PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Weapon Focus and |W|



LibraryOgre
2008-11-22, 12:39 AM
Since weapon focus is a bonus with a specific weapon, is it multiplied when you have a X|W| power? If you have a 4|W| power, does weapon focus become a +4 total? What about magic bonuses from weapons?

Dhavaer
2008-11-22, 12:48 AM
No, you only multiply the die. The bonus from Versatile isn't multiplied either.

NecroRebel
2008-11-22, 01:24 AM
Dhavaer is correct; static bonuses are added only once. Check the Damage section in the PHB on page 276, and particularly the example of Valenae the Eladrin Paladin. It specifically says that she is using a 2W power, but her Strength, weapon focus, and enhancement bonuses are added once and only once.

It appears that the only way to increase the actual value that is multiplied is to increase the size of your weapon's damage die.

Lord_Ventnor
2008-11-22, 02:33 AM
That or attack multiple times. Remember, Weapon Focus is applied to each damage roll.

NecroRebel
2008-11-22, 02:42 AM
That or attack multiple times. Remember, Weapon Focus is applied to each damage roll.

That's not quite the same thing though, is it? I mean, the OP was asking if damage bonuses were multiplied on higher W value powers, which they aren't, not if they were multiplied by the number of attacks, which they are.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-11-22, 03:34 AM
As a general rule:

[W] means whatever is listed under "weapon damage" for your weapon in the PHB. For example, a [W] attack with a longsword translates to a 1d8. A 2[W] attack with the longsword is 2d8.

After rolling the [W] value, add whatever else the power says. Typically a stat (like STR). A STR 18 Fighter using a Longsword for a 2[W]+STR power does 2d8+4.

Next, you add any other modifiers. Weapon Focus always adds to a damage roll with a weapon (but not any ongoing damage). The above Fighter with Weapon Foucs does 2d8+4+1 damage; if the attack had been only a 2[W], he'd do 2d8+1.

This is all on PHB 276, for future reference.

Rockphed
2008-11-22, 04:18 AM
So weapon focus is best for Two-weapon rangers? I wonder if that was intentional...

Artanis
2008-11-22, 02:26 PM
Looked at in a vacuum, it is indeed very good for Rangers. Twin Strike alone makes Weapon Focus incredibly strong for a Ranger. But then, Twin Strike is ridiculously powerful anyways. It may be intentional, but it seems more likely to me that it isn't: it looks more like they made a 4e version of the old 3e feat and went about their business.

NecroRebel
2008-11-22, 02:44 PM
Looked at in a vacuum, it is indeed very good for Rangers. Twin Strike alone makes Weapon Focus incredibly strong for a Ranger. But then, Twin Strike is ridiculously powerful anyways. It may be intentional, but it seems more likely to me that it isn't: it looks more like they made a 4e version of the old 3e feat and went about their business.

"Ridiculously powerful?" I was under the impression that the general consensus was that Twin Strike was somewhat underpowered. Losing the attribute bonus to damage relative to other attacks means you will usually deal much less damage per strike. That will usually be more than your offhand's [W] average damage. Combine with the fact that you'll have a relatively low chance to hit with both attacks (assuming ~60% with either attack, that's ~36%), and you get lower-than-normal average damage. Frankly, you need the various static weapon bonuses to bring it up closer to the damage output of other attacks. Without them, it's weak.

Now, Twin Strike does have a significantly better-than-average chance of hitting at least once (again assuming ~60% chance to hit with either, you have an ~84% chance of landing at least one attack), so it is better against minions, but not if you're looking to maximize damage potential from an at-will. For that, you want to add your stat mod, which means you want Hit and Run or Nimble Strike.

Then again, my assumptions and/or math might be off, so please take my insane ramblings as more guidelines than true rules :smallredface:

fractic
2008-11-22, 03:28 PM
"Ridiculously powerful?" I was under the impression that the general consensus was that Twin Strike was somewhat underpowered. Losing the attribute bonus to damage relative to other attacks means you will usually deal much less damage per strike. That will usually be more than your offhand's [W] average damage. Combine with the fact that you'll have a relatively low chance to hit with both attacks (assuming ~60% with either attack, that's ~36%), and you get lower-than-normal average damage. Frankly, you need the various static weapon bonuses to bring it up closer to the damage output of other attacks. Without them, it's weak.:

But you are supposed to have those bonusses from magic weapons or feats. Not to mention the other benefits of twin strike. Attacking twice gives a better chance to hit at all, this makes Twin Strike better against minions (or enemies on low HP) and make it more likely that you get your hunter's quary damage. It's really strong.

tyfon
2008-11-22, 03:37 PM
"Ridiculously powerful?" I was under the impression that the general consensus was that Twin Strike was somewhat underpowered. Losing the attribute bonus to damage relative to other attacks means you will usually deal much less damage per strike. That will usually be more than your offhand's [W] average damage. Combine with the fact that you'll have a relatively low chance to hit with both attacks (assuming ~60% with either attack, that's ~36%), and you get lower-than-normal average damage. Frankly, you need the various static weapon bonuses to bring it up closer to the damage output of other attacks. Without them, it's weak.

