Basic Feat Design Rules

The homebrew forum

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Maj
Prince
Posts: 4705
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Shelton, Washington, USA

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Maj »

Random Casualty wrote:And once your character's acknowledge that it's an automatic miss, you're basicalyl into metagame land,


You can't acknowledge ever that it's an automatic miss. You can acknowledge that after 3 tries, you haven't hit the guy. Hopefully, your character will think something to the effect of "Oh, crap. This isn't working. Let's try something different."

RC wrote:beacuse to your character, there's no reason he shouldn't be able to land a blow there.


No. To the player, there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to hit. In theory, your character would just figure his tactics or style aren't effective for this guy/creature/monster/whatever. There are always tactics that are ineffective against some enemies, and if you don't have that in a game, it totally breaks believe-ability, not to mention stifling player creativity, and leading to really boring encounters.

RC wrote:He'd just think he has super high AC or something.


No he wouldn't. The player might, but for characters there usually isn't a concept of AC, which means that there are myriad other reasons that characters could come up with to explain why they just can't seem to hit their target. Many of them could even be things that haven't been written into the rules of D&D yet - like a melee variation of Wind Wall.

Right now, you are totally metagaming because you are assuming that Ess is talking about one particular thing that you are against. While that might certainly be the case, neither of us honestly know. Until you do, I'd check your answers, if I were you.
My son makes me laugh. Maybe he'll make you laugh, too.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

Maj at [unixtime wrote:1083351847[/unixtime]]
You can't acknowledge ever that it's an automatic miss. You can acknowledge that after 3 tries, you haven't hit the guy. Hopefully, your character will think something to the effect of "Oh, crap. This isn't working. Let's try something different."

RIght so to be a good PC or NPC you have to try a few times... and basically this gives your opponent a huge advantage.

So this feat greatly rewards metagamers by having an automatic miss mechanic and that's bad. It also rewards metagamers by punishing people for flanking their enemy, because only a metagamer wouldn't do that.


No. To the player, there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to hit. In theory, your character would just figure his tactics or style aren't effective for this guy/creature/monster/whatever. There are always tactics that are ineffective against some enemies, and if you don't have that in a game, it totally breaks believe-ability, not to mention stifling player creativity, and leading to really boring encounters.

What breaks believability is that a feat in the hands of a 5th level fighter with no armor and 13 dex can enable him to dodge an attack from Thor just because Thor happens to be flanking him. In fact, Thor hits the silver dragon he happened to be flanking with, and kills him.

Tell me how that is in any way believable?

Thor is faster, better and regardless of any tricks the fighter has, Thor should be able to crush this guy without any problem. He's a freaking god against a 5th level character.

What I changed elusive target to in my campaigns is that if the enemy misses on his first attack, then he can shift the attack to anyone else within 5' of the target. So it works whenever you're fighting multiple opponents, regardless of if they're flanking you. In fact since flanking grants a +2 to hit, it's harder to use this feat when they're flanking you, because they're more likely to hit you. And of course, Thor still smites your mortal character effortlessly as he should.
The_Hanged_Man
Knight-Baron
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by The_Hanged_Man »

Thor's no dummy. He figures out what's going on, casts True Resurrection, backs up 10 feet, and throws his Hammer o' Kicking Butt. End of 5th level fighter - who might get a footnote in a minor epic about Thor's recent battles.

How is it believable? Easy.

I'm a martial artist who trains in fighting multiple opponents and finding ways to make the opponents muck each other up. I specialize in dodging so as to make one of them stab at me when I'm at just the right place to make the stab hit their ally instead of me. I feint and draw a counterattack that misses me, but hits an ally. I use the momentum of an opponent's attack to throw them into another opponent.

Seems reasonable to me.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

The_Hanged_Man at [unixtime wrote:1083355381[/unixtime]]
I'm a martial artist who trains in fighting multiple opponents and finding ways to make the opponents muck each other up. I specialize in dodging so as to make one of them stab at me when I'm at just the right place to make the stab hit their ally instead of me. I feint and draw a counterattack that misses me, but hits an ally. I use the momentum of an opponent's attack to throw them into another opponent.


I would bet you everything I own that you couldn't make Thor miss like that. You couldn't even make Bruce Lee miss, and he's no god.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

I would bet you everything I own that you couldn't make Thor miss like that.


Of course not, Thor has always on Foresight, which means that he is already aware of the danger your feats present and can simply attack you in another way.

You couldn't even make Bruce Lee miss, and he's no god.


Did you see the Batman / Green Hornet crossover special?

If Adam West can do it, then someone who invests class features into it certainly can.

-Username17
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1083367222[/unixtime]]
Of course not, Thor has always on Foresight, which means that he is already aware of the danger your feats present and can simply attack you in another way.

You're totally missing the point. I mean seriously...

The point is that someone like Thor is WAY better than your 5th level fighter. Beyond even comparing. So damn good that if he even has to use a divination to try to figure out a way to counter you, he should be wasting his time. You don't have to consider all sorts of crap when you see an ant walking on the ground, you just freaking squash it. That's what's happening here. To give the ant a special technique that lets it automatically turn your squash into an attack that kills an ally, is just stupid.

Did you see the Batman / Green Hornet crossover special?

If Adam West can do it, then someone who invests class features into it certainly can.


Natural 1. Sure it could happen. Anybody can get unlucky and miss... well not Thor cause he ignores the automiss... but any normal mortal can roll a natural 1 and miss, in which case the attack could be redirected.

I'm not saying it's wrong to redirect attacks, I'm saying it's wrong to do it only while flanking for one, and to do so automatically with no regard to how good the other guy is. The first step to redirecting an attack is for the attack to miss you. This should require a failed attack roll.
User avatar
Desdan_Mervolam
Knight-Baron
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Desdan_Mervolam »

I have to ask, if you're not being flanked, just who are you redirecting those attacks into? Your best friend and blood-brother who's seen enough scary shit by your side to make Lovecraft flinch?

You keep saying that a combatant, surrounded by mooks, should not be able to redirect attacks by one mook into another mook, despite the fact that I have seen Errol Flynn, Bruce Lee, and John Woo all do this thing in many a movie.

-Desdan
Don't bother trying to impress gamers. They're too busy trying to impress you to care.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

Desdan_Mervolam at [unixtime wrote:1083396433[/unixtime]]
You keep saying that a combatant, surrounded by mooks, should not be able to redirect attacks by one mook into another mook, despite the fact that I have seen Errol Flynn, Bruce Lee, and John Woo all do this thing in many a movie.


No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that a combatant shouldn't be able to "automatically" redirect attacks. There's a difference.

Like I already stated before, how I play that elusive target ability in my games is that if the first attack made on you by the selected target misses you can redirect it to any other target within 5' of you.

Now, my version has a few key differences as I've already stated... for one, it requires that the enemy miss the target. It punishes the enemy's failure further, and actually makes his initial attack roll matter. If the guy hits you, this feat does nothing. You can't redirect an attack that's already hit you. So if you're fighting Thor, he still really doesn't care much about this feat, as he shouldn't.

Now, the second part is that flanking is still favorable against someone with this feat. You still get a +2 bonus against him, which improves your chance of hitting him. And as stated before, you've got to miss before he can use the feat on you.

So now, this feat becomes a strong feat for an AC build, one that depends on not getting hit, and becomes less of a feat for the hulking low AC barbarian, as it should. And it lets you do the cool Bruce Lee stuff you wanna do with it, it's just better designed.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

Like I already stated before, how I play that elusive target ability in my games is that if the first attack made on you by the selected target misses you can redirect it to any other target within 5' of you.


So a 6th level Fighter invests 3+ class features and ends up with something moderately inferior to Minor Image?

What the hell?

-Username17
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1083433967[/unixtime]]
So a 6th level Fighter invests 3+ class features and ends up with something moderately inferior to Minor Image?

What the hell?


Yeah, "what the hell?" pretty much sums up my thinking about what you just typed...

I fail to see how that's inferior to minor image.
User avatar
Essence
Knight-Baron
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Olympia, WA

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Essence »

Thor and his pet Great Wyrm Silver Dragon flanking the 5th level Fighter with Elusive Target:

Thor wins init; Thor attacks 5th level Fighter. Thor hits; Thor crits; Thor rolls max damage. 4d8+84 x3=348 damage.

Fighter uses Elusive Target to deflect this attack to the Great Wyrm. The Great Wyrm takes 348 damage, makes his Fort save vs. Massive Damgae without blinking.

Thor attacks the Fighter 3 more times, and smashes him into paste.
The Dragon attacks the Fighter 5 more times, and turns the paste into subatomic particles.


This feat you keep nononoing about it really quite significantly less powerful or annoying then you make it out to be, R.C. Maybe you should, you know, read it before you assume what it's capable of?

It's once per round, and it's only against one of the people that are attacking you. Surrounding and beating down someone with Elusive Target really is still a very smart thing to do. At worst, one flanker will take one hit from another -- and even that's not guaranteed.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

Essence at [unixtime wrote:1083528673[/unixtime]]Thor wins init; Thor attacks 5th level Fighter. Thor hits; Thor crits; Thor rolls max damage. 4d8+84 x3=348 damage.

Fighter uses Elusive Target to deflect this attack to the Great Wyrm. The Great Wyrm takes 348 damage, makes his Fort save vs. Massive Damgae without blinking.

Lets not forget annihilating strike... now shall we? That wyrm is so screwed.

And you're still dodging around the freaking point. A 5th level fighter just made a greater god miss. This seems reasonable to you for a feat? Because it makes me say "wtf is up with this shit?"

It just allowed a 5th level fighter to gain XP for killing a great wyrm, maybe even an advanced great wyrm. Sure, he died doing it, but he shouldn't even be able to do that in the first place.


It's once per round, and it's only against one of the people that are attacking you. Surrounding and beating down someone with Elusive Target really is still a very smart thing to do. At worst, one flanker will take one hit from another -- and even that's not guaranteed.


It's an automatic miss. An that IS guaranteed. No magic armor does that, no defensive spell does that, nothing does that.

That's damn incredible. Not to mention elusive target does some other awesome stuff too, like negate power attack.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

It's an automatic miss.


So is minor image, what's your freakin point? They don't even get a save until after they've interacted with it, which means that first they attack the point where none of your characters actually are (an automatic miss), then they get a Will Save to figure out what the hell.

Your "solution" is to make a feat called "Elusive Target" which does not make you any harder to hit. While it may still be viable from a simple damage output question - it doesn't actually perform the supposed purpose of the feat - which is to prolong your own life.

How does your "solution" make any sense? It increases your own offensive capabilities with no corresponding increase in your defensive capabilities. Furthermore, it makes you more "elusive" when your armor becomes heavier - even if your speed is going down.

Your proposal makes the feat counterintuitive - a boon for heavily armored tanks who need a boost to damage output instead of a boon for lightly armored mobility fighters desperately in need of a way to avoid getting hurt.

Your proposal doesn't make any sense, because the characters who are supposed to want it get nothing from it and the characters who supposedly don't need it want it for the opposite reason of what it is supposed to do.

So don't you even pretend to be handing out seminars on what does and does not make sense - you aren't making any sense, and haven't this whole thread.

-Username17
User avatar
Essence
Knight-Baron
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Olympia, WA

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Essence »

R.C. wrote:Lets not forget annihilating strike... now shall we? That wyrm is so screwed.


Thor can easily decline to use annihilating strike. That wyrm is just fine.


R.C. wrote:
It's an automatic miss. An that IS guaranteed. No magic armor does that, no defensive spell does that, nothing does that.


Actually, there are lots of effects that can cause an automatic miss on one attack. That same 5th level Fighter with a Displacement spell on will actually take fewer hits from Thor and the Dragon in one round than he will without the spell and with the feat.

Deflect Arrows automatically causes the first non-magical ranged attack made against a character to miss.

Contingency can be made to cause an automatic miss in any number of ways.

Mislead, as Frank pointed out, is indistinguishable from an automatic miss until you miss and realize it's an illusion.

There's lots of ways to cause automatic misses in specific circumstances. The fact that Deflect Arrows exists sets positive precident for Elusive Target.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1083537910[/unixtime]] "solution" make any sense? It increases your own offensive capabilities with no corresponding increase in your defensive capabilities. Furthermore, it makes you more "elusive" when your armor becomes heavier - even if your speed is going down.

What the feat actually does is kinda open for interpretation. Cause overreach for instance is entirely based on a missed attack, which is ok. Ignore power attack is purely a protection thing, but that just reduces damage.


Your proposal makes the feat counterintuitive - a boon for heavily armored tanks who need a boost to damage output instead of a boon for lightly armored mobility fighters desperately in need of a way to avoid getting hurt.

That's a good point, and I think I'm going to put a light armor restriction on the feat.

The feat as written is no better. Cause overreach is much better for the tank than it is the dextrous fighter.


Your proposal doesn't make any sense, because the characters who are supposed to want it get nothing from it and the characters who supposedly don't need it want it for the opposite reason of what it is supposed to do.

Well, this is a consequence that lightly armored characters just generally suck and that the dodge feat tree sucks. This isn't my fault, nor a fault of my system or the logical premise behind it.

As for some of the other arguments...

Illusions: Yeah, assuming you can't detect them they're an automatic miss, but that's misdirection at work. It's ok to make someone automatically miss if they fail to realize its an illusion. They've at least failed at something. And you could actually attack the non-illusory target so it's not actualyl a true "automatic".

Deflect arrows is a question, and really that one is probably overpowered too, but at the very least deflect arrows doesn't break the rule elusive target does. You don't gain more of an advantage from deflect arrows by being flanked. So deflect arrows is a completely different argument.

Remember, my main objection to elusive target is that it gives you a benefit for being flanked that you don't get when you're not flanked. That's pretty downright stupid.

Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

It's ok to make someone automatically miss if they fail to realize its an illusion. They've at least failed at something.


Failed to do what exactly? You don't even get a save until after you physically interact with it.

So first you make your attack, which automatically misses, then you get a Will save so that you don't have to flush all the rest of your attacks down the toilet as well.

