Weapon Master feat

[paladinn]

Considering the 5e proficiency system and the Weapon Master feat. RAW, the feat grants proficiency in 4 weapons. Obviously it's meant for characters to gain access to normally non-proficient weapons (so Gandalf can swing Glamdring without hurting himself).

I'm wondering about either expanding the scope of the feat or creating another one. If one takes the feat, s/he has the option of either picking 4 more newly-proficient weapons Or gaining a +2 in one or two already-proficient weapons. This to allow, for example, a fighter to become a true "swordsmaster" or such. It's at the cost of a feat/ASI, but fighters have extras anyway.

Outside of "regular" proficiency and a fighting style, I don't know of another way to gain higher mastery with a given weapon. Any thoughts?

[Dork_Forge]

Choose four weapons, you gain proficiency with them if you don't have it already. If you have proficiency with these weapons already then you gain a +1 to both damage and to hit. Whether or not you already have proficiency, when you hit with one of these weapons you can roll the damage die twice instead of once. You can use this ability a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per short rest.

Hows that for a bit more bang for your buck?

[N810]

^ not bad. maybe add exotic weapon proficiency instead of 4 weapons as an option ?

[Kane0]

^ not bad. maybe add exotic weapon proficiency instead of 4 weapons as an option ?

What weapons are exotic?

[sithlordnergal]

What weapons are exotic?

Sadly, there are none in the base 5e game

[paladinn]

Choose four weapons, you gain proficiency with them if you don't have it already. If you have proficiency with these weapons already then you gain a +1 to both damage and to hit. Whether or not you already have proficiency, when you hit with one of these weapons you can roll the damage die twice instead of once. You can use this ability a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per short rest.

Hows that for a bit more bang for your buck?

Intriguing.. You sure it's not OP? I wasn't thinking to add a bonus to Four weapons if they're already proficient. I guess if it grants a total +4, you can spread it out amongst 2-4 weapons?

Should a "weapon master" be limited in the # uses/ day?

[Kane0]

Combine weapon master with savage attacker, and maybe a fighting style if it’s still too weak.

[sithlordnergal]

Choose four weapons, you gain proficiency with them if you don't have it already. If you have proficiency with these weapons already then you gain a +1 to both damage and to hit. Whether or not you already have proficiency, when you hit with one of these weapons you can roll the damage die twice instead of once. You can use this ability a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per short rest.

Hows that for a bit more bang for your buck?

Hmmm, that seems good, though I might suggest rewording it a bit to prevent it from stacking with crits. As its worded now, if you use this ability and get a crit, you could roll 4x the weapon dice. Its not a big issue for most classes, but for classes like the Rogue and Paladin, which are well known for how much damage they can do on a crit, having a way to do ×4 weapon damage on a crit is huge.

And while d8 weapons aren't so bad, you need to watch out for the d10 and d12 weapons. Imagine, if you will, a Half-Orc Paladin/Sorcerer with this feat as you modified it that uses a Great Axe. If they crit with it, they'll do 5d12+4-to-10d8 thanks to this feat, Divine Smite, and their racial ability.

At level 4, which is the soonest you could get this feat as a Half-Orc, that's a crit that deals an average of 50.5 damage.

EDIT: Although it does give you a huge reason to use a Greataxe over a Greatsword...It makes the Greataxe relevant again.

[Sorinth]

The feat as is is terrible.

If you are looking at making it a feat that martials might actually want I would be reluctant to allow bonuses to hit. The whole bounded accuracy thing + how bonuses to hit make GWM/SS feats much better would make me think twice.

Adding extra damage seems fine as would giving you something extra to do with your BA or Reaction.

[paladinn]

Combine weapon master with savage attacker, and maybe a fighting style if it’s still too weak.

Requiring yet another feat?

I'm thinking this could be something to help fill in the martial/caster gap. Possibly something that could work like BECMI's Weapon Mastery (without all the special effects)

I hadn't considered a damage bonus, but I guess that would be in keeping with the concept.

So my fighter has proficiency with all weapons to start, but wants to specialize in the longsword. He takes the Dueling fighting style, which grants a damage bonus but no attack bonus. In fact, none of the styles give an attack bonus. Was that an oversight?

[Composer99]

Requiring yet another feat?

I'm thinking this could be something to help fill in the martial/caster gap. Possibly something that could work like BECMI's Weapon Mastery (without all the special effects)

I hadn't considered a damage bonus, but I guess that would be in keeping with the concept.

So my fighter has proficiency with all weapons to start, but wants to specialize in the longsword. He takes the Dueling fighting style, which grants a damage bonus but no attack bonus. In fact, none of the styles give an attack bonus. Was that an oversight?

