Savage attacker is most useful when rerolling a low roll. You specifically only look at the average damage of weapons. At levels 1-4 this is fine, but once you get muti attack it stops being meaningful. Instead of using it every swing, you are only going to use it if your weapon damage is below average, or on the 2nd swing, if it was not used on the first.
The reason why I mention greatswords is that the way the math works out, you are way more likely to be around the average damage than to be at a high or low extreme because of the 2 dice. You'd only have a <3% chance of rolling max or min damage, and a ~50% chance of rolling a 6-8.
You also are applying the "advantage" incorrectly to the 2d6 if I understand it correctly. "You can roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice and use either roll against the target" Meaning you roll two sets of 2d6 and use the higher. It looks like you just doubled the average increase of rolling 1d6.
On a d12 you have an equal 1/12 chance of rolling any number. The chance of rolling low is greater, the chance of rolling high is greater too, meaning the chance to reroll is much more advantageous to a d12 than a 2d6.
Basically a d12 is more spikey and savage attacker allows you take advantage of that to avoid the lows and get more highs. While with a 2d6 you are way more likely to get an average roll and and average reroll.
Indeed you can use savage attack when your roll is low but that also adds to the issues, first off you can't actually be certain you'll hit on the next attack. From this perspective, I'd still say Savage Attacker is still playing a clear second place to Lucky since you're potentially turning a low roll into a medium or high roll where lucky is potentially turning a miss into a hit, or even a critical in rare cases.
Yes, the Greatsword normalizes damage more, I will admit that which I didn't fully calculate, I might look to redo that later, as that is an important factor.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
Yes, I'm certain. After factoring in the miss chance, Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter only add about +1 mean damage per attack. For a single weapon attack, being able to add nearly +2 is impressive. Only Duelist does it better, and just barely.
You can also combine the two, and every little bit of damage helps. Especially at lower levels. Plus, fighting styles are absolutely feats. There's literally a feat to grant a fighting style. Not a half-feat, with a +1 to an ability score, but a full feat. It's called Fighting Initiate, and it's found in Tasha's.
Again, this is a 1st-level feat that can only be used with the Attack when everyone only has one attack they can make. It can't even be used with the monk's bonus action Martial Arts if they pick a race with natural weapons. If it doesn't scale well past 5th-level, that's okay. It's only limited by how many times they try and Attack a target. It also might be a prerequisite for another feat. And if you think it's too weak, then suggest an improvement like adding a bonus weapon die on a critical hit. Because, I'm going to be honest, I miss having that along with the half-orc. It was fun when it came up, even if it wasn't often.
We can't assume that there will be a feat that requires Savage Attacker. Feedback that relies on such assumptions is flawed because there could as easily be no future feat that requires it.
Also, just because it is a first level feat doesn't mean it has to be this weak. Compare Savage Attacker to Lucky, Alert, Magic Initiate, or Musician and it is incredibly lack luster. Right now, there is no mechanical reason to pick Savage Attacker over a number of other first level feats.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
Lucky is anything but situational. It is applicable whenever you don't have advantage and more. It is usable both offensively and defensively, as you can use it for your attacks or against enemy attacks or to make Saving Throws. You can also use it on intiative which can combo with a party member's usage of Alert (another strong 1st level feat) Its only limit is its low early usage, but that rises pretty quickly.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
Savage attacker is most useful when rerolling a low roll. You specifically only look at the average damage of weapons. At levels 1-4 this is fine, but once you get muti attack it stops being meaningful. Instead of using it every swing, you are only going to use it if your weapon damage is below average, or on the 2nd swing, if it was not used on the first.
The reason why I mention greatswords is that the way the math works out, you are way more likely to be around the average damage than to be at a high or low extreme because of the 2 dice. You'd only have a <3% chance of rolling max or min damage, and a ~50% chance of rolling a 6-8.
You also are applying the "advantage" incorrectly to the 2d6 if I understand it correctly. "You can roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice and use either roll against the target" Meaning you roll two sets of 2d6 and use the higher. It looks like you just doubled the average increase of rolling 1d6.
On a d12 you have an equal 1/12 chance of rolling any number. The chance of rolling low is greater, the chance of rolling high is greater too, meaning the chance to reroll is much more advantageous to a d12 than a 2d6.
