 3.

I agree - but you may not be in a position to full attack, and Cleave is usable long before you get multiple attacks anyways. So this advice, while good, may not apply. In addition, iteratives may be wasted if you're fighting enemies whose AC is so high that the secondary/tertiary attacks would only hit on a 20.

One use for it is to get multiple attacks prior to obtaining +6 BAB, and then retrain it after that.

[Eldariel]

PF Cleave is pretty nice for the first 5 levels and eminently retrainable thereafter.

[Darth Paul]

If your answer to #2 is larger than your answer to #1, then Weapon Focus is a better feat for you. And weapon focus is a pretty crappy feat.

Since when is a feat that improves my hit chance by 5% on every swing "crappy"?

My most successful fighter ever (and by "successful" I mean "long-lived") started off with Weapon Focus (Dwarven Waraxe) at first level to go along with the Exotic proficiency (yeah, dwarf fighter), took Power Attack and Cleave ASAP in the feat progression, and picked up Great Cleave after that. The stubby little bastard was unstoppable.

Cleave is perfectly useful, but you have to use it right and actively seek out the situations to use it in. You also have to have a party to work together, as I did- a wizard to Magic Missile and an archer who could Precise Shot into the melee and soften up the targets a little so that the axe would then one-hit every time and cleave on through the ranks; another fighter working with me, flanking and Great Cleaving from the opposite direction (a rogue Sneak Attacking once in a while didn't hurt either); the both of us eliminating the mooks so that our wizard and cleric could save their high-potency spells for the Big Bad instead of wasting them on the foot troops that fighters are intended by nature to take out. It even works against the higher HD enemies as you get magic weapons and STR enhancements. And Great Cleaving Hydra heads is an experience to remember.

So, I think Cleave is just fine and dandy. Cleave on, dude.

[Aquillion]

While I think the bolded is generally true, some DMs (like me) like to regularly push the envelop on encounter sizes, going with what is logical in-world as opposed to what the EL calculator pumps out.But if you're going to send hordes of high-CR opponents against the PCs, standing and fighting them many-at-a-time is generally suicidal (you implied that you often had to fudge the rules to keep your frontline fighters alive, say, which isn't so surprising.)

In that case, Cleave is still a bad feat, because you what you want is some way of reducing the threat of those large numbers (by, say, forcing them to attack you one at a time, or incapacitating them with trip attempts.) A handful of extra attacks scattered over the entire combat (and worse, generally only late in the combat, when everything is mostly decided) isn't going to do that.

[Rubik]

Since when is a feat that improves my hit chance by 5% on every swing "crappy"?

My most successful fighter ever (and by "successful" I mean "long-lived") started off with Weapon Focus (Dwarven Waraxe) at first level to go along with the Exotic proficiency (yeah, dwarf fighter), took Power Attack and Cleave ASAP in the feat progression, and picked up Great Cleave after that. The stubby little bastard was unstoppable.

Cleave is perfectly useful, but you have to use it right and actively seek out the situations to use it in. You also have to have a party to work together, as I did- a wizard to Magic Missile and an archer who could Precise Shot into the melee and soften up the targets a little so that the axe would then one-hit every time and cleave on through the ranks; another fighter working with me, flanking and Great Cleaving from the opposite direction (a rogue Sneak Attacking once in a while didn't hurt either); the both of us eliminating the mooks so that our wizard and cleric could save their high-potency spells for the Big Bad instead of wasting them on the foot troops that fighters are intended by nature to take out. It even works against the higher HD enemies as you get magic weapons and STR enhancements. And Great Cleaving Hydra heads is an experience to remember.

So, I think Cleave is just fine and dandy. Cleave on, dude.And this demonstrates well just how terribly low-op your group needs to be in order to make Cleave and Great Cleave shine.

Nicely said.

[Psyren]

And this demonstrates well just how terribly low-op your group needs to be in order to make Cleave and Great Cleave shine.

Nicely said.

As long as elitists smugly equate "low-op" with "terrible" then we will never get away from Pun-Pun and Tippyverse as the game's perceived baseline.

[Rubik]

As long as elitists smugly equate "low-op" with "terrible" then we will never get away from Pun-Pun and Tippyverse as the game's perceived baseline.ter·ri·bly
ˈterəblē/
adverb
1. very; extremely.

Given the very first definition I found for the word above, was there any part of that statement of mine that's at all untrue? The party he described was basically as low-op as you can get, short of anti-optimization.

[Psyren]

Given the very first definition I found for the word above, was there any part of that statement of mine that's at all untrue? The party he described was basically as low-op as you can get, short of anti-optimization.

Denotatively, no. But connotation matters too.

And yeah, it's low-op - so what? Not every feat needs to be geared to high-op play.

[Rubik]

Denotatively, no. But connotation matters too.

And yeah, it's low-op - so what? Not every feat needs to be geared to high-op play.Um... This is a thread about "why Cleave is sub-optimal." Showing what kind of optimization is required for Cleave to be considered "decent" is entirely relevant.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

In magic: the gathering, there are a kind of card called "win-more". They do awesome things when you are already ahead, but if you're behind, they are pretty useless.

Cleave is similar. It is only useful when you have taken the lead, and before that, it literally does nothing. In comparison, other feats help me out all the time, even when I'm losing.

If you think Cleave is a worthwhile feat, then ask yourself the following:
1) How often do your attacks drop an enemy, per combat, and there is another enemy who you could hit? (i.e. how often would cleave come up?)
2) How often per combat do you miss on an attack roll by 1? (i.e. how often would weapon focus come up?)
If your answer to #2 is larger than your answer to #1, then Weapon Focus is a better feat for you. And weapon focus is a pretty crappy feat.Like I said before, if you do a bunch of damage and have ++ reach, it's going to come up more than 5% of the time by a long shot. You likely will still have a better feat to use it on, but cleave would still provide a good amount of extra attacks. Also, I can imagine a multitude of scenarios where you've killed one enemy but are not winning. For instance, cleaving through groups of DFI'd minions with low health and scary offense.
On the other hand, PF Cleave lets you hit a second target continuously throughout the combat instead of needing your first one to be at death's door already. You can cleave every round, instead of only on the round that drops the primary target. Siimilarly, PF Great Cleave is usable any time you're surrounded, even vs. foes that aren't weak enough to crumple in one blow.Well yeah, if you can retrain PF Cleave it's fine for the first few levels. It's still bad after that, and in a 3.5 setting I could also just dip a ToB class and ready the Steel Wind maneuver. I'm guessing Path of War has something similar. 3.5 cleave isn't a great feat, but it enhances what you already do, whereas PF Cleave replaces what you do. As a melee type, it's usually better to enhance what you do.
Since when is a feat that improves my hit chance by 5% on every swing "crappy"?*snip*I don't think Weapon Focus is what made your character good in that group. In 3.5 there are feats that do more than a 5% increase to hit with a particular weapon, which is what makes weapon focus relatively bad. In a regular group you don't need the best feats (and in fact the best feats can unbalance the group), but weapon focus still isn't as good as those feats.