Archery gives an attack bonus. Since each fighting style does something a little different to buff damage for weapon users, I don't think it's an oversight that only one does it the way archery does.

[Kane0]

Requiring yet another feat?

I'm thinking this could be something to help fill in the martial/caster gap. Possibly something that could work like BECMI's Weapon Mastery (without all the special effects)

I hadn't considered a damage bonus, but I guess that would be in keeping with the concept.

So my fighter has proficiency with all weapons to start, but wants to specialize in the longsword. He takes the Dueling fighting style, which grants a damage bonus but no attack bonus. In fact, none of the styles give an attack bonus. Was that an oversight?

Sorry to be clearer what I was suggesting was merging them:

Weapon Master
+1 Str or Dex
- You gain a Fighting Style of your choice from Archery, Duelling, Great Weapon Fighting and Two Weapon Fighting
- Choose 4 weapons. If you choose a weapon you are not proficient with you become proficient with that weapon. If you are already proficient with that weapon once per turn when you roll damage for a melee attack using that weapon you can roll twice and use either result.

If that is deemed too good I'd say remove the stat bonus.

Edit: Adding bonuses to attack is a bigger deal than extra damage because of 5e's bounded accuracy. Bonuses to hit are typically rare and highly valued when they come up, so I default to not using them where possible.

[heavyfuel]

Combine weapon master with savage attacker, and maybe a fighting style if it’s still too weak.

I second combining it with a Fighting Style, but probably remove the +1 to Str/Dex.

The Fighting Style feat (UA) is probably a bit one the weak side, but making it a half-feat would probably be too strong. Combining it with some weapon Proficiencies makes it about the correct power level.

[Dork_Forge]

Intriguing.. You sure it's not OP? I wasn't thinking to add a bonus to Four weapons if they're already proficient. I guess if it grants a total +4, you can spread it out amongst 2-4 weapons?

Should a "weapon master" be limited in the # uses/ day?

You can take it back from 4, but I thought 4 allowed the feat to be versatile enough that the PC wouldn't be screwed if a very nice magic item dropped that wasn't their main or wanted to be a switch hitter.

For balance purposes yes, limiting them to # times per day let's them do more interesting things then soley +x, the why is easily fluffed to exerting yourself in combat.



Hmmm, that seems good, though I might suggest rewording it a bit to prevent it from stacking with crits. As its worded now, if you use this ability and get a crit, you could roll 4x the weapon dice. Its not a big issue for most classes, but for classes like the Rogue and Paladin, which are well known for how much damage they can do on a crit, having a way to do ×4 weapon damage on a crit is huge.

And while d8 weapons aren't so bad, you need to watch out for the d10 and d12 weapons. Imagine, if you will, a Half-Orc Paladin/Sorcerer with this feat as you modified it that uses a Great Axe. If they crit with it, they'll do 5d12+4-to-10d8 thanks to this feat, Divine Smite, and their racial ability.

At level 4, which is the soonest you could get this feat as a Half-Orc, that's a crit that deals an average of 50.5 damage.

EDIT: Although it does give you a huge reason to use a Greataxe over a Greatsword...It makes the Greataxe relevant again.

It's... basically just the Half Orc racial feat ability, a weapon smite kind of, it's not unbalanced. Sure if you look at crits then you're potentially doing a lot (though your range for Divine Smite dice couldn't ever happen at 4th level), but if you're investing in being good at crits... then it should be spectacular. They happen 5% of the time, completely at random, you can invest in making crits amazing, hold back resources to capitolise and go entire sessions, multiple sessions without one actually happening.

The wording probably needs to be tightened up, but it's no more bad for crits than taking the Half Orc racial feat at 4th, unless you're lucky enough to roll multiple 20s on attack roles per short rest.

[Kane0]

It's... basically just the Half Orc racial feat ability, a weapon smite kind of, it's not unbalanced. Sure if you look at crits then you're potentially doing a lot (though your range for Divine Smite dice couldn't ever happen at 4th level), but if you're investing in being good at crits... then it should be spectacular. They happen 5% of the time, completely at random, you can invest in making crits amazing, hold back resources to capitolise and go entire sessions, multiple sessions without one actually happening.

The wording probably needs to be tightened up, but it's no more bad for crits than taking the Half Orc racial feat at 4th, unless you're lucky enough to roll multiple 20s on attack roles per short rest.

To be fair, it would stack with Orc/Barbarian extra crit damage as well as crit enhancers like Champion/Hexblade/Elven Accuracy. So probably not an issue on its own, but could be built into a crit monster given the right circumstances.