Now, Twin Strike does have a significantly better-than-average chance of hitting at least once (again assuming ~60% chance to hit with either, you have an ~84% chance of landing at least one attack), so it is better against minions, but not if you're looking to maximize damage potential from an at-will. For that, you want to add your stat mod, which means you want Hit and Run or Nimble Strike.

Then again, my assumptions and/or math might be off, so please take my insane ramblings as more guidelines than true rules :smallredface:

Let say - 100 attacks, hit on 10, str. mod +3, avg dmg 4.5

100 - longsword - 45 regular hits + 5 critical = 45*4.5 + 45*3 + 5*11 = 392.5
100(200) - 2 longswords - 90 hits + 10 critic = 90*4.5 + 10*8 = 485

NecroRebel
2008-11-22, 04:51 PM
Let say - 100 attacks, hit on 10, str. mod +3, avg dmg 4.5

100 - longsword - 45 regular hits + 5 critical = 45*4.5 + 45*3 + 5*11 = 392.5
100(200) - 2 longswords - 90 hits + 10 critic = 90*4.5 + 10*8 = 485

2 problems:
First, though it actually helps your point, hitting on a 10 or higher is a 55% chance to hit, not 50%, so your values should be 430 and 530, respectively.

Second, a +3 str mod is low, even at level 1. 18 or 20 Str is easily acquired if you're building for it, which increases the first value by 55 or 110, respectively, while not affecting the twin strike value, so the true values should be 485 or 540 for the basic strike and 530 for twin strike.

Further, that value is only at level 1 through 7. At level 8, when you could have increased your attribute modifier, your basic attack damage goes up but your twin strike damage doesn't (ignoring for this statement such things as enhancement, power, feat, and other static bonuses).

In short, the higher your attribute modifier, the less attractive Twin Strike becomes. It is only with other bonuses, including such things as Weapon Focus, that Twin Strike becomes as good a damage-dealer as a basic attack if your attribute modifier is greater than your weapon's average damage.



I will admit, of course, that Twin Strike does average slightly more damage than the other ranger at-wills if and only if your average weapon damage plus your non-attribute static bonuses are greater than your attribute modifier. However, this will not usually happen until around level 3-4, and even then the advantage is minimal. It's really a choice between an average of .5 damage more per turn or the ability to move or shift that the other powers grant; hardly "ridiculously powerful."

Artanis
2008-11-22, 05:43 PM
It's already happening at level 1 for my Ranger.

Longbow: 1d10
Dex Mod: +4
Average Longbow damage per hit = 5.5

So a one-attack power does 1d10+4 = 9.5 on average. Twin Strike does 2d10 = 11 on average. And if you pick up Weapon Focus, that widens the gap.

Magic items merely make the difference bigger. Enhancement bonuses go up faster than your stats, and twice as many shots means twice as many crits, which in turn means twice as many of those +XdY bonuses.

And to-hit actually doesn't matter in this comparison, since no matter what the to-hit is, Twin Strike will get twice as many hits in as a one-attack power. X% of Y attacks is still half as many hits as X% of 2Y attacks.

NecroRebel
2008-11-22, 05:54 PM
All true. I wasn't looking at the larger-die weapons so much, so the damage gap was far smaller.

However, I still would not call it ridicilously powerful, as even with a lot of damage boosters the gap still isn't huge. It's somewhat stronger than the other at-wills; however, the ability to move or shift freely will be very valuable much of the time as well, making it a fairly well-balanced power.

The only real exception is Careful Attack, which all the math points to being weaker than the others.

namo
2008-11-22, 06:04 PM
Further, that value is only at level 1 through 7. At level 8, when you could have increased your attribute modifier, your basic attack damage goes up but your twin strike damage doesn't (ignoring for this statement such things as enhancement, power, feat, and other static bonuses).

In short, the higher your attribute modifier, the less attractive Twin Strike becomes. It is only with other bonuses, including such things as Weapon Focus, that Twin Strike becomes as good a damage-dealer as a basic attack if your attribute modifier is greater than your weapon's average damage.