Basically a d12 is more spikey and savage attacker allows you take advantage of that to avoid the lows and get more highs. While with a 2d6 you are way more likely to get an average roll and and average reroll.
Indeed you can use savage attack when your roll is low but that also adds to the issues, first off you can't actually be certain you'll hit on the next attack. From this perspective, I'd still say Savage Attacker is still playing a clear second place to Lucky since you're potentially turning a low roll into a medium or high roll where lucky is potentially turning a miss into a hit, or even a critical in rare cases.
Yes, the Greatsword normalizes damage more, I will admit that which I didn't fully calculate, I might look to redo that later, as that is an important factor.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
It's a weird relationship.
Statistically, you're still better off with the greatsword or maul. The average on 2d6 is 7; 8.3 repeating with great weapon fighting. The average on the d12 of a greataxe is still 6.5, or 7.3 repeating with the same fighting style. Savage Attacker adds roughly 16% every time, so even with the bell curve of 2d6 you're still coming out ahead.
It's the difference between 9.66 and 8.5. Which is, ironically, 1.16. It was always critical hits that made the d12 more attractive. And even then, you needed the barbarian's brutal critical (or some other source of an extra die) to start seeing a real difference.
Savage attacker increases a greataxe from 6.5 to 8.49. It increases a greatsword from 7 to 8.39 (and a longsword from 4.5 to 5.38). Since it only applies once per turn, if you're averaging at least 1.2 hits per turn a greatsword does more damage. At typical 70% hit probabilities it adds something like 0.9 damage per round in tier 1, 1.2 in tier 2 (assuming 2 attacks per round).
Which is, at typical encounter durations and number of encounters per day, less bonus damage than taking Lucky and using it for nothing but attacks (worth around 13 damage per day at level 1, 22 at level 5). And lucky has plenty of other uses, such as avoiding status effects that reduce your damage by far more than missing.
Savage attacker is most useful when rerolling a low roll. You specifically only look at the average damage of weapons. At levels 1-4 this is fine, but once you get muti attack it stops being meaningful. Instead of using it every swing, you are only going to use it if your weapon damage is below average, or on the 2nd swing, if it was not used on the first.
The reason why I mention greatswords is that the way the math works out, you are way more likely to be around the average damage than to be at a high or low extreme because of the 2 dice. You'd only have a <3% chance of rolling max or min damage, and a ~50% chance of rolling a 6-8.
You also are applying the "advantage" incorrectly to the 2d6 if I understand it correctly. "You can roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice and use either roll against the target" Meaning you roll two sets of 2d6 and use the higher. It looks like you just doubled the average increase of rolling 1d6.
On a d12 you have an equal 1/12 chance of rolling any number. The chance of rolling low is greater, the chance of rolling high is greater too, meaning the chance to reroll is much more advantageous to a d12 than a 2d6.
Basically a d12 is more spikey and savage attacker allows you take advantage of that to avoid the lows and get more highs. While with a 2d6 you are way more likely to get an average roll and and average reroll.
Indeed you can use savage attack when your roll is low but that also adds to the issues, first off you can't actually be certain you'll hit on the next attack. From this perspective, I'd still say Savage Attacker is still playing a clear second place to Lucky since you're potentially turning a low roll into a medium or high roll where lucky is potentially turning a miss into a hit, or even a critical in rare cases.
Yes, the Greatsword normalizes damage more, I will admit that which I didn't fully calculate, I might look to redo that later, as that is an important factor.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
It's a weird relationship.
Statistically, you're still better off with the greatsword or maul. The average on 2d6 is 7; 8.3 repeating with great weapon fighting. The average on the d12 of a greataxe is still 6.5, or 7.3 repeating with the same fighting style. Savage Attacker adds roughly 16% every time, so even with the bell curve of 2d6 you're still coming out ahead.
It's the difference between 9.66 and 8.5. Which is, ironically, 1.16. It was always critical hits that made the d12 more attractive. And even then, you needed the barbarian's brutal critical (or some other source of an extra die) to start seeing a real difference.
Right but again, looking at averages is not an accurate way of gauging how good this feat is for a d12 vs 2d6.
A good way of explaining what I'm talking about is to look at the Mode rather than Average. The mode of 2d6 is going to be 7, the mode for a d12 doesn't exist because each side has the same probability.
If you are rolling 2d6 you are going to consistently be close to average damage, with the damage following a normal curve.
With 1d12 you have an equal chance of rolling any number, which means you are more likely to roll extreme highs or lows. This means the feat is much better for a d12 because.
For a 2d6 roll, you only have a 16% chance to roll a 2-4 or 10-12. For a 1d12, you have a 58% chance to roll a 1-4 or 10-12
Savage attacker is most useful when rerolling a low roll. You specifically only look at the average damage of weapons. At levels 1-4 this is fine, but once you get muti attack it stops being meaningful. Instead of using it every swing, you are only going to use it if your weapon damage is below average, or on the 2nd swing, if it was not used on the first.
The reason why I mention greatswords is that the way the math works out, you are way more likely to be around the average damage than to be at a high or low extreme because of the 2 dice. You'd only have a <3% chance of rolling max or min damage, and a ~50% chance of rolling a 6-8.
You also are applying the "advantage" incorrectly to the 2d6 if I understand it correctly. "You can roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice and use either roll against the target" Meaning you roll two sets of 2d6 and use the higher. It looks like you just doubled the average increase of rolling 1d6.
On a d12 you have an equal 1/12 chance of rolling any number. The chance of rolling low is greater, the chance of rolling high is greater too, meaning the chance to reroll is much more advantageous to a d12 than a 2d6.
Basically a d12 is more spikey and savage attacker allows you take advantage of that to avoid the lows and get more highs. While with a 2d6 you are way more likely to get an average roll and and average reroll.
Indeed you can use savage attack when your roll is low but that also adds to the issues, first off you can't actually be certain you'll hit on the next attack. From this perspective, I'd still say Savage Attacker is still playing a clear second place to Lucky since you're potentially turning a low roll into a medium or high roll where lucky is potentially turning a miss into a hit, or even a critical in rare cases.
Yes, the Greatsword normalizes damage more, I will admit that which I didn't fully calculate, I might look to redo that later, as that is an important factor.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
It's a weird relationship.
Statistically, you're still better off with the greatsword or maul. The average on 2d6 is 7; 8.3 repeating with great weapon fighting. The average on the d12 of a greataxe is still 6.5, or 7.3 repeating with the same fighting style. Savage Attacker adds roughly 16% every time, so even with the bell curve of 2d6 you're still coming out ahead.
It's the difference between 9.66 and 8.5. Which is, ironically, 1.16. It was always critical hits that made the d12 more attractive. And even then, you needed the barbarian's brutal critical (or some other source of an extra die) to start seeing a real difference.
Right but again, looking at averages is not an accurate way of gauging how good this feat is for a d12 vs 2d6.
A good way of explaining what I'm talking about is to look at the Mode rather than Average. The mode of 2d6 is going to be 7, the mode for a d12 doesn't exist because each side has the same probability.
If you are rolling 2d6 you are going to consistently be close to average damage, with the damage following a normal curve.
With 1d12 you have an equal chance of rolling any number, which means you are more likely to roll extreme highs or lows. This means the feat is much better for a d12 because.
For a 2d6 roll, you only have a 16% chance to roll a 2-4 or 10-12. For a 1d12, you have a 58% chance to roll a 1-4 or 10-12
I can not express how much THIS is the real way that savage attacker needs to be looked at. It isn't about the averages it is about how it feels and the dropped frequency of occurrence of the lowest end with the increased frequency of both average and higher results.
Savage attacker is most useful when rerolling a low roll. You specifically only look at the average damage of weapons. At levels 1-4 this is fine, but once you get muti attack it stops being meaningful. Instead of using it every swing, you are only going to use it if your weapon damage is below average, or on the 2nd swing, if it was not used on the first.
The reason why I mention greatswords is that the way the math works out, you are way more likely to be around the average damage than to be at a high or low extreme because of the 2 dice. You'd only have a <3% chance of rolling max or min damage, and a ~50% chance of rolling a 6-8.
You also are applying the "advantage" incorrectly to the 2d6 if I understand it correctly. "You can roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice and use either roll against the target" Meaning you roll two sets of 2d6 and use the higher. It looks like you just doubled the average increase of rolling 1d6.
On a d12 you have an equal 1/12 chance of rolling any number. The chance of rolling low is greater, the chance of rolling high is greater too, meaning the chance to reroll is much more advantageous to a d12 than a 2d6.
Basically a d12 is more spikey and savage attacker allows you take advantage of that to avoid the lows and get more highs. While with a 2d6 you are way more likely to get an average roll and and average reroll.
Indeed you can use savage attack when your roll is low but that also adds to the issues, first off you can't actually be certain you'll hit on the next attack. From this perspective, I'd still say Savage Attacker is still playing a clear second place to Lucky since you're potentially turning a low roll into a medium or high roll where lucky is potentially turning a miss into a hit, or even a critical in rare cases.
Yes, the Greatsword normalizes damage more, I will admit that which I didn't fully calculate, I might look to redo that later, as that is an important factor.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
It's a weird relationship.
Statistically, you're still better off with the greatsword or maul. The average on 2d6 is 7; 8.3 repeating with great weapon fighting. The average on the d12 of a greataxe is still 6.5, or 7.3 repeating with the same fighting style. Savage Attacker adds roughly 16% every time, so even with the bell curve of 2d6 you're still coming out ahead.
It's the difference between 9.66 and 8.5. Which is, ironically, 1.16. It was always critical hits that made the d12 more attractive. And even then, you needed the barbarian's brutal critical (or some other source of an extra die) to start seeing a real difference.
Right but again, looking at averages is not an accurate way of gauging how good this feat is for a d12 vs 2d6.
A good way of explaining what I'm talking about is to look at the Mode rather than Average. The mode of 2d6 is going to be 7, the mode for a d12 doesn't exist because each side has the same probability.
If you are rolling 2d6 you are going to consistently be close to average damage, with the damage following a normal curve.
With 1d12 you have an equal chance of rolling any number, which means you are more likely to roll extreme highs or lows. This means the feat is much better for a d12 because.
For a 2d6 roll, you only have a 16% chance to roll a 2-4 or 10-12. For a 1d12, you have a 58% chance to roll a 1-4 or 10-12
You're right. The mean and mode for 2d6 are identical, so I got my wires crossed. (It's also the median, but we don't care about that.) It happens.
Savage Attacker does, at least, feel better with the d12 because you're almost always going higher. If that's what you want to do. It is possible to use the feat and go lower if your character is, for example, charmed; giving it a defensive utility. But I digress.
The issue, I think, now comes down to timing. In the PHB, you rerolled the weapon's damage. Now, we don't. It works like advantage/disadvantage, where we roll both simultaneously. At least, that's how I interpret it. Because the word "reroll" doesn't appear. And that can't be accidental, because it does appear elsewhere.
I don't think I've seen critical hits mentioned. People complain a lot about low damage critical hits. With the changes to critical hits only affecting weapon damage, Savage Attacker may be one of only a few sources of improving damage on a critical hit. It lets you "roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice". And a critical hit tells you to "roll the damage dice of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a second time and add the second roll as extra damage to the target. For example, a Mace deals Bludgeoning Damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you score a Critical Hit with the Mace, it instead deals 2d6 + your Strength modifier." I find the wording on this rather bad, but the way the example is phrased makes me think that on a critical hit with Savage Attacker we would roll 2d6 twice and pick the best result to add our strength modifier to.
In a crit fisher build - which will also enjoy more advantage on attacks than now from the increase in inspiration bonuses, meaning more crits - the extra damage from this feat would scale to some degree along with your crit range. Maybe even then it's not the best, idk. But it seems good, and the once per turn restriction makes some sense versus having the improvement on every attack. And in the long run, there's nothing saying that you won't have Savage Attacker and Lucky or whatever other feats all stacking together.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
None of those are broken. You still need to meet the component costs for those spells. If you want shillelagh, then you need a wooden implement and a component pouch. You don't get to use your spellcasting focus. So a Sorcerer with the Hermit background, which is a PHB suggestion, can start with Magic Initiate (Primal) to pick up the cantrip, plus one more, and a 1st-level primal spell (like cure wounds). And they can use the quarterstaff that comes with the background, but as part of their class gear they're choosing the component pouch.
If you want to be a Paladin with shield, then you better not have an actual shield on your arm. You need to meet the somatic component for the spell.
Personally, I'm looking forward to trying out an Acolyte Evoker with sacred flame and guiding bolt. I'm expecting some adjustments to account for the new changes to spell compatibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
None of those are broken. You still need to meet the component costs for those spells. If you want shillelagh, then you need a wooden implement and a component pouch. You don't get to use your spellcasting focus. So a Sorcerer with the Hermit background, which is a PHB suggestion, can start with Magic Initiate (Primal) to pick up the cantrip, plus one more, and a 1st-level primal spell (like cure wounds). And they can use the quarterstaff that comes with the background, but as part of their class gear they're choosing the component pouch.
If you want to be a Paladin with shield, then you better not have an actual shield on your arm. You need to meet the somatic component for the spell.
Personally, I'm looking forward to trying out an Acolyte Evoker with sacred flame and guiding bolt. I'm expecting some adjustments to account for the new changes to spell compatibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
None of the material components of Shillelagh have an associated cost, thus they most definitely can be replaced by a spellcasting focus.
A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.
As you can use the hand for a material component to perform the somatic component, a Paladin with club and shield (adorned with holy symbol) can most definitely cast Shillelagh in this way from Magic Initiate.
Tho you are right that a paladin without a free hand can't cast shield, but not all paladins do use shields, however the shield spell was never my example, but yes, a paladin using a 2-handed weapon can still cast the shield spell as 2 hands are only needed for making attacks, not for holding the weapon. If a paladin wanted to be able to cast shield while holding a shield and weapon, they'd need war caster currently.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
None of those are broken. You still need to meet the component costs for those spells. If you want shillelagh, then you need a wooden implement and a component pouch. You don't get to use your spellcasting focus. So a Sorcerer with the Hermit background, which is a PHB suggestion, can start with Magic Initiate (Primal) to pick up the cantrip, plus one more, and a 1st-level primal spell (like cure wounds). And they can use the quarterstaff that comes with the background, but as part of their class gear they're choosing the component pouch.
If you want to be a Paladin with shield, then you better not have an actual shield on your arm. You need to meet the somatic component for the spell.
Personally, I'm looking forward to trying out an Acolyte Evoker with sacred flame and guiding bolt. I'm expecting some adjustments to account for the new changes to spell compatibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
None of the material components of Shillelagh have an associated cost, thus they most definitely can be replaced by a spellcasting focus.
A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.
As you can use the hand for a material component to perform the somatic component, a Paladin with club and shield (adorned with holy symbol) can most definitely cast Shillelagh in this way from Magic Initiate.
Tho you are right that a paladin without a free hand can't cast shield, but not all paladins do use shields, however the shield spell was never my example, but yes, a paladin using a 2-handed weapon can still cast the shield spell as 2 hands are only needed for making attacks, not for holding the weapon. If a paladin wanted to be able to cast shield while holding a shield and weapon, they'd need war caster currently.
For the love of...
You can only use the spellcasting focus if either the focus or the class says you can. For example, a sorcerer can use an arcane focus to meet the spellcasting requirement for its spells. But if you have a spell off another class' list, you can't use the focus for it. There are the occasional, class-agnostic focus, like the ruby of the war mage, but that's different.
Like, an eldritch knight or arcane trickster cannot normally use a spellcasting focus because their spellcasting feature doesn't say they can. And a cleric with the nature domain still needs to meet the component requirement of any druid cantrip they choose; which kind of limits their options.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
None of those are broken. You still need to meet the component costs for those spells. If you want shillelagh, then you need a wooden implement and a component pouch. You don't get to use your spellcasting focus. So a Sorcerer with the Hermit background, which is a PHB suggestion, can start with Magic Initiate (Primal) to pick up the cantrip, plus one more, and a 1st-level primal spell (like cure wounds). And they can use the quarterstaff that comes with the background, but as part of their class gear they're choosing the component pouch.
If you want to be a Paladin with shield, then you better not have an actual shield on your arm. You need to meet the somatic component for the spell.
Personally, I'm looking forward to trying out an Acolyte Evoker with sacred flame and guiding bolt. I'm expecting some adjustments to account for the new changes to spell compatibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
None of the material components of Shillelagh have an associated cost, thus they most definitely can be replaced by a spellcasting focus.
A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.
As you can use the hand for a material component to perform the somatic component, a Paladin with club and shield (adorned with holy symbol) can most definitely cast Shillelagh in this way from Magic Initiate.
Tho you are right that a paladin without a free hand can't cast shield, but not all paladins do use shields, however the shield spell was never my example, but yes, a paladin using a 2-handed weapon can still cast the shield spell as 2 hands are only needed for making attacks, not for holding the weapon. If a paladin wanted to be able to cast shield while holding a shield and weapon, they'd need war caster currently.
For the love of...
You can only use the spellcasting focus if either the focus or the class says you can. For example, a sorcerer can use an arcane focus to meet the spellcasting requirement for its spells. But if you have a spell off another class' list, you can't use the focus for it. There are the occasional, class-agnostic focus, like the ruby of the war mage, but that's different.
Like, an eldritch knight or arcane trickster cannot normally use a spellcasting focus because their spellcasting feature doesn't say they can. And a cleric with the nature domain still needs to meet the component requirement of any druid cantrip they choose; which kind of limits their options.
This is basic. How do you not know this?
Because I'm tired and forgot that part since it's not under casting focus, it's under class description, sorry. However you raise an interesting point, what spell casting focuses are even applicable anymore, given they aren't from class lists... However this said, you can still hold the components to be used in the same hand as the club, as far as I can see, so Shillelagh is still possible by just having Mistletoe and a Shamrock leaf. Nothing specifies these need to be in a separate hand from the club. A bit of duct tape, or nail into the side of the club.... it's an unusual case, since the club itself is part of the material components.
EDIT: I'll go a bit further and say most groups I've played in, don't normally care too deeply about the components of a spell unless it has a cost or there is some effect that might prevent is (like silence). It's just faster to home brew it away, DM doesn't want to have to look it up every time because it slows down combat and story telling.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
None of those are broken. You still need to meet the component costs for those spells. If you want shillelagh, then you need a wooden implement and a component pouch. You don't get to use your spellcasting focus. So a Sorcerer with the Hermit background, which is a PHB suggestion, can start with Magic Initiate (Primal) to pick up the cantrip, plus one more, and a 1st-level primal spell (like cure wounds). And they can use the quarterstaff that comes with the background, but as part of their class gear they're choosing the component pouch.
If you want to be a Paladin with shield, then you better not have an actual shield on your arm. You need to meet the somatic component for the spell.
Personally, I'm looking forward to trying out an Acolyte Evoker with sacred flame and guiding bolt. I'm expecting some adjustments to account for the new changes to spell compatibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
Never said they were broken, but it shows how much bettet Magic Initiate is over Savage Attacker. A component pouch solves the material requirement issue.
Warcaster is pretty much a must have for sword and shield paladin if optimization is involved. Until 4th level, a paladin can just use a greatsword and then switch to sword and shield when they get warcaster. Even without a shield, they can reach as high as a 22 with the shield spell, Chainmail, and the Defense Fighting Style; if they add on Shield of Faith, that bumps up to a 24 AC. Once they have Warcaster, they can use a shield as well so with the Defense Fighting Style, Shield of Faith, and the Shield Spell, that is 26 AC.
I agree that lucky is still very strong and advantage on hit is better than on weapon damage, but at lower levels with low PB it's going to be extremely situational.
It's pretty dependent on your table and how many encounters you'd have per long rest.
I still like the fact that it does something that gives a machinal reason to use a 2 hander other than a great sword. Idk if you can really mathematically see how much benefit the feat would be with a d12 but just estimating it does seem like it would be a decent damage increase.
More than anything, I think it fun for players to reroll crappy damage rolls. I've had a guy at my table who constantly rolls terribly on damage and would love something like this.
We can't assume that there will be a feat that requires Savage Attacker. Feedback that relies on such assumptions is flawed because there could as easily be no future feat that requires it.
Also, just because it is a first level feat doesn't mean it has to be this weak. Compare Savage Attacker to Lucky, Alert, Magic Initiate, or Musician and it is incredibly lack luster. Right now, there is no mechanical reason to pick Savage Attacker over a number of other first level feats.
Lucky is anything but situational. It is applicable whenever you don't have advantage and more. It is usable both offensively and defensively, as you can use it for your attacks or against enemy attacks or to make Saving Throws. You can also use it on intiative which can combo with a party member's usage of Alert (another strong 1st level feat) Its only limit is its low early usage, but that rises pretty quickly.
Also have to look at Magic Initiate. Magic Initiate can give you access to Shield, +5 AC as a reaction, of which you get one free casting of and can then cast it using spell slots. So Paladins, Rangers, Bards, Druids, and Clerics all now can have access to an amazing first level spell that sees usage at all tiers of play without needing to multiclass and have one free casting of it to boot.
Characters with classes that already have Shield (Wizards, Sorcerers, Artificers) can learn Bless and Guidance instead, again spells that see usage in all tiers of play. Even full martial characters can find value in having access to spells like Bless and Guidance, even if only once per long rest.
It's a weird relationship.
Statistically, you're still better off with the greatsword or maul. The average on 2d6 is 7; 8.3 repeating with great weapon fighting. The average on the d12 of a greataxe is still 6.5, or 7.3 repeating with the same fighting style. Savage Attacker adds roughly 16% every time, so even with the bell curve of 2d6 you're still coming out ahead.
It's the difference between 9.66 and 8.5. Which is, ironically, 1.16. It was always critical hits that made the d12 more attractive. And even then, you needed the barbarian's brutal critical (or some other source of an extra die) to start seeing a real difference.
Savage attacker increases a greataxe from 6.5 to 8.49. It increases a greatsword from 7 to 8.39 (and a longsword from 4.5 to 5.38). Since it only applies once per turn, if you're averaging at least 1.2 hits per turn a greatsword does more damage. At typical 70% hit probabilities it adds something like 0.9 damage per round in tier 1, 1.2 in tier 2 (assuming 2 attacks per round).
Which is, at typical encounter durations and number of encounters per day, less bonus damage than taking Lucky and using it for nothing but attacks (worth around 13 damage per day at level 1, 22 at level 5). And lucky has plenty of other uses, such as avoiding status effects that reduce your damage by far more than missing.
Right but again, looking at averages is not an accurate way of gauging how good this feat is for a d12 vs 2d6.
A good way of explaining what I'm talking about is to look at the Mode rather than Average. The mode of 2d6 is going to be 7, the mode for a d12 doesn't exist because each side has the same probability.
If you are rolling 2d6 you are going to consistently be close to average damage, with the damage following a normal curve.
With 1d12 you have an equal chance of rolling any number, which means you are more likely to roll extreme highs or lows. This means the feat is much better for a d12 because.
For a 2d6 roll, you only have a 16% chance to roll a 2-4 or 10-12.
For a 1d12, you have a 58% chance to roll a 1-4 or 10-12
I can not express how much THIS is the real way that savage attacker needs to be looked at. It isn't about the averages it is about how it feels and the dropped frequency of occurrence of the lowest end with the increased frequency of both average and higher results.
If you really want to look at the statistics, go to anydice.com and enter something like "output [ highest of 2d6 and 2d6 ]"
You're right. The mean and mode for 2d6 are identical, so I got my wires crossed. (It's also the median, but we don't care about that.) It happens.
Savage Attacker does, at least, feel better with the d12 because you're almost always going higher. If that's what you want to do. It is possible to use the feat and go lower if your character is, for example, charmed; giving it a defensive utility. But I digress.
The issue, I think, now comes down to timing. In the PHB, you rerolled the weapon's damage. Now, we don't. It works like advantage/disadvantage, where we roll both simultaneously. At least, that's how I interpret it. Because the word "reroll" doesn't appear. And that can't be accidental, because it does appear elsewhere.
I don't think I've seen critical hits mentioned. People complain a lot about low damage critical hits. With the changes to critical hits only affecting weapon damage, Savage Attacker may be one of only a few sources of improving damage on a critical hit. It lets you "roll the Weapon’s damage dice twice". And a critical hit tells you to "roll the damage dice of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a second time and add the second roll as extra damage to the target. For example, a Mace deals Bludgeoning Damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you score a Critical Hit with the Mace, it instead deals 2d6 + your Strength modifier." I find the wording on this rather bad, but the way the example is phrased makes me think that on a critical hit with Savage Attacker we would roll 2d6 twice and pick the best result to add our strength modifier to.