[Dork_Forge]

To be fair, it would stack with Orc/Barbarian extra crit damage as well as crit enhancers like Champion/Hexblade/Elven Accuracy. So probably not an issue on its own, but could be built into a crit monster given the right circumstances.

It stacks in the exact same way the existing half orc racial does or the Kensei mini smite does, even crit fishing builds wouldn't be able to get too ridiculous (Brutal Critical is a 9th level ability, Elven Accuracy and the Half Orc racial are mutual exclusives, the Hexblades Curse is severely limited and Champion is a heavy investment). If you want to hit hard with crits it takes a lot of investment, this feat as proposed doesn't really push the envelope any further, especially with the inherent limited nature of ASIs in 5e.

[paladinn]

Adding bonuses to attack is a bigger deal than extra damage because of 5e's bounded accuracy. Bonuses to hit are typically rare and highly valued when they come up, so I default to not using them where possible.

Idk, when I think of a Weapon Master type character, I'm thinking of a matter of skill/attack more than damage. Any barbarian with a greataxe can get more damage; but an artist with a blade should be able to hit more.

But I guess that concept is beyond 5e.. sigh

[kobo1d]

Flat bonus to hit is probably going to be a balance issue with ranged and heavy weapons. What about a feat that gives you bonuses specific to the weapon qualities?

Just spitballing the benefits, but something like this:

Weapon Ascendancy
Choose four of the following options when you select this feat:

Ammunition: When you attack at long range with ammunition weapons, long range doesn't impose disadvantage.
Finesse: You may Disengage as a Bonus Action when you hit an enemy with a finesse weapon.
Heavy: When you score a Critical Hit with a heavy weapon, you can use a Bonus Action to try to Shove that creature.
Light: You gain a +1 bonus to AC for each light weapon you are wielding.
Loading: You gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls you make with loading weapons when your target is within normal range.
Reach: You gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls you make with reach weapons when making an Opportunity attack.
Special: You gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls you make with special weapons.
Thrown: Your thrown weapons ignore half cover and three-quarters cover.
Two-Handed: Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack from a two-handed weapon, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space, provided the target is no more than one size larger than you.
Versatile: You gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls you make with versatile weapons against any creature of a size larger than yours.
Bludgeoning: Bludgeoning damage from your weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.
Piercing: Piercing damage from your weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.
Slashing: Slashing damage from your weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.

[paladinn]

Flat bonus to hit is probably going to be a balance issue with ranged and heavy weapons. What about a feat that gives you bonuses specific to the weapon qualities?

Just spitballing the benefits, but something like this:

Weapon Ascendancy
Choose four of the following options when you select this feat:

Ammunition: When you attack at long range with ammunition weapons, long range doesn't impose disadvantage.
Finesse: You may Disengage as a Bonus Action when you hit an enemy with a finesse weapon.
Heavy: When you score a Critical Hit with a heavy weapon, you can use a Bonus Action to try to Shove that creature.
Light: You gain a +1 bonus to AC for each light weapon you are wielding.
Loading: You gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls you make with loading weapons when your target is within normal range.
Reach: You gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls you make with special weapons when making an Opportunity attack.
Special: You gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls you make with special weapons.
Thrown: Your thrown weapons ignore half cover and three-quarters cover.
Two-Handed: Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack from a two-handed weapon, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space, provided the target is no more than one size larger than you.
Versatile: You gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls you make with versatile weapons against any creature of a size larger than yours.
Bludgeoning: Bludgeoning damage from your weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.
Piercing: Piercing damage from your weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.
Slashing: Slashing damage from your weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.

Wow, we really are trying to avoid attack bonuses, aren't we? Is a +1 to hit really that game-breaking?

[kobo1d]

Wow, we really are trying to avoid attack bonuses, aren't we? Is a +1 to hit really that game-breaking?

It's just the right combination of very strong and very boring, so I don't think it makes for a great feat idea.

[Composer99]

Idk, when I think of a Weapon Master type character, I'm thinking of a matter of skill/attack more than damage. Any barbarian with a greataxe can get more damage; but an artist with a blade should be able to hit more.

But I guess that concept is beyond 5e.. sigh

Isn't "hit more" already reflected in the fighter's additional attacks?

As an alternative, what about getting to reroll failed attacks? That would let you hit more without mucking with the maths.

[Kane0]

Or reaction to add to an attack roll if you miss, like a reverse shield/parry.

[sithlordnergal]

It's... basically just the Half Orc racial feat ability, a weapon smite kind of, it's not unbalanced. Sure if you look at crits then you're potentially doing a lot (though your range for Divine Smite dice couldn't ever happen at 4th level), but if you're investing in being good at crits... then it should be spectacular. They happen 5% of the time, completely at random, you can invest in making crits amazing, hold back resources to capitolise and go entire sessions, multiple sessions without one actually happening.

The wording probably needs to be tightened up, but it's no more bad for crits than taking the Half Orc racial feat at 4th, unless you're lucky enough to roll multiple 20s on attack roles per short rest.

So I've never actually looked up the Half-Orc racial feat before now. It looks similar to this, however the difference is that its only once per short rest. Compare that to being able to use that feature a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per short rest, which is what the change suggests doing. Even in a white room its a bit unbalanced, since at level four a Half Orc Paladin could easily do 5d12+4d8 for an average of about 50.5 damage on a crit. And by that time you have things like Hold Person to guarantee that crits happen.

The fact that it looks like it would stack with the Racial Feat makes it even worse, allowing a level 8 Paladin to do up to 6d12+6d8 damage with a single crit, and still have two more uses of the modified feat. If you made a decent crit fishing build, this would be a terrifying addition

[ImproperJustice]

What if you kept the four mini bonus structure of the original feet and added some fun nonsense:

1. +1 to stat like before
2. Any melee weapon which does not have a throw range, now has range 10 / 20.
3. You gain an additional object interaction to switch, draw, or holster weapons.
4. Through focus and mastery you can ignore any effect that would cause you to make a melee or ranged attack at disadvantage for 1 minute per short rest.

2. Lets you throw stuff you shouldn’t.
3. Let’s you weapon swap faster and help some build concepts.
4. Lets you do crazy stuff, fight on the ground, fight blinded, or shoot arrows hanging upside down or whatever.

[Dork_Forge]

So I've never actually looked up the Half-Orc racial feat before now. It looks similar to this, however the difference is that its only once per short rest. Compare that to being able to use that feature a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per short rest, which is what the change suggests doing. Even in a white room its a bit unbalanced, since at level four a Half Orc Paladin could easily do 5d12+4d8 for an average of about 50.5 damage on a crit. And by that time you have things like Hold Person to guarantee that crits happen.

The fact that it looks like it would stack with the Racial Feat makes it even worse, allowing a level 8 Paladin to do up to 6d12+6d8 damage with a single crit, and still have two more uses of the modified feat. If you made a decent crit fishing build, this would be a terrifying addition

Yes the racial feat only gives you one use per short rest, it's also a half feat that potentially gives an entire additional attack per long rest. Meaning you can pick it up at level 4 wihtout slowing your Str progression (like how Elven Accuracy ends up working), with fixed Weapon Master you need to sacrifice your stat progression or wait until you've maxed your stat.

Even then, Crits won't exactly get crazy until higher levels (end of tier 2/into tier 3) and at those levels the damage isn't so spectacular that it's game breaking, especially since crits are entirely random and one of the best fishing abilities (Elven Accuracy) is inherently incompatible with the best crit damage race (Half Orcs).

Though if you think it's too much you can just make it two per short rest.

[Fnissalot]

How about:
Weapon Master
Choose one ability score and four weapons. You gain the following benefits:


Increase the chosen ability by 1, to a maximum of 20.
You gain proficiency with those weapons if you are not proficient with them.
When you attack with one of those weapons, you can use the chosen ability's modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls.


This would make people think less about hexblade as a multiclass? If it is too strong, we can cut the ability increase.

[Kane0]

Would definitely make it competitive to be picked thats for sure, but i dont think it satisfies the goal the op was going for

[Spartan_MD]

Weapon Master
Choose one ability score and four weapons. You gain the following benefits:

Increase the chosen ability by 1, to a maximum of 20.

You gain proficiency with those weapons if you are not proficient with them.

Chose one weapon. When you are wielding this weapon with which you are proficient and you hit with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your half your proficiency bonus to damage for that attack.

The last feature would scale well. As the character gained experience, they would do more damage.

[paladinn]

I'm honestly not enamored with the stat-increase part of the feat. Getting trained with weapons doesn't necessarily make you stronger. It Does let you fight more effectively, when translates into better attack rolls (IMO); but that doesn't seem to be an option in 5e.

I want to emulate, as much as possible, the BECMI "Weapon Mastery" concept. Everyone gets certain proficiencies, which Do give you a bonus to hit. If I spend an ASI on a feat, I don't see why it can't grant at least a +1 or 2. Would it be so game-breaking?

By 20th level, a PC would have a +6 to hit with a proficient weapon. One application of Weapon Master (modified) could make it +7 or +8. Maybe that type of WM could be limited to fighters and rogues? Rogues get Expertise, which makes them a Lot better with given skills; why not something similar for weapons?

[Unoriginal]

Would you let someone taking Weapon Master select monster weapons like the Tlincalli's Spiked Chain?

[paladinn]

Would you let someone taking Weapon Master select monster weapons like the Tlincalli's Spiked Chain?

Maybe within reason if there's a RP reason for it?

[Fnissalot]

I'm honestly not enamored with the stat-increase part of the feat. Getting trained with weapons doesn't necessarily make you stronger. It Does let you fight more effectively, when translates into better attack rolls (IMO); but that doesn't seem to be an option in 5e.

I want to emulate, as much as possible, the BECMI "Weapon Mastery" concept. Everyone gets certain proficiencies, which Do give you a bonus to hit. If I spend an ASI on a feat, I don't see why it can't grant at least a +1 or 2. Would it be so game-breaking?

By 20th level, a PC would have a +6 to hit with a proficient weapon. One application of Weapon Master (modified) could make it +7 or +8. Maybe that type of WM could be limited to fighters and rogues? Rogues get Expertise, which makes them a Lot better with given skills; why not something similar for weapons?


The following makes you overall more accurate while keeping the bounded accuracy of 5e while scaling over levels. It also gives you a bonus to intimidating people with fancy moves with the weapon, juggling with weapons, or repairing the weapon at a smithy. (This could probably be more specific as it currently might be to easy to apply).
Weapon Master
Choose four weapons. You gain the following benefits:

You gain proficiency with those weapons if you are not proficient with them.
When you make an attack roll with one of those weapons, you can treat a d20 roll lower than your proficiency bonus as 7. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier and regain the uses at the end of a long rest.
Whenever you make a skill check with one of those weapons, you are considered proficient in the skill and add double your proficiency bonus to the check, instead of your normal proficiency bonus. This does not apply to attack rolls.

[paladinn]

Soo.. maybe a Weapon Focus feat that just gives one a +1 to hit (and maybe damage) with one proficient weapon? This can be taken exactly twice for any one weapon. Limited to fighters and rogues.

A max +2 shouldn't be game-breaking; and as a feat it Does take the place of an ASI.

[Dork_Forge]

Soo.. maybe a Weapon Focus feat that just gives one a +1 to hit (and maybe damage) with one proficient weapon? This can be taken exactly twice for any one weapon. Limited to fighters and rogues.

A max +2 shouldn't be game-breaking; and as a feat it Does take the place of an ASI.

That doesn't justify a feat on it's own and a half feat would be a bit much since you could just pick it up 'for free' whilst not slowing your stat progression down.

[Fnissalot]

That doesn't justify a feat on it's own and a half feat would be a bit much since you could just pick it up 'for free' whilst not slowing your stat progression down.
Yeah, that is too good to not take. With bounded accuracy, it is also breaking the form of the game.

Another version then:
Weapon master (iteration 3?)
Choose three weapons.
* You get proficiency with those weapons.
* Once per turn when attacking with one of those weapons, you may reroll a roll of 1 on an attack roll or damage roll. You must use the new result.
* As a bonus action, those weapons counts as magical for you with the purpose of overcoming magical resistances until end of turn.

Or
Weapon master (iteration 4?)
Choose three weapons.
* You get proficiency with those weapons.
* Once per turn when you miss with one of those weapons, the target takes damage equal to your your proficiency bonus using the damage type of the weapon used for the attack. The attack is still not considered a hit.

[paladinn]

Yeah, that is too good to not take. With bounded accuracy, it is also breaking the form of the game.

Another version then:
Weapon master (iteration 3?)
Choose three weapons.
* You get proficiency with those weapons.
* Once per turn when attacking with one of those weapons, you may reroll a roll of 1 on an attack roll or damage roll. You must use the new result.
* As a bonus action, those weapons counts as magical for you with the purpose of overcoming magical resistances until end of turn.

Or
Weapon master (iteration 4?)
Choose three weapons.
* You get proficiency with those weapons.
* Once per turn when you miss with one of those weapons, the target takes damage equal to your your proficiency bonus using the damage type of the weapon used for the attack. The attack is still not considered a hit.

I'm getting the impression that a bonus to hit is just unmanageable under any circumstances?

I get bounded accuracy; but we're only talking a +1 or +2. How can someone be a "master swordsman" if s/he can't hit any better than any other fighter?

Rogues get Expertise that Doubles a proficiency bonus with a couple skills. But that is acceptable?

[Dork_Forge]

Yeah, that is too good to not take. With bounded accuracy, it is also breaking the form of the game.

Another version then:
Weapon master (iteration 3?)
Choose three weapons.
* You get proficiency with those weapons.
* Once per turn when attacking with one of those weapons, you may reroll a roll of 1 on an attack roll or damage roll. You must use the new result.
* As a bonus action, those weapons counts as magical for you with the purpose of overcoming magical resistances until end of turn.

Or
Weapon master (iteration 4?)
Choose three weapons.
* You get proficiency with those weapons.
* Once per turn when you miss with one of those weapons, the target takes damage equal to your your proficiency bonus using the damage type of the weapon used for the attack. The attack is still not considered a hit.

I'm not fond of the bonus action magical thing, it shuts down TWF Weapon Masters and penalises you for achieving better weapons. The glancing blow mechanic seems interesting though.



I'm getting the impression that a bonus to hit is just unmanageable under any circumstances?

I get bounded accuracy; but we're only talking a +1 or +2. How can someone be a "master swordsman" if s/he can't hit any better than any other fighter?

Rogues get Expertise that Doubles a proficiency bonus with a couple skills. But that is acceptable?

You just can't tack on a plus to hit on a half feat, especially when the -5+10 feats exist. I see no issue having a plus to hit (and maybe a bigger plus to damage) as long as it isn't a half feat and the plus isn't too big.

[Composer99]

The problem with a feat that gives a reliable +1 or +2 to weapon attack rolls is that there's not much reason why anyone who uses weapon attacks as their primary combat shtick wouldn't pick it up. In particular, a +2 bonus would be pretty much an "auto" pick, almost as soon as possible.

Once everyone is taking this feat, the intent that it's meant to distinguish between "weapon masters" and other types of fighters is undone. I don't think making so that the bonus applies to one weapon or a handful of weapons makes enough difference in that regard.

Feats such as Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter are powerful, but at least you have to want to specialise in the types of weapon those feats support to take them - if you want to fight sword-and-board style most of the time, neither feat is particularly appealing, for instance.

[Fnissalot]

I'm getting the impression that a bonus to hit is just unmanageable under any circumstances?

I get bounded accuracy; but we're only talking a +1 or +2. How can someone be a "master swordsman" if s/he can't hit any better than any other fighter?

Rogues get Expertise that Doubles a proficiency bonus with a couple skills. But that is acceptable?

For a martial class, a +2 to hit is on par with +4 ASI. You primarily pick ASIs to hit more. It is far better than an ASI even if it just grants a +2 to hit. It just takes a few points extra to hit, and you will be enough above the power curve that you will likely almost never miss. I would rather push a master swords man in the bottom end, to make them more consistent against weak targets without breaking the curve at higher levels. Getting to reroll 1s reduced the risk of an automatic miss by a lot without actually pushing upwards, the average roll increases by something .475 or so. But primarily, this turns it from having a 5% risk to automiss to a .25% risk. Getting damage of even when you miss will make you so much more deadly as well. Dealing 5 damage on a miss means you take out basic kobolds even if you don't hit them. This might be too good considering that end game fighters will deal 24 damage even if they don't hit with any of their attacks. Both options make you a lot better than the average Joe.

It is not unimaginable, but there would need to be a cost to gain the effect (like it only adds +2 to hit when you have disadvantage on the roll) or it would be too good and everyone would take it. Compare it to savage attacker, it increases your damage output with a 1d10 weapon by ~1.65 damage per turn if you get any hit off, so it is even lower than that on average since you won't always hit, and it provides nothing else that an ASI in your primary stat would give. A +1 to hit is far better than 1.6 damage every turn you manage to hit. Elemental Adept has a smaller damage increase but works against resistances as well. Savage attacker is far from the best feat, but I think is a better target in power level than GWM, SS, CBE, and PWM as all of them are highly specialized and would likely risk being too good. Getting a straight up bonus to hit for or multiple weapons of choice is more general than the listed abbreviated feats and would be a lot weaker to compare it. According to me, it should be in the ballpark of Savage Attacker or Elemental Adept to be decent enough and warranted by the right build and the right design space.

Expertise is generally not usable in combat, and it is hard to compare and evaluate things that affects non-combat challenges(combat can always be compared by amount of damage dealt or prevented, expertise in sleight of hands versus intimidation is harder to evaluate). Additionally, a lot of the things you get from expertise, you can do with magic by spending resources which devalues it a lot :S. Skill check DCs are also less flat than monster ACs which makes these abilities even harder to compare. There are only two printed monsters with 25 in AC and none has more while for skill checks a DC 25 is just very hard and the book lists DC 30 for the even more challenging tasks, and the DM can go above it with breaking the rules. Additionally, in a fight, everyone would want to feel useful and higher ACs would start punishing martials without the extra to hit feat you are pondering. While in a combat, you become a liability if you are not hitting since you no longer will contribute on your turn while still dragging up the challenge of the combat encounter (as long as the DM balances the encounter based on party size). In a non-combat situation, everyone benefits from the rogue getting to pickpocket the plot item, disable the trap, or unlock the door. These reasons are why I don't think they are comparable.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm getting the impression that a bonus to hit is just unmanageable under any circumstances?

I get bounded accuracy; but we're only talking a +1 or +2. How can someone be a "master swordsman" if s/he can't hit any better than any other fighter?

Rogues get Expertise that Doubles a proficiency bonus with a couple skills. But that is acceptable?

It's a long and exhaustive list of reasons, but attacks don't just scale with to-hit, but also weapon damage, damage bonuses, attack rate, special features, HP, spells, etc. How lethal you are at level 20 is a massive amount of difference from how you were at level 1.

It takes about 40 or so level 1 Fighters to take on a level 20 Samurai.

In comparison to skills, you get roughly a +6 bonus to your skill checks over 20 levels. Expertise increases that by another +6. Consider that between Expertise and being level 20, you can eventually outvalue the d20's average roll of 10.5.

That's why any bonus to damage, HP, or to-hit is a big deal, since there's a lot of other things that synergize with it. It's probably why they made TWF so terrible, to cut down on potentially putting too much value on the potential amplifier of attack rate (which would otherwise go from 2 to 3, a theoretical 50% boost to all damage), they just screwed up by making it too bad,

Compare that to skills, the difference between a level 20 and a level 1, without expertise for either, is the difference between a 50% chance of success and a 20% chance.

[Fnissalot]

I'm getting the impression that a bonus to hit is just unmanageable under any circumstances?

I get bounded accuracy; but we're only talking a +1 or +2. How can someone be a "master swordsman" if s/he can't hit any better than any other fighter?

Rogues get Expertise that Doubles a proficiency bonus with a couple skills. But that is acceptable?


After giving it some more thought, the feat martial adept already gives you the option to hit more. It gives you +1d6 (mean +3.5) to one attack roll per short rest as long as you pick the precision attack. It is a bit less narrow, since you can choose two maneuvers but on average and more impactful as you can choose when to apply it (you only apply it once you think you are 1-3 points short of hitting so it would matter almost each time). It has a 100% chance of turning a roll 1 short into a hit, 83% of turning a roll of 2 short, and 67% on a roll that is 3 short. If you take 2-3 short rests per long rest, that is a bonus to hit on 3-4 attacks. If you only use it when you think you are between 1-3 short of hitting, you will on average get the hit 83% of the time so we then assume it grants you 2.5-3.33 hits per long rest with little variance with the range of 0-4. Your feat should be around there, so if you increase the variance, you would likely decrease the average. The higher the variance, the harder it will be to balance as well, so if we keep it low it is easier to work with.
+1 on hit to all attacks is way better than that. If you do 50-67 attacks in a day, you get the same average but the variance increases, as you the might get 50-67 hits from it as well since the spread increases by the amount of attacks you do.
+1 to hit for a minute is worse as you will at get about 10-50 attacks in a minute depending on class and build over the level span.
You would also probably want it to scale to differentiate it between a lvl 1 and a lvl 20 weapon master, and I would prevent it from working with GWM and SS to make it into its own niche and since it removes part of the weakness with those two already strong feats.

What differentiates a master swordsman from the average swordsman for you?

To more often hit the average goons?
To just miss less?
To be able to hit those that are hard to hit more frequently?
To more consistently cause criticals?
To sometimes cause crazy amounts of damage?

I don't think a feat should deal with more than one of them.

[Kane0]

Knowing you come from an older D&D background Paladinn, honestly the 5e framework can support a flat +1 to hit just fine, its just that practically everything within its design philosophy prefers otherwise.

A +1 sword is still a thing and there is the Bless spell, Archery fighting style and a few other things, it doesnt break the game in half to have a feat that gives you +1 to hit with one or a few weapons you’re proficient in.

[paladinn]

It just strikes me as strange that, for all the various feat options with all their varying (and sometimes competing) plusses, there really is no option for someone who wants to be singularly focused on one weapon (or type of weapon). Practically speaking, you're never going to be that much better than any other character of the same level with the same weapon proficiencies.

I know the theory was that feats are supposed to be "meaningful and flavorful"; but if all I want is to be a master of the longsword, or the longbow, or what have you, there isn't a clear way to do it. Given that you give up an ASI for a feat, you have to give up 2 or more ASI's to achieve anything similar, even if you're not that interested in all the "flavorful" special effects.

That's one reason I can see this as mainly a fighter's feat. They are the only class with 2 extra ASIs/feats to use on this.

In AD&D, weapon specialization went a long way toward achieving this; and 3e had Too many ways to do so. A happy medium would have been nice.

[Kane0]

It just strikes me as strange that, for all the various feat options with all their varying (and sometimes competing) plusses, there really is no option for someone who wants to be singularly focused on one weapon (or type of weapon). Practically speaking, you're never going to be that much better than any other character of the same level with the same weapon proficiencies.

I know the theory was that feats are supposed to be "meaningful and flavorful"; but if all I want is to be a master of the longsword, or the longbow, or what have you, there isn't a clear way to do it. Given that you give up an ASI for a feat, you have to give up 2 or more ASI's to achieve anything similar, even if you're not that interested in all the "flavorful" special effects.

That's one reason I can see this as mainly a fighter's feat. They are the only class with 2 extra ASIs/feats to use on this.

In AD&D, weapon specialization went a long way toward achieving this; and 3e had Too many ways to do so. A happy medium would have been nice.

There was a UA a long time back with feats about mastery of a certain weapon type (swords, hammers, spears, etc), and they gave +1 to hit IIRC. Might be right up your alley.

[paladinn]

There was a UA a long time back with feats about mastery of a certain weapon type (swords, hammers, spears, etc), and they gave +1 to hit IIRC. Might be right up your alley.

I have the UA article in question, and it Does exactly as you say. But it also says why the author didn't like it, so I'm sure there's no way it'll ever become "official." Hey, none of it made it into XGtE.

But it is interesting. If that kind of feat was acceptable enough to at least present, maybe it's not so gamebreaking after all?

[Kane0]

Boiled down to the absolute core of the experience, very little is *actually* gamebreaking, regardless of the ruleset.

We gamers just love to overthink things is all.

[Nagog]

What weapons are exotic?


Sadly, there are none in the base 5e game

This is exactly why the feat doesn't really stand up well on it's own. The closest we have to exotic weapons are the Double Scimitar (which is kinda exotic in the sense it's considered elf-only) and Firearms, which are only present in specific settings/campaigns.

I would have it grant martial weapon proficiency in general, and give you the ability to ignore non magical damage resistance when weilding a nonmagical weapon. Makes it great for both outlier Gish builds and for Improvised Weapon builds, as those tend to fall off hard past level 5 due to improvised weapons never being magical.

[Vogie]

Anything to avoid crappy +1 to hit and/or +1 to damage feats. That is crappy, 5e playtest logic.

I'd rather there be more Weapon Mastery feats than just "Weapon Master".

Heavy Weapon master
Flail Master
Hammer Master
Blade Master
Finesse Weapon Master
Light Weapon master
Thrown Weapon master
Ammunition master
And so on.
And, like the UA feats that we've been seeing, have them follow a simple template.

You gain proficiency in the weapon, if you don't have it already. If you do have it already, you gain a minor benefit.
You gain a minor but recurring beneficial ability
You gain a major but niche beneficial ability


I'd much rather have a bunch of things like Spear Master as opposed to our sweeping generalities that are currently covered in PAM and GWF. Having the ability to swap out one feat for another feat when you hit an ASI (or when you level up, or hit an even level) could also be quite interesting, allowing characters to slowly come into themselves over the course of the campaign.

For example, I have a campaign where there's exactly one character who can use all martial weapons, the barbarian, and so I wrote in a 3d6 Maul for them to find. Then they picked up Polearm master at their ASI at the end of the session prior to receiving it. Sure, they use it occasionally... but they loved the idea of the bonus action Boop.

[Man_Over_Game]

Boiled down to the absolute core of the experience, very little is *actually* gamebreaking, regardless of the ruleset.

We gamers just love to overthink things is all.

Problems are relative.

If something broke your windshield on a Monday, that's a big problem.

If something broke your windshield during the apocalypse, probably the least of your concerns.

5e has been the most balanced of DnD editions yet, that doesn't mean that things shouldn't be ruminated and weighed against about for the sake of progress. We can afford to complain and want to do something about it, and that's better than the alternative.

Watched one of the devs for Dead Cells describe the criticisms of players during it's Early Access stage, and he said some valuable words: Players criticize because they have a hope to make your game better. They simply want to play your game, and have more fun. And maybe what they want isn't what everyone wants, and maybe they're not your target audience, but you know that they're the ones playing your game and care enough to want more.

[Mr Adventurer]

you know that they're the ones playing your game and care enough to want more.

This just sounds like a variation on "squeaky wheel gets the grease", to be honest.