What you're saying is true but your presentation is biased. For instance, enhancement bonuses are something you get pretty much automatically and they progress faster than ability bonuses. At level 14, a single strike has +2 from ability increases and +3 from weapon enhancement ; Twin Strike has two times +3 from weapon enhancement. (At level 8, +1+1 versus 2 x +1 assuming the ranger only got a +1 weapon : that'd be a tie. It's 3 vs 4 otherwise.)

In short, Twin Strike becomes better as time goes by.

edit: ninja'ed :smallsmile:

KKL
2008-11-22, 06:30 PM
Twin Strike underpowered, what are you joking?

It's one of the best At-Wills ingame, aside from Righteous Brand and Commander's Strike :V

NecroRebel
2008-11-22, 07:24 PM
Twin Strike underpowered, what are you joking?

It's one of the best At-Wills ingame, aside from Righteous Brand and Commander's Strike :V

I was simply mistaken. I thought I had remembered seeing a comparison of various powers, one of which was weaker than the vast majority of others. There were 2 attack rolls associated with that weaker-than-average one, and I had thought that it was Twin Strike.

Now, I've gone back and looked at the math again, and it appears that the thing I was thinking of was a fix for Sure Strike and Careful Attack, both of which are significantly weaker than the other at-wills for their respective classes. The fix was to give those attacks 2 attack rolls and take the better one, which is what got me confused :smallredface:

That said, I still do not think Twin Strike is that much better than the other at-wills. It deals more damage, certainly, but misses out on some extra utility; as such, you'd probably end up using a different at-will in many of the cases where you'd use an at-will at all.

Oslecamo
2008-11-22, 07:29 PM
And that's why the minotaur race is so freaking good, and few DMs will allow it.

It's one of the only ways of increasing your weapon damage die, thus sky rocketing your damage easily.

Artanis
2008-11-22, 08:31 PM
I was simply mistaken. I thought I had remembered seeing a comparison of various powers, one of which was weaker than the vast majority of others. There were 2 attack rolls associated with that weaker-than-average one, and I had thought that it was Twin Strike.

Now, I've gone back and looked at the math again, and it appears that the thing I was thinking of was a fix for Sure Strike and Careful Attack, both of which are significantly weaker than the other at-wills for their respective classes. The fix was to give those attacks 2 attack rolls and take the better one, which is what got me confused :smallredface:

That said, I still do not think Twin Strike is that much better than the other at-wills. It deals more damage, certainly, but misses out on some extra utility; as such, you'd probably end up using a different at-will in many of the cases where you'd use an at-will at all.
You're forgetting Twin Strike's ability to hit multiple targets :smallwink:

Don't get me wrong, my Ranger gets plenty of use out of Nimble Strike, and there's some at-wills that are pretty strong. But Twin Strike is up there with the best of them.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-11-22, 09:03 PM
A fun idea with Twin Strike: Power Attack.

While not great at Heroic (+2 untyped damage bonus for -2 to hit), it starts getting fun in Paragon (+4 damage!) and, with CA, you're no worse off than if you were Twin Striking normally :smallbiggrin:

Asbestos
2008-11-22, 09:19 PM
And that's why the minotaur bugbear race is so freaking good, and few DMs will allow it.

It's one of the only ways of increasing your weapon damage die, thus sky rocketing your damage easily.

Fixed that.

Break
2008-11-22, 09:45 PM
A fun idea with Twin Strike: Power Attack.

While not great at Heroic (+2 untyped damage bonus for -2 to hit), it starts getting fun in Paragon (+4 damage!) and, with CA, you're no worse off than if you were Twin Striking normally :smallbiggrin:

It actually gets better with Fighter's Rain of Blows with the weapons listed in the power. Stacking Power Attack, static damage bonuses like Kensai's class ability or Weapon Focus, and the like results in some really high damage outputs out of a level 3 enounter power. A potential of four attacks like that is easily stronger than 7|W| + Str + static damage modifiers - a level 29 daily.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-11-22, 10:06 PM
It actually gets better with Fighter's Rain of Blows with the weapons listed in the power. Stacking Power Attack, static damage bonuses like Kensai's class ability or Weapon Focus, and the like results in some really high damage outputs out of a level 3 enounter power. A potential of four attacks like that is easily stronger than 7|W| + Str + static damage modifiers - a level 29 daily.

I really wish they'd Word of God how Rain of Blows is supposed to work. :smallannoyed:

The way I read it, the Primary Attack is 2, [W] + STR attacks, but if you meet the requirements for the Secondary Attack, you get another [W] + STR attack. So 3 in total. 4 just seems absolutely nuts (for the reasons you cited), and I can't see how you could read the power to only give 2 attacks.