[VoxRationis]

It's a pity great cleave doesn't stack with whirlwind anymore. The Fighter standing in the middle of a bunch of bad guys and spinning like a top to kill them all was kinda funny.

Head Bad Guy:Alright, my 7 loyal minions, surround this guy and let's kill him!
Fighter:Whirlwind! Kill mook one, cleave into HBG, kill mook two, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 3, great cleave again into HBG, kill mook 4, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 5, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 6, great cleave into HBG, kill mook 7, great cleave into HBG, finally, take your standard whirlwind attack at HBG.

You've managed to hit him 8 times at your full BAB thanks to his mooks standing around dying.

Yeah, I've thought of that myself. Works even better with a spiked chain. Where does it say you can't stack it with Whirlwind Attack?

Anyway, the point someone brought up about it being useful against low-health, high-damage opponents is very good. Even without Dragonfire Inspiration, at low levels it's easy to have foes that are theoretically trivial (owing to being low-level warriors or some such) but are in fact capable of stripping your characters' health down to nothing in a round or two. The problem is that once it starts taking four or five hits, or even more, to incapacitate a foe, the feat makes less difference, going from "you get an extra kill" to "you get a slight head start on the next foe in line."

[Rubik]

This is where the whole "bag of rats" schtick comes in. Fighting a big monster with tons of HP? Take 5 levels in war mind. Release a bag of rats around your feet and Great Cleave/sweeping strike your way through the monster, effectively doubling (or more!) the number of attacks you make per round.

[Jergmo]

It's hardly suboptimal. It's all a matter of being appropriate for the campaign. In your own game, it frequently comes up, so it's valuable. In a game where you encounter TO wizards, it's not.

Or, say, in an E6 game, Great Cleave may make you one of the most frightening warriors in the world, as it's a setting where clumps of low-level fighters are a persistent threat.

[Dr. Azkur]

It's a pre req for Frenzied Berserker, so I won't miss it whenever I go to melee without gishing.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Being a prerequisite for Frenzied Accidental TPKer is... oddly enough, a plus for Cleave, since it deters entry into that PrC.

[aleucard]

Being a prerequisite for Frenzied Accidental TPKer is... oddly enough, a plus for Cleave, since it deters entry into that PrC.

Agreed. If that class had some method of allowing the player to NOT attack friendlies, then it'd probably be one of the best 'Hulk SMASH!' PrC's in the books. As it is now, though, the only reason someone that understands what the Hell they're reading would take it is to troll their teammates, and that's the kind of thing that makes hitting the offending person in the nuts with a baseball bat understandable.

[Dr. Azkur]

Anyone who knowingly journeys with a berserker and is killed by their frenzy had it well coming. Avoiding it is not at all hard.

Either way, having a class such as that without any setbacks would be too boring, isn't optimising supposed to be a challenge? Pro tip: there are multiple ways to ensure the passing of your Will Saves, which shouldn't be of low priority anyway.

[eggynack]

Agreed. If that class had some method of allowing the player to NOT attack friendlies, then it'd probably be one of the best 'Hulk SMASH!' PrC's in the books. As it is now, though, the only reason someone that understands what the Hell they're reading would take it is to troll their teammates, and that's the kind of thing that makes hitting the offending person in the nuts with a baseball bat understandable.
The class actually does have a method of allowing the player to not attack allies. You can only unwillingly fly into a damage induced frenzy if you have frenzies to fly into, and you don't have an infinite quantity of frenzies in a day. You can just spend all of the frenzies, one after another, within the confines of a safe space, and then you're mostly just left with a power attack and cleave booster. Not the best way to spend levels, but you get a pretty high damage total, likely higher than you'd get otherwise.

[Jeff the Green]

Being a prerequisite for Frenzied Accidental TPKer is... oddly enough, a plus for Cleave, since it deters entry into that PrC.

In general, one enters Frenzied Berserker not for the frenzy but for the improved Power Attack ratio.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Anyone who knowingly journeys with a berserker and is killed by their frenzy had it well coming. Avoiding it is not at all hard.

Either way, having a class such as that without any setbacks would be too boring, isn't optimising supposed to be a challenge? Pro tip: there are multiple ways to ensure the passing of your Will Saves, which shouldn't be of low priority anyway.So, anyone who doesn't pump the crap out of initiative or is always immune to or untargetable by the berserker had it coming? Because if you have a dumb FB player who can't just automatically end it, and you're traveling with him, and he stumbles into a 30 damage zap trap... everyone in reach is dead.

As long as the FB player recognizes that frenzy is nothing but a drawback and either pumps his will save (and gets pride domain) to negate unwanted uses, or does as eggynack suggests and just gets rid of his frenzies out of combat in a safe area, then sure, it's not a walking TPK any more. But none of that is on the teammates.

As far as the PA ratio is concerned... the problem with charging once you have high strength and PA/Leap Attack/Shock Trooper is very rarely "I need more damage."

[Dr. Azkur]

Well yes. Don't live with an arsonist if you can't get fire insurance, man.

[Gemini476]

The thing with them having it coming has entirely to do with the earlier clause of them knowing that the person in question is a Frenzied Berserker.

I mean, this is like following a slabbering butcher named Bloodkill McMurder into a dark alleyway. It's assisted suicide, really.

The big thing people miss with recruiting Frenzied Berserkers into the party is that you don't have to. Give him his share of the pay, skip town while he's asleep, whatever. If he doesn't have a routine of defrenzying then the party saying "no, we do not want to put this ticking timebomb in our backpack" is entirely valid.

Or, well, unless if you play with a group of massive metagamers who refuse such in-character choices because "but we're a party!"
Because some characters just don't work with a party. Frenzied Berserkers who do not practice some way to limit their TPKing to less than standard (standard being roughly the chance of being dominated into doing so) are just a bad idea.

Luckily, there are a bunch of ways to limit that. Defrenzying in the morning is a good idea, although it's horrible for prison scenarios or really any time that you spend more than 24 hours in a non-safe area, boosting Will saves is the best option but takes a lot of resources and levels to perfect, and Grease is alright but requires the Wizard to either have Celerity or win initiative. And puts a huge weakness in your build, but you'd always have that. Oh, and you can have a Merciful weapon. That also works, probably, but possibly leaves a TPKO.

The big issue is, of course, taking small amounts of random damage and punching your Rogue into chunky salsa because a bee stung you.

Of course, the best ability the Frenzied Berserker has is obviously Improved Frenzy. Turn that potential TPK into a last-man standing free-for all deathmatch!

[aleucard]

How about we compile a list of ways to make the FB less of a risk as a TPK? If they have any level of iffiness from the DM's perspective, say so.

1, the FB pumps their Will save into orbit (19 minimum) and gets one of the several ways that exist to make all Will saves not auto-fail on Natural 1. While this doesn't necessarily mean that they can prevent going into a Frenzy, this means that they can end it on their next turn, which minimizes the risk.

2, the party finds or makes some way of locking the FB down at will, preventing them from making thrown attacks too if possible. This can be anything from some method of getting an Immediate Action Grease to making an enchantment on the FB's boots that puts them under one if a trigger is tripped (all party members have a switch, make it easy enough to turn on that it's at least an Immediate Action).

3, the FB gets a feat/item/etc. that either allows them to regulate themselves mid-frenzy, such as this feat (http://dndtools.eu/feats/book-of-exalted-deeds--52/righteous-wrath--2458/) (may or may not apply to Frenzy, ask DM), or forces them to act in a non-lethal manner (a Merciful enchantment modified so that it turns on during the FB's Frenzy regardless of their will, for instance).

[Rubik]

Calm Emotions, along with other enchantment effects. A Suggestion, for instance, that he calm down when no enemies are nearby. How about a Bestow Curse preventing him from attacking friends and neutrals?

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Minor nitpick: The wizard must win initiative. If the frenzy triggers out of combat, and the FB wins initiative, the wizard is flatfooted and can't use immediate actions. (Exception: Things which would negate surprise, which generally are levels 15 and onward, unless you have a very specific contingency like "when I cast nerveskitter, Celerity" and that's still 11). Also, if the wizard can easily counter you with a level 1 spell, so can enemies.

Like I said, I would, IC and OOC, refuse to team up with a FB who didn't prevent the TPK. But pumping will saves to that point isn't easy or cheap, especially not right as you enter the PrC. I would appreciate seeing non-CHA-based builds (because if you're going CHA-based you have better things to do than take 10 levels of a frothing maniac class) who hit +18 will (and preferably reroll 1s) at [full BaB] 6/Frenzied Berserker 1 or at least somewhere near that.

[Aquillion]

How about a Bestow Curse preventing him from attacking friends and neutrals?Way too DM-iffy; Bestow Curse effects other than the ones listed require that your DM approve them as "no more powerful than what is listed here", and I think a curse specifically calibrated to completely negate a major disadvantage of a well-known class would cross that line in the eyes of most DMs.

(Something like, say, a massive penalty to your initiative or even just auto-1s on your initiative rolls forever might work, though -- that's more clearly a curse in line with the listed examples.)

[Killer Angel]

Since when is a feat that improves my hit chance by 5% on every swing "crappy"?


Because feats are precious, and are best used for things that let you do something unusual or really improve your style, or that will be often useful. Combat reflexes and Power attack are examples of this.
Weap. focus? it will be useful exactly on 1 to hit roll in 20, and IMO it's too little.

[Gwendol]

It's actually worse since it's a 5% increase with a specific weapon.

[weckar]

I've found it is usually decent in games with a lot of horde-type fighting.
But, generally, the feat is worth taking if only because of all the 'cleavage' puns.

[Person_Man]

These are my lists of ways to gain extra attacks (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?127463-3-X-Extra-attacks-natural-attacks-AoO) and optimizing Power Attack (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?129070-3-X-Optimizing-Power-Attack&p=7165087). I'm sure that they're missing stuff, but they're pretty good lists.

Take a look at some of the better Feats on those lists:

Karmic Strike: AoO whenever an enemy hits you.
Robilar's Gambit: AoO whenever an enemy attacks you.
Leap Attack: Increases Power Attack damage, increasing your damage output by 50%ish on a Charge.
Spirited Charge: Multiplies damage on a charge. (Requires Mounted Combat and Ride by Attack, but I consider those strong Feats as well).
Headlong Rush: Multiplies damage on a charge, and provokes AoO from enemies you pass. (Which can be a good thing with the right combo).
Battle Jump: Multiplies damage on a Charge if you drop from at least 10 feet above your enemy, which is not hard to do with a Jump as long as the ceiling is high enough.
Combat Reflexes: You can make more then one attack of opportunity per round, and can make attacks of opportunity when Flat Footed. Even without anything else to support it other then a reach weapon, this Feat will generally give you several extra attacks per combat, especially if you lose Initiative. With the right combo, it can give you lots of extra attacks each combat.
Lots of things that add natural attacks: Shape Soulmeld, Deepspawn, Deformity Claws, Draconic Tail, Jaws of Death, etc. Although natural weapons have the down side of not benefiting from enchantments (unless you're a Kensai or Totemist), they do qualify for Power Attack and Weapon Finesse, and if you have Pounce or free movement, you can use them every round without any special "trigger."
Multiweapon Fighting: Can dramatically increase the number of attacks you get per round, though you need at least 3 arms (which generally takes +2ish LA or the Prehensile Tail Feat).
Spectral Skirmisher feat: When Invisible, enemies attacking your square generate AoO. Are you a Gish? If so, this is early Robilar's Gambit with no down side when used with Greater Invisibility.


So Cleave isn't a bad Feat. It just that compared to many other Feats, it has a rarer trigger that is likely to result in lower average damage output most combats.

[VoxRationis]

The whole frenzied berserker hate is a little unnecessary. We had a character in one of my campaigns who was in the class. Pulverized every encounter I threw at him, even a roc (incidentally, do you think a character should really be able to Power Attack during freefall?), and overshadowed even the wizards. Never once did he threaten the core group (he did once backhand the cleric into unconsciousness, but that was the same character who challenged NPCs of godlike ability when he was level 9), since they all knew he was a loose cannon and treated him appropriately (never entering into melee with him, for one thing). And throwing your frenzies away at the beginning of each day is a waste—the bonuses it gives are useful. You just have to be a little careful about application. It's not even that difficult to predict when you're going to need to shut the berserker down or run—they only go after friends once all the enemies are dead, and they do pretty reliable damage, so it's easy to estimate when they'll start to go after the party.

In my personal opinion, the frenzy is in concept what rage should have been—unstoppable melee power at the expense of control. That's a classic fantasy and mythic archetype, going right back to Heracles. Give it some respect (and a wide berth:smallwink:).

(Incidentally, if you're wondering why the PCs' enemies didn't just nick him with a blowdart when he was out shopping, it's because the campaign didn't involve enemies that knew the party that closely.)

[aleucard]

The whole frenzied berserker hate is a little unnecessary. We had a character in one of my campaigns who was in the class. Pulverized every encounter I threw at him, even a roc (incidentally, do you think a character should really be able to Power Attack during freefall?), and overshadowed even the wizards. Never once did he threaten the core group (he did once backhand the cleric into unconsciousness, but that was the same character who challenged NPCs of godlike ability when he was level 9), since they all knew he was a loose cannon and treated him appropriately (never entering into melee with him, for one thing). And throwing your frenzies away at the beginning of each day is a waste—the bonuses it gives are useful. You just have to be a little careful about application. It's not even that difficult to predict when you're going to need to shut the berserker down or run—they only go after friends once all the enemies are dead, and they do pretty reliable damage, so it's easy to estimate when they'll start to go after the party.

In my personal opinion, the frenzy is in concept what rage should have been—unstoppable melee power at the expense of control. That's a classic fantasy and mythic archetype, going right back to Heracles. Give it some respect (and a wide berth:smallwink:).

(Incidentally, if you're wondering why the PCs' enemies didn't just nick him with a blowdart when he was out shopping, it's because the campaign didn't involve enemies that knew the party that closely.)

Thing is, to bring the FB down to an acceptable risk of TPK (let alone down to the same risk as any other PC), not only does the FB Player have to spend an uncomfortable amount of resources towards that specifically (granted, they help in usually the most important defensive area for melee beatstick types, but still), but the other players have to do a lot of planning and resource-spending towards being able to shut down one of their own partymembers at the drop of a hat (or at least outrun the guy until he cools off) both individually and as a group. Few groups are willing to expend those resources towards guarding against their own ally, and with the existence of perfectly acceptable substitutes for the same exact job (with a couple other jobs being done also in certain cases), most consider the choosing of that class to be inherently selfish. That works for a Full Evil or 'Chaotic Neutral' Murderhobo party, but the number of games that play like that is very small, and even then it only needs to become an issue once before the rest of the party yells 'Free EXP/Loot!' and squishes the FB thanks to it making itself a viable target.

Really, the FB is a perfect example of how some character concepts, despite how awesome they are both on paper and in practice, just do not get a lot of screen time, whether because few people play them after thinking them out or the Players/campaign killing them specifically for one reason or another. A good example of this would be the Kleptomaniac Rogue taken to extremes. That sort of individual WILL steal from someone he shouldn't have in very short order and eventually be caught, whether that be a PC or an important NPC doesn't much matter. FB's have similar issues, but with trying to plant an axe in anything breathing if you don't have a steady stream of bad guys to feed him/her/it until they chill out. It can provide interesting Roleplaying options, yeah, but generally making the hostage or whatever you're trying to escort eat a sword doesn't bode well for your survivability when said NPC is wanted by someone with stronger buddies than you.

[VoxRationis]

The party in question devoted absolutely zero in the way of party resources towards finding ways to disable their Frenzied Berserker and got away just fine. It's just a matter of giving them suitable berth, favoring spells and ranged attacks over melee, etc.

[aleucard]

The party in question devoted absolutely zero in the way of party resources towards finding ways to disable their Frenzied Berserker and got away just fine. It's just a matter of giving them suitable berth, favoring spells and ranged attacks over melee, etc.

Not all parties are that comfortable with having someone that could turn into a Bravo Foxtrot during every single encounter where he risks damage. All it takes is for him to nearly kill 1 person before the rest of the party starts either asking him to make a new character or just flat out forces him to (whether by ditching the character somewhere or murdering him/her/it in their sleep doesn't matter). Having to make a new character because of easily avoidable bulls@#$ does not do good things for party cohesion.

[Anlashok]

Not all parties are that comfortable with having someone that could turn into a Bravo Foxtrot during every single encounter where he risks damage. All it takes is for him to nearly kill 1 person before the rest of the party starts either asking him to make a new character or just flat out forces him to (whether by ditching the character somewhere or murdering him/her/it in their sleep doesn't matter). Having to make a new character because of easily avoidable bulls@#$ does not do good things for party cohesion.

*******s in the party will complain about anything. You kill your FB and reroll a wizard and they complain about your BFC being too good. So you kill that and make a fighter and they complain about you being useless. So you kill that and make a Sublime Chord and they complain that the wizard did it better. They're going to whine either way.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Somehow I imagine the whining will be stronger when they have to make sure your character won't accidentally kill everyone. Remember that it's not just mid-combat. The real danger is when the FB gets hit with damage outside of combat, frenzies and kills before immediate actions can even go off. Unless he gets that mythical +18 will save at level 7 that I never saw someone demonstrate, or he blows off his frenzies at the beginning of the day, he's an IC and OOC liability in a way that dead weight or spotlight stealers could never be.

[Endarire]

How does Cleave compare if it also triggers when you trip something? (The one use per round limit still applies on normal Cleave.)

[aleucard]

How does Cleave compare if it also triggers when you trip something? (The one use per round limit still applies on normal Cleave.)

MUCH better (remember, other methods of knocking the target on their ass work too), though you still have the issue of having to be at least flanked before you can even get the chance, though reach weapons (Spiked Chain and others that allow targeting adjacent squares especially) help a VERY large amount. Would probably be of most use to a lockdown build, though other flavors of living blender also would appreciate. Not too sure if it would be able to replace one of the more standard feats for that kind of build, but if you got a slot open, sure.

[Aquillion]

The party in question devoted absolutely zero in the way of party resources towards finding ways to disable their Frenzied Berserker and got away just fine. It's just a matter of giving them suitable berth, favoring spells and ranged attacks over melee, etc.So what you're saying is that, yes, they had to revolve their entire strategy and builds around the FB, sacrificing significant options in exchange for his melee power.

FB is a class that should never have been published. Yes, there are other options in the game that cause problems in various ways, and yes, I don't deny that if the entire party is on-board with the idea, it could theoretically be fun -- I don't even deny that it can lead to funny stories if you're playing the right sort of game, where people are looking for random goofy chaos -- but the fundamental concept is, inherently, based around having the rest of the party to sacrifice things and take risks in exchange for buffs to your character, and that strikes me as fundamentally bad for an officially-published class in a multiplayer game. It's something that would make sense as a houserule or homebrew, but should absolutely never have been officially-published, since that gave it the air of "this is a default part of the game which you can reasonably assume most groups will accept."

(Or, alternatively, what they should have done was published it in a book that was a bit like Magic: The Gathering's Unglued, full of mechanics that are goofy or which don't make sense for the "default" game. It's that sort of mechanic -- conceptually interesting, and maybe fun if approached from the right mindset, but absolutely terrible if you treat it as just another PRC.)

[aleucard]

So what you're saying is that, yes, they had to revolve their entire strategy and builds around the FB, sacrificing significant options in exchange for his melee power.

FB is a class that should never have been published. Yes, there are other options in the game that cause problems in various ways, and yes, I don't deny that if the entire party is on-board with the idea, it could theoretically be fun -- I don't even deny that it can lead to funny stories if you're playing the right sort of game, where people are looking for random goofy chaos -- but the fundamental concept is, inherently, based around having the rest of the party to sacrifice things and take risks in exchange for buffs to your character, and that strikes me as fundamentally bad for an officially-published class in a multiplayer game. It's something that would make sense as a houserule or homebrew, but should absolutely never have been officially-published, since that gave it the air of "this is a default part of the game which you can reasonably assume most groups will accept."

(Or, alternatively, what they should have done was published it in a book that was a bit like Magic: The Gathering's Unglued, full of mechanics that are goofy or which don't make sense for the "default" game. It's that sort of mechanic -- conceptually interesting, and maybe fun if approached from the right mindset, but absolutely terrible if you treat it as just another PRC.)

It may be interesting on an NPC enemy, though. Would definitely fit the bill for an Evil character, since they wouldn't much care about their allies in the first place.

[HammeredWharf]

Like I said, I would, IC and OOC, refuse to team up with a FB who didn't prevent the TPK. But pumping will saves to that point isn't easy or cheap, especially not right as you enter the PrC. I would appreciate seeing non-CHA-based builds (because if you're going CHA-based you have better things to do than take 10 levels of a frothing maniac class) who hit +18 will (and preferably reroll 1s) at [full BaB] 6/Frenzied Berserker 1 or at least somewhere near that.

Dragonborn Dwarf Barbarian 1 / Ranger 3 / Hexblade 1 / Duskblade 1 / FB 1

Feats:
Stalwart Determination

Items:
Cloak of Resistance +3

Traits:
Detached, +1 will

Starting Con:
16 + 4 from race for a total of 20, +5 will

Class levels:
+5 will

Rage:
+2 will and +2 from the Con increase

...for a total of +18 will. It's not a bad build, either, as getting your saves high is generally a really good idea. I'd go into FB a level later and take a Cleric dip, because that'd give me domain powers, including the reroll from Luck domain.

[nedz]

Dragonborn Dwarf Barbarian 1 / Ranger 3 / Hexblade 1 / Duskblade 1 / FB 1

Feats:
Stalwart Determination

Items:
Cloak of Resistance +3

Traits:
Detached, +1 will

Starting Con:
16 + 4 from race for a total of 20, +5 will

Class levels:
+5 will

Rage:
+2 will and +2 from the Con increase

...for a total of +18 will. It's not a bad build, either, as getting your saves high is generally a really good idea. I'd go into FB a level later and take a Cleric dip, because that'd give me domain powers, including the reroll from Luck domain.
Nice build, but it takes a small hit to elegance because of possible XP Penalties.

As to Cleave.

It's a good feat in Core only games where better feats are not available.
It's reasonably useful at low level if you are fighting groups of opponents before other options are available, though there is an opportunity cost of delaying those options. This is campaign dependant to a degree.
It stacks with most other methods of generating extra attacks.


Overall I'd rate it slightly above average as feat choices go.
As to optimisation: Every straight Fighter should take this feat.

[chaos_redefined]

Yeah, it's a good build, except for the part where you have no feats to really play with. You aren't human, so you have 3 feats, plus Endurance from Ranger (I'm ignoring TWF because you shouldn't be two-weapon fighting). Frenzied Berserker has 4 feats entry, so unless you have flaws allowed in your games, that means you can't qualify with that build. With flaws, it means you are more tight than usual for feats, with one spare feat left after the qualifiers and Steadfast Determination. The non-FB barbarian, in the meantime, just got access to Shock Trooper one level ago, meaning he hits harder. And if he got the fighter dip right, then he also gets Elusive Target, making him hard to kill in melee.

So... if your group plays with flaws, you have access with the build you posted. Not all groups allow flaws, and if they do, this opens up other options for builds that can do just as good a job without trying to kill the party because they rolled a natural 1.

There are two options I see on getting past this. The first is Fighter 3 in place of Ranger 3. Sure, fighter 3 is kinda crappy, but you get the important will save boost. If there's another full-BAB class with good will saves, then Fighter 2/?? 1 would be good as well.

The other option would be Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/(Full BAB class here) 1/Warblade 3/FB 1. This doesn't give you the +18 to will saves, but it instead opens up Iron Heart Surge, which should end frenzy. This gives you 5 feats without flaws, meaning you qualify with 1 to spare.

[Killer Angel]

Dragonborn Dwarf Barbarian 1 / Ranger 3 / Hexblade 1 / Duskblade 1 / FB 1

Feats:
Stalwart Determination

Items:
Cloak of Resistance +3

Traits:
Detached, +1 will

Starting Con:
16 + 4 from race for a total of 20, +5 will

Class levels:
+5 will

Rage:
+2 will and +2 from the Con increase

...for a total of +18 will. It's not a bad build, either, as getting your saves high is generally a really good idea. I'd go into FB a level later and take a Cleric dip, because that'd give me domain powers, including the reroll from Luck domain.

When players (the one with the FB and the other ones at the table) know what they're doing, to deal with a FB isn't a huge problem.

But for a standard D&D Group, a FB is dangerous, and can effectively cause deaths or serious problems. It's a class designed in a very bad way.

[HammeredWharf]

Yeah, it's a good build, except for the part where you have no feats to really play with. You aren't human, so you have 3 feats, plus Endurance from Ranger (I'm ignoring TWF because you shouldn't be two-weapon fighting). Frenzied Berserker has 4 feats entry, so unless you have flaws allowed in your games, that means you can't qualify with that build. With flaws, it means you are more tight than usual for feats, with one spare feat left after the qualifiers and Steadfast Determination.

I wouldn't call FB optimal. Especially not at lvl 7. It is, however, not a bad choice, especially later on when you've got a better Will save. Getting +18 will at lvl 10-ish shouldn't be much of a problem. The build I posted assumes it'll have to achieve the +18 solo AND by lvl 7, while it's generally safe to assume you'll be able to get at least a buff or two from your party members. It also has a starting constitution of 16. You could be a human with 18 starting con to get the exact same result or a level 8 human with a starting con of 16 who put his leveling points in con.

It's also a build I made in five minutes. It's just a starting point, not an optimized final version.


The non-FB barbarian, in the meantime, just got access to Shock Trooper one level ago, meaning he hits harder.

...and dies faster and has to charge. Meanwhile, the FB is three levels away from Deathless Frenzy. There are perks to both options.


The other option would be Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/(Full BAB class here) 1/Warblade 3/FB 1. This doesn't give you the +18 to will saves, but it instead opens up Iron Heart Surge, which should end frenzy. This gives you 5 feats without flaws, meaning you qualify with 1 to spare.

The problem with IHS is that using it is arguably not attacking "those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability". But yes, if the DM allows it, it's a great way to end a Frenzy.


When players (the one with the FB and the other ones at the table) know what they're doing, to deal with a FB isn't a huge problem.

But for a standard D&D Group, a FB is dangerous, and can effectively cause deaths or serious problems. It's a class designed in a very bad way.

It's quirky and requires some optimization. In my opinion it's one of the better-designed prestige classes, because it's not just "your class, but better". I'd also assume the players know what they're doing while talking about optimization.

[Darth Paul]

It's actually worse since it's a 5% increase with a specific weapon.

And that is the specific weapon I carry. In fact, I carry two of them in case the first one breaks (if we're talking about the dwarf character). Then later there's weapon specialization to give it added damage. Also, Greater Weapon Focus to stack with Weapon Focus. In our campaigns, hitting or missing the enemy is the difference between life and death, so every +1 is worth digging and scratching for. Which is why we also flank people, etc, etc. I have never considered a Weapon Focus a wasted feat as a fighter. (I once took it as a Wizard for my heavy crossbow, but that was for roleplaying reasons. Nonetheless, there was great rejoicing when it allowed me to put a bolt through a Death Knight's eye socket with a critical, that would not have been a critical without the +1 from Weapon Focus...)

There's no such thing as a wasted feat, unless it's "Skill Focus: Underwater Basket-Weaving". And even then, you could be in an aquatic campaign.

[Gwendol]

Even so, cleave will likely still see more use.

[Darth Paul]

The two go hand in hand, as far as I'm concerned. But different strokes for different folks, I'm not here to tell anyone how to build their character.

[eggynack]

And that is the specific weapon I carry. In fact, I carry two of them in case the first one breaks (if we're talking about the dwarf character). Then later there's weapon specialization to give it added damage. Also, Greater Weapon Focus to stack with Weapon Focus. In our campaigns, hitting or missing the enemy is the difference between life and death, so every +1 is worth digging and scratching for. Which is why we also flank people, etc, etc. I have never considered a Weapon Focus a wasted feat as a fighter. (I once took it as a Wizard for my heavy crossbow, but that was for roleplaying reasons. Nonetheless, there was great rejoicing when it allowed me to put a bolt through a Death Knight's eye socket with a critical, that would not have been a critical without the +1 from Weapon Focus...)
Except all of those feats are really bad. You could instead be getting stuff like combat reflexes, combat expertise, improved trip, and knock-down. Now your character is getting an attack on any enemy that enters his general area, getting a trip attempt on pretty much every enemy he hits with those attacks, and getting an extra attack on the enemies that fall to those trip attempts. That stuff is really good, at least for a fighter, as is a setup like power attack, improved bull rush, and shock trooper, particularly when you combine them with some form of pounce (usually barbarian).

The thing of it is, feats do a lot. They are a highly potent resource, and can mean the difference between a fighter that has only one way to deal with a problem, and a fighter that has three or four ways to deal with a problem. Things like weapon focus aren't a complete waste, as they provide a clearly visible benefit, but there is almost always a better option. You could use your feats to gain a marginally higher chance of hitting, or you could use them to provide some much needed versatility to your character, and control the battlefield with your weapon.

[Karnith]

Things like weapon focus aren't a complete waste, as they provide a clearly visible benefit, but there is almost always a better option. You could use your feats to gain a marginally higher chance of hitting, or you could use them to provide some much needed versatility to your character, and control the battlefield with your weapon.
In addition, if you really want to boost your to-hit, there are probably going to be better feats for that than Weapon Focus. Reckless Charge (Miniatures Handbook, p. 27; it allows you to take a -4 penalty to AC while charging in exchange for a +4 bonus on attack rolls) is generally much better than Weapon Focus for chargers, for example, and AoO-focused characters are likely to get a good deal more mileage out of Deft Opportunist (MH, p. 25; +4 bonus to hit when making AoOs).

[eggynack]

In addition, if you really want to boost your to-hit, there are probably going to be better feats for that than Weapon Focus. Reckless Charge (Miniatures Handbook, p. 27; it allows you to take a -4 penalty to AC while charging in exchange for a +4 bonus on attack rolls) is generally much better than Weapon Focus for chargers, for example, and AoO-focused characters are likely to get a good deal more mileage out of Deft Opportunist (MH, p. 25; +4 bonus to hit when making AoOs).
Indeed so, and things like knowledge devotion, and as I mentioned, shock trooper, also see play despite being simple bonuses to damage and to attack. Simply increasing your damage and accuracy instead of adding options is fine, but the bonuses had better be pretty big to justify it.

[Firechanter]

I can see Cleave and even Great Cleave be pretty awesome with an Ubercharger and good Reach. Imagine a Warblade with Dancing Blade Form and Spiked Chain -> 20' Reach -> 56 Threatened squares, dealing well enough damage per hit to easily one-shot anything that might conceivably come at you in numbers.

Problem: Feat slots. If you want to have a bit of flexibility, you'll have difficulties squeezing in those two extra feats. Sure, a few Fighter levels may help, but personally I prefer to not water down my Warblade builds like that.

[Darth Paul]

What is this Miniatures Handbook, Weapon Devotion, and Shock Trooper of which you speak?

This is where the whole debate breaks down for me, I guess. Y'all are using terms from sourcebooks and expansions of which I have never even heard before reading this thread.

And as far as Combat Reflexes, etc, all those feats rely on an attack roll- which is boosted by Weapon Focus. I will keep my feat.

EDIT: Oh, it was Knowledge Devotion. I stand corrected.

[eggynack]

What is this Miniatures Handbook, Weapon Devotion, and Shock Trooper of which you speak?

This is where the whole debate breaks down for me, I guess. Y'all are using terms from sourcebooks and expansions of which I have never even heard before reading this thread.
More sourcebooks do make weapon focus even worse, but even a purely core build can find sufficient purpose from fighter feats without touching on weapon focus. Take a look at a basic build to level six like this one (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?80415-The-Horizon-Tripper-(Core-Melee-Build)), using nothing but core resources, and then consider the fact that you only have about four feats left after that, with maybe a couple more if you're doing something that gains them. There's just not much room.


And as far as Combat Reflexes, etc, all those feats rely on an attack roll- which is boosted by Weapon Focus. I will keep my feat.
The problem is that it is, in many ways, a choice between the extra attack and the slight attack roll boost. So, you can either hit an extra few times in a round, with the exact number dependent on how the circumstances and the number of ways you increase the number, or you can hit 5% more when you do get an attack. Unless you're really bad at hitting your enemies, the former is going to lead to more hits in a round. This is especially true in a book-limited situation, as you don't even have something like pounce to grant consistent full attacks.

[Firechanter]

What is this Miniatures Handbook, Weapon Devotion, and Shock Trooper of which you speak?

This is where the whole debate breaks down for me, I guess. Y'all are using terms from sourcebooks and expansions of which I have never even heard before reading this thread.

Yeah, sure. People on these boards will generally refer to and draw from pretty much the _complete_ 3.5; especially the Completes, Tome of Battle and PH2. Core-only 3.5 breaks down hard in the second half of the game, as Mundanes run out of available feats at levels 9-12, while the fun for casters only really starts at the same point. In the end, the Wizard learns to stop time and gate in Solars, while the Fighter is stuck with taking a +1 To Hit with his secondary weapon.
Not trying to derail the thread into another caster/mundane discussion; just to show that Core-only becomes pretty much unplayable for Mundanes, which is why generally Splats are assumed to be available.

[Aquillion]

Yeah, sure. People on these boards will generally refer to and draw from pretty much the _complete_ 3.5; especially the Completes, Tome of Battle and PH2. Core-only 3.5 breaks down hard in the second half of the game, as Mundanes run out of available feats at levels 9-12, while the fun for casters only really starts at the same point. In the end, the Wizard learns to stop time and gate in Solars, while the Fighter is stuck with taking a +1 To Hit with his secondary weapon.
Not trying to derail the thread into another caster/mundane discussion; just to show that Core-only becomes pretty much unplayable for Mundanes, which is why generally Splats are assumed to be available.Yeah, but it's fair for him to be confused by all that.

In core only, Cleave is a decent feat for fighters, because you're just going to flat-out run out of other feats (much like how many mediocre PRCs, like Horizon Walker, also become viable with core only -- spending six levels to get free Dimension Doors, or seven to get that and Tremorsense, makes a lot of sense when your alternative is more feats. Of course, that reminds me that going into Horizon Walker or something and giving up your useless later bonus feats is a better option even with core only.)

[Gwendol]

I think you're a bit unfair to Cleave. If you plan on dealing a lot of damage in single hits, cleave is rarely a waste, especially if you also use a reach weapon. A fighter in Core will be challenged to see Cleave trigger regularly, while a charger build will likely see more use of it. In my view, a Warblade or Crusader should try and fit the feat in, or a pounce-charger.

[LordBlades]

The problem with IHS is that using it is arguably not attacking "those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability". But yes, if the DM allows it, it's a great way to end a Frenzy.


Iron Heart Surge also gives +2 to attack, so using it is 'attacking to the best of your ability', at least by RAW.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I think you're a bit unfair to Cleave. If you plan on dealing a lot of damage in single hits, cleave is rarely a waste, especially if you also use a reach weapon. A fighter in Core will be challenged to see Cleave trigger regularly, while a charger build will likely see more use of it. In my view, a Warblade or Crusader should try and fit the feat in, or a pounce-charger.Try is the operative word. I've defended cleave in this thread, for the very situations you describe, but once you open up the feats a little there's a lot of competition.

RE: Combat reflexes vs. Weapon Focus
Damage maths as follows:
Expected # of "bonus" AoOs (i.e. AoOs past the first) per round: X
Expected # of attacks that are not bonus AoOs per round: Y
Likelihood of hitting without weapon focus: Z (where 0.05<Z<0.95, so WF actually matters)
Average damage on a hit: D

Benefit of combat reflexes, per round: X*Z*D
Benefit of weapon focus, per round: Y*(0.05)*D

For Combat Reflexes to be better than Weapon Focus, X>Y*(0.05)/Z

Plug in a 50% hit chance and 1 attack per round (standard low level core), and you only need to expect more than 0.1 extra AoOs per round for Combat Reflex to be superior.

[animewatcha]

So what spells and do-dads summon multiple things to keep the FB busy until the duration runs out?

[Coidzor]

Plug in a 50% hit chance and 1 attack per round (standard low level core), and you only need to expect more than 0.1 extra AoOs per round for Combat Reflex to be superior.

So basically for every 10 rounds of combat you need 2 AoOs or better in order for Combat Reflexes to pull ahead.

[Necroticplague]

So what spells and do-dads summon multiple things to keep the FB busy until the duration runs out?

Grease. Frenzy makes it so you can't do dex based skill checks. Balance is dex-based. So, while frenzying, you would spend the whole frenzy tripping over yourself if you stand on slippery ice or a spot of grease.


So basically for every 10 rounds of combat you need 2 AoOs or better in order for Combat Reflexes to pull ahead.

Which also means that your DM can make weapon profeciency worth more by having enemies not provoke AoOs if you have combat reflexes to hit everyone that does so. Of course, it that situation, the feat Combat Reflexes is even more powerful, because it means that just by existing, you're manipulating enemy movements to something less then ideal. So either enemies take pains to avoid your reach, or you get more attacks. Can you say win-win?

[animewatcha]

So contingent spell ( or craft contingent spell ) for grease ( i think there was an item equivalent for other party members to usee ) to be used when he goes wacko? Sounds like we have just saved higher level spells like calm emotions for other things.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

So basically for every 10 rounds of combat you need 2 AoOs or better in order for Combat Reflexes to pull ahead.I should point out that my base numbers are slightly off. It should be something like Y=1.5 attacks per round, since Y includes the first AoO. In that case, you'd need 0.15 additional AoOs per round, or 3 bonus AoOs per 20 rounds instead of 2.

I could get more precise, suppose we have a dex modifier of +X, and state the probability of getting 0 AoOs, 1 AoO, 2 AoOs, ..., X AoOs per round, but... I think the point is made.

Regarding Grease and FB... if your FB can't fly, enemies can just grease him and make him look like an idiot. Any counter the party can use, knowledgeable forces can use as well. The real way to do it is spend all your feats and levels pumping your will save, or expend the frenzies.

[Particle_Man]

Agreed. If that class had some method of allowing the player to NOT attack friendlies, then it'd probably be one of the best 'Hulk SMASH!' PrC's in the books.

Would the Righteous Wrath feat from Book of Exalted Deeds be useful here? It seems to help with rage, at least.

[HammeredWharf]

Would the Righteous Wrath feat from Book of Exalted Deeds be useful here? It seems to help with rage, at least.

No, Frenzy is different from Rage. Getting a high Will save is probably the best way. The build I posted earlier got it to 18 at level 7 by itself with some (slightly) questionable tricks, but it's trivial later on and with a little help from your party.

[Coidzor]

Would the Righteous Wrath feat from Book of Exalted Deeds be useful here? It seems to help with rage, at least.

If it doesn't help with Frenzy, then all it would do is counteract a Dragon Magazine Flaw. So, really, it's either useless or it obviates the weakness of Frenzy in exchange for a feat. But from a RAW standpoint it's a wee bit of a stretch.

[HammeredWharf]

If it doesn't help with Frenzy, then all it would do is counteract a Dragon Magazine Flaw. So, really, it's either useless or it obviates the weakness of Frenzy in exchange for a feat. But from a RAW standpoint it's a wee bit of a stretch.

Even if it doesn't help with Frenzy, it still makes evil creatures Shaken. Its second part sounds more like WotC's usual sloppiness than a RAW way of dealing with something. After all, it says "clarity of mind unusual among barbarians" before claiming to let you do a list of things barbarians can already do while raging.

[Aquillion]

So basically for every 10 rounds of combat you need 2 AoOs or better in order for Combat Reflexes to pull ahead.Yes, but it's better than that.

The thing is that it's possible to build your character in order to maximize attacks of opportunity. Trips, increasing your reach, Robilar's Gambit (which has it as a prerequisite anyway), etc.

Just throwing Combat Reflexes on a random character build isn't usually a good idea, but unlike a lot of the stuff we're comparing it to, it has the potential for strong synergies -- someone focused on reach, trips, and who has Robilar's Gambit or something similar is probably going to get more than one attack of opportunity almost every single round.

By comparison, there's not really anything you can do to build around the bonuses granted by Weapon Focus or Cleave, and no particularly effective build that benefits disproportionately from them. That's the main reason they suck. For fighters (unlike casters), it's not about picking a bunch of really good individual things -- it's about making a build with a strong overall strategy. So judging feats in a vacuum is sometimes a mistake.

[Necroticplague]

By comparison, there's not really anything you can do to build around the bonuses granted by Weapon Focus or Cleave, and no particularly effective build that benefits disproportionately from them. That's the main reason they suck. For fighters (unlike casters), it's not about picking a bunch of really good individual things -- it's about making a build with a strong overall strategy. So judging feats in a vacuum is sometimes a mistake.

Just to play devils advocate: chargers, with the ability to have large bonuses on one attack, benefit disproportionately from cleave, while builds that make a lot of attacks at a low bonus benefit disproportionately from the +1 of weapon focus (if you only have 15% chance to hit, +5% is a +33% increase in effectiveness.)

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Just to play devils advocate: chargers, with the ability to have large bonuses on one attack, benefit disproportionately from cleave, while builds that make a lot of attacks at a low bonus benefit disproportionately from the +1 of weapon focus (if you only have 15% chance to hit, +5% is a +33% increase in effectiveness.)A +1 to hit is going to increase your DPR by the same amount whether you have many low attacks or one big attack, assuming you started with the same DPR. Looking at it in terms of relative chances to hit tends to be misleading.

*Exception: Your bonus is so low, or so high, that you need a 20 to hit or a 1 to miss, in which case the benefit of Weapon Focus is nil.

RE: Combat Reflexes is better than it seems in a vacuum.
Should read: Combat Reflexes is even better than it seems in a vacuum. It's a great feat for anyone with a decent dex modifier and a reach weapon, and it just gets better if you have ways of triggering more AoOs.