In a crit fisher build - which will also enjoy more advantage on attacks than now from the increase in inspiration bonuses, meaning more crits - the extra damage from this feat would scale to some degree along with your crit range. Maybe even then it's not the best, idk. But it seems good, and the once per turn restriction makes some sense versus having the improvement on every attack. And in the long run, there's nothing saying that you won't have Savage Attacker and Lucky or whatever other feats all stacking together.
first off +1, second off, there are even more broken things that can be gained.
Paladin and Bladesinger can get Shillelagh as Charisma/Intelligence, respectively 1d8 club. so now Charisma focused Paladin more viable and let's not get started on how that breaks Bladesinger even more...
If you're using ranged attacks, hunter's mark or hex becomes more attractive for the damage it can add... the concentration makes it less attractive for melee builds.
Also never forget the classic for magic initiate, Find Familiar, because everybody knows Familiars aren't broken for 1st level!
None of those are broken. You still need to meet the component costs for those spells. If you want shillelagh, then you need a wooden implement and a component pouch. You don't get to use your spellcasting focus. So a Sorcerer with the Hermit background, which is a PHB suggestion, can start with Magic Initiate (Primal) to pick up the cantrip, plus one more, and a 1st-level primal spell (like cure wounds). And they can use the quarterstaff that comes with the background, but as part of their class gear they're choosing the component pouch.
If you want to be a Paladin with shield, then you better not have an actual shield on your arm. You need to meet the somatic component for the spell.
Personally, I'm looking forward to trying out an Acolyte Evoker with sacred flame and guiding bolt. I'm expecting some adjustments to account for the new changes to spell compatibility, but we'll just have to wait and see.
None of the material components of Shillelagh have an associated cost, thus they most definitely can be replaced by a spellcasting focus.
As you can use the hand for a material component to perform the somatic component, a Paladin with club and shield (adorned with holy symbol) can most definitely cast Shillelagh in this way from Magic Initiate.
Tho you are right that a paladin without a free hand can't cast shield, but not all paladins do use shields, however the shield spell was never my example, but yes, a paladin using a 2-handed weapon can still cast the shield spell as 2 hands are only needed for making attacks, not for holding the weapon. If a paladin wanted to be able to cast shield while holding a shield and weapon, they'd need war caster currently.
For the love of...
You can only use the spellcasting focus if either the focus or the class says you can. For example, a sorcerer can use an arcane focus to meet the spellcasting requirement for its spells. But if you have a spell off another class' list, you can't use the focus for it. There are the occasional, class-agnostic focus, like the ruby of the war mage, but that's different.
Like, an eldritch knight or arcane trickster cannot normally use a spellcasting focus because their spellcasting feature doesn't say they can. And a cleric with the nature domain still needs to meet the component requirement of any druid cantrip they choose; which kind of limits their options.
This is basic. How do you not know this?
Because I'm tired and forgot that part since it's not under casting focus, it's under class description, sorry. However you raise an interesting point, what spell casting focuses are even applicable anymore, given they aren't from class lists... However this said, you can still hold the components to be used in the same hand as the club, as far as I can see, so Shillelagh is still possible by just having Mistletoe and a Shamrock leaf. Nothing specifies these need to be in a separate hand from the club. A bit of duct tape, or nail into the side of the club.... it's an unusual case, since the club itself is part of the material components.
EDIT: I'll go a bit further and say most groups I've played in, don't normally care too deeply about the components of a spell unless it has a cost or there is some effect that might prevent is (like silence). It's just faster to home brew it away, DM doesn't want to have to look it up every time because it slows down combat and story telling.
Never said they were broken, but it shows how much bettet Magic Initiate is over Savage Attacker. A component pouch solves the material requirement issue.
Warcaster is pretty much a must have for sword and shield paladin if optimization is involved. Until 4th level, a paladin can just use a greatsword and then switch to sword and shield when they get warcaster. Even without a shield, they can reach as high as a 22 with the shield spell, Chainmail, and the Defense Fighting Style; if they add on Shield of Faith, that bumps up to a 24 AC. Once they have Warcaster, they can use a shield as well so with the Defense Fighting Style, Shield of Faith, and the Shield Spell, that is 26 AC.