Anyhoo, Fighters can get ridiculous damage output with two-handed weapons and Power Attack. Not 3E ridiculous, but once you hit Paragon, those pluses really start to add up. Why, just tonight I Prophecy of Doom'd a Vicious Greatsword +3 attacking with Thicket of Blades - good times :smallamused:

Break
2008-11-22, 10:17 PM
I really wish they'd Word of God how Rain of Blows is supposed to work. :smallannoyed:

The way I read it, the Primary Attack is 2, [W] + STR attacks, but if you meet the requirements for the Secondary Attack, you get another [W] + STR attack. So 3 in total. 4 just seems absolutely nuts (for the reasons you cited), and I can't see how you could read the power to only give 2 attacks.

I read it as "anytime the primary hits, the secondary happens if you meet the requirements," which will activate twice if you hit both.

Even if that's not the case, Rain of Blows is still ridiculously good for the level you get it at, assuming you have the proper weapon.

Artanis
2008-11-22, 10:51 PM
It gets even more messed up than that.

Look at the Ranger powers that involve multiple attacks. Their Hit lines say "such and such damage per attack." Rain of Blows does not. But other abilities where a hit allows a secondary attack, such as Acid Arrow, say so as part of the Hit line. So in other words, pretty much every single word of the power is contradictory to something. Every. Single. Word.

With that in mind, there's a third, equally valid interpretation: that it's normally just one attack, not two. If you meet the Weapon line requirements, then you add a secondary attack.

Not having the right weapon puts the damage at 1W+STR, which sucks but isn't that far below Precise Strike and Armor-Piercing Thrust. Meanwhile, having the right weapon gives a higher potential damage than Crushing Blow or Dance of Steel. So this interpretation leave it more or less balanced-ish with the other level 3 Encounter attacks.

Screwed up? Yes. Doesn't make a lot of sense? Definitely. But it fits the wording just as well as, if not better than, both other interpretations ("two attacks plus a secondary" and "two attacks, each with a secondary"), and you know how WotC can be with trivial-seeming details at times...

Oracle_Hunter
2008-11-22, 11:17 PM
See, I don't think the 2 attack interpretation is defensible. Look at the language:



Primary Target: One creature

Attack: Strength vs. AC, two attacks

Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage.

Weapon: If you’re wielding a light blade, a spear, or a flail
and have Dexterity 15 or higher, make a secondary attack.

Secondary Target: The same or a different target

Secondary Attack: Strength vs. AC

Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage.

The primary attack clearly says "two attacks" right there. Below that it says if you fit these requirements, you can make a secondary attack - whose statistics are listed below. Look at any other attack power with a secondary attack; the primary attack typically doesn't say anything more than "X v. Y" and under "Hit" it usually ends with "Make a Secondary Attack."

And against the 4 hits, you should read what grants a Secondary Attack. It's not in the Hit line; all you have to do is wield one of those weapons and have a Dex 15+. Granting extra secondary attacks with each hit doesn't track anything written here, and certainly doesn't follow the pattern of other Secondary Attack powers which include the "Make a Secondary Attack" under either the Hit or Effect heading.

I know it's an old debate, but seriously, can't they do a FAQ or something? :smallannoyed:

Break
2008-11-22, 11:20 PM
A FAQ or some well-worded errata would be extremely nice to have for Rain of Blows. I won't press the issue further so the topic has a shot at moving back on track, though.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-11-22, 11:24 PM
A FAQ or some well-worded errata would be extremely nice to have for Rain of Blows. I won't press the issue further so the topic has a shot at moving back on track, though.

Oh, I thought the question had been answered already. I've just been casually using the Ranger segue to complain about WotC being lazy with their drafting :smalltongue:

I mean, have you seen Titanium Dragon's epic Errata thread (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1067447)? Or his dissection of AV (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1100755)? Dude should be hired to do the final edits on all future 4E sourcebooks :smallbiggrin:

Nerd-o-rama
2008-11-22, 11:34 PM
Oh, I thought the question had been answered already. I've just been casually using the Ranger segue to complain about WotC being lazy with their drafting :smalltongue:

I mean, have you seen Titanium Dragon's epic Errata thread (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1067447)? Or his dissection of AV (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1100755)? Dude should be hired to do the final edits on all future 4E sourcebooks :smallbiggrin:Why would they do that when they can just copy his work off their forums? EULA for the win.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-11-23, 12:24 AM
Why would they do that when they can just copy his work off their forums? EULA for the win.

Indeed. Did you know WotC actually added a 4E Errata forum for consumers to identify broken powers and suggest errata for them? It's like someone at WotC skimmed an article about "crowd-sourcing" and decided they could just do that for their books.

The worst thing is that WotC isn't going to print up revised copies of their broken books next year. They're just going to wait for the "errata" to pile up for their current product run, and then release 4.5E when they want more money. Customer-friendly, they ain't. :smallannoyed: