Weaponmaster feat

[ZorroGames]

Point B:

"You gain proficiency with four weapons of your choice. Each one must be a simple or a martial weapon."

RAW (not specified melee or ranged) this seems to imply any weapon on page 149 of PHB.

Such as a Variant Human Wizard choosing (for whatever reason) Heavy Crossbow, Maul, Javelin, and Mace as starting proficiencies at first level with this feat.

Am I understanding that RAW correctly?

RAI perhaps is different but I am asking RAW.

[JackPhoenix]

Yes. Propably the biggest waste of a feat in the game, though.

[Lord Il Palazzo]

You've got it right by RAW and, I believe, RAI. I think the reason it says is that each weapon must be a simple or martial weapon is that you're not supposed to be able to gain proficiency with things that aren't "weapons" like improvised weapons, using a shield as a weapon or gaining proficiency with throwing cats.

[mephnick]

Yes. Propably the biggest waste of a feat in the game, though.

Pretty much. Most classes that need the proficiencies have them from their base or subclass and those few that don't are generally better served dipping for them. I guess in a no multiclassing obscure corner case it might be useful. Maybe?

[ZorroGames]

Yes. Propably the biggest waste of a feat in the game, though.

The example? Yes.

Or the feat in general? If so, Why, please? I am trying to understand why this feat exists except for character/Role Play builds. And those are Okay if that is the intent/goal.

Would such a feat on a (V) Human Cleric of Knowledge or Monk or Rogue or Sorceror or Warlock also be just as bad?

[Pex]

The feat would be at least worthy of consideration if it also allowed the weapons to count for class features that depend on specific weapon types, such as for a rogue's sneak attack or a monk.

[Sariel Vailo]

The feat would be at least worthy of consideration if it also allowed the weapons to count for class features that depend on specific weapon types, such as for a rogue's sneak attack or a monk.

This i could i agree with i wanted to swing a sword as a kensai and than kick a vitch cant do that tho

[Lord Il Palazzo]

The example? Yes.

Or the feat in general? If so, Why, please? I am trying to understand why this feat exists except for character/Role Play builds. And those are Okay if that is the intent/goal.

Would such a feat on a (V) Human Cleric of Knowledge or Monk or Rogue or Sorceror or Warlock also be just as bad?It's a pretty bad feat for most anyone.

The main problem with Weapon Master is that most classes already have proficiency with the weapons they're most likely to want. The classes that push you toward high strength (barbarian, fighter, paladin, some cleric domains) get all simple and martial. Rogues get the things they're able to sneak attack with. Casters are mostly the ones who have a really limited selection but they don't usually have much motivation to have a good strength score and can almost always deal better damage with their cantrips and spells.

The other problem is that there are plenty of other ways to get weapon proficiency. For example, playing an elf or dwarf gets you a handful of weapons and taking one level of another class will give you weapon proficiencies, plus armor proficiencies and some other abilities or benefits.

On top of that, outside of special abilities that require certain types of weapons (sneak attack or polearm master, for example) weapon choice doesn't make that much of a difference on damage. A character with a longsword will usually deal 4.5 or 5.5 damage per attack (plus strength) depending on whether you're going one- or two-handed. A quarterstaff (which every class is proficient with out of the box) can also be used one- or two-handed and only deals an average of 1 less damage without requiring you to jump through hoops for proficiency (and it works for the bonus action attack on polearm master if you're trying to build got some kind of polearm wizard). Even if you pick up a greatsword or a maul, 2d6 only averages 7 damage so you'd only be 2.5 points of damage better off than you would be with a quarterstaff.

[ZorroGames]

Thanks, it seemed a weird way to acquire a small number of weapon proficiencies especially for non-martial classes with more limited ASI/feat moments.

[Desteplo]

Rogues to gain whip to then spell sniper into booming blade... or 1 dip into fighter and also get more health and weapon specialty. And not waste an ASI

[Specter]

If you're a rogue with an odd DEX who wants a longbow, I say it's a solid feat.

[mephnick]

Ooh ooh, forge domain cleric? Needs STR, doesn't get weapon proficiencies outside of racials. Could be worth a feat then if you don't want to delay spell progression?

[Corran]

The feat would be at least worthy of consideration if it also allowed the weapons to count for class features that depend on specific weapon types, such as for a rogue's sneak attack or a monk.
That's a good idea, with the exception that polearms should never be allowed to deal sneak attack. PAM + SA is all kinds of broken.


Ooh ooh, forge domain cleric? Needs STR, doesn't get weapon proficiencies outside of racials. Could be worth a feat then if you don't want to delay spell progression?
Haven't looked at forge clerics, but if they dont get an extra attack (but maybe even of they do), I would probably prefer to stick with a mace. Afterall, the mace deserves some love!

ps: Btw, I always thought that weapon master would become useful once/if exotic weapons appeared. But since it restricts gained proficiency to only simple and martial weapons, meh....

[Syll]

If it let you pick up shield proficiency too, it would gain a bit of value. Not saying it would make it *good*, just better.

[Arcangel4774]

The only place I've seen it used and not be a waste is in conjunction with the UA revised ranger beast master, which has your companion gain asi when you do. Great wolf sif, anyone?

[Flashy]

The only place I've seen it used and not be a waste is in conjunction with the UA revised ranger beast master, which has your companion gain asi when you do. Great wolf sif, anyone?

The phrasing of the animal companion feature doesn't technically allow it to take feats though. The wording allows you to increase its stats whenever YOU gain an ASI. The animal companion doesn't actually get the ASI feature, it just gains a similar effect.

Edit: Not that I think it's unreasonable to allow the animal to take feats, I'm just pointing out that under a strict reading of the UA it's not necessarily permitted.