-Username17
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1083568658[/unixtime]]
Failed to do what exactly? You don't even get a save until after you physically interact with it.

failed to have true seeing up. In the case of silent image, failed to succeed at a listen check to realize something is screwy about it because it's not making noise. Even something as simple as arcane sight revealing an illusion aura is sufficient to give away an illusion.

And then there's no indication you'll even attack the illusion at all. You have to select it as your target. So you failed in acquring the proper target. That's a choice you as the PC made and it was the wrong choice. Now maybe you didn't have the right information or the right items, but you nonetheless made the wrong choice.

It's much like coming to a door with a trap on it. If you don't have the skills to disarm it, that trap will always get you. If you do have the skills and you're good enough, you can disarm it.

Elusive target however is the inescapeable Gygaxian trap. You can't detect it no matter how good you are, and there's no way to avoid it short of using knowledge you wouldn't have without metagaming. No amount of skill is going to let you avoid it, hell you could be Thor, god of thunder and you still lose.


So first you make your attack, which automatically misses, then you get a Will save so that you don't have to flush all the rest of your attacks down the toilet as well.


Well I'd assume if you strike it and your sword goes straight through it, taht'd be sufficient cause to automatically disbelieve it. It works that way for mirror image anyway.

And even if you do require a save, the character can obviously feel that it didn't hit, as illusions aren't solid, so he could just assume it's an illusion even with a failed save.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

failed to have true seeing up.


OK... well Elusive Target gives you an automatic miss if you fail to not flank, and you fail to get your opponent to declare his Dodge against another target, and you fail to have Foresight, and you fail to attack your opponent while denied his dex bonus....

If your definition of "failure" includes "failed to have previously used an extremely expensive and rare killer application which becomes available 6 character levels later than the ability in question which would cancel it." then Elusive Target only works if they "fail" as well.

It is avoidable - and btw Thor actually does have the precognizance to know that you have it and how to counter it automatically. So he avoids it. Thor, by your definition, doesn't fail - and totally gets to hit you in the face with the hammer.

How "not having True Seeing" could be construed as failure but suddenly "not having denied your opponent their dex bonus" is not is beyond me. I mean, True Seeing is a 5th level spell for Clerics. Blink is a 3rd level spell, and Invisibility is a 2nd level spell. Both of them turn off the dodge Bonus and thus the Elusive Target. Elusive Target is easier to beat than Minor Image.

And even if you do require a save, the character can obviously feel that it didn't hit, as illusions aren't solid, so he could just assume it's an illusion even with a failed save.


1> Hitting it or spending a round studying it is the requirement for getting a save - so obviously this doesn't cause you to automatically disbelieve.

2> Do you stop attacking an enemy every time you miss because of incorporeality, blink, or displacement?

This is the D&D world, just because your sword passes through something doesn't mean it will the next time, nor does it mean the thing in question can' hurt you.

-Username17
The_Hanged_Man
Knight-Baron
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by The_Hanged_Man »

RandomCasualty at [unixtime wrote:1083364881[/unixtime]]
The_Hanged_Man at [unixtime wrote:1083355381[/unixtime]]
I'm a martial artist who trains in fighting multiple opponents and finding ways to make the opponents muck each other up. I specialize in dodging so as to make one of them stab at me when I'm at just the right place to make the stab hit their ally instead of me. I feint and draw a counterattack that misses me, but hits an ally. I use the momentum of an opponent's attack to throw them into another opponent.


I would bet you everything I own that you couldn't make Thor miss like that. You couldn't even make Bruce Lee miss, and he's no god.


Of course. I suck at fighting. I tend to miss when I try practice lunges at the air. I also didn't take Elusive Target - I probably took Skill Focus (writing annoying letters).

Also, Thor doesn't exist.

Now, assuming the opposite of all those things (and no foresight for Thor), then yes, I could make Thor miss.
User avatar
Desdan_Mervolam
Knight-Baron
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Desdan_Mervolam »

RandomCasualty at [unixtime wrote:1083574930[/unixtime]]And then there's no indication you'll even attack the illusion at all. You have to select it as your target. So you failed in acquring the proper target. That's a choice you as the PC made and it was the wrong choice. Now maybe you didn't have the right information or the right items, but you nonetheless made the wrong choice.


:wtf:
Okay, I'm confused. If a fighter attacks an illusion, then it's the fighters own damned fault because he should have chosen a non-illusionary target, but if that fighter gets punked accidentally by his rogue buddy because they were flanking an Elusive target, it's not his fault, even though he had about as much likelyhood of knowing how the guy can move as he would knowing that the mage who teleported into camp and started prophesising the gorey end of the party at the hands of the death-cult of Imokillyathoth was an illusion?

-Desdan
Don't bother trying to impress gamers. They're too busy trying to impress you to care.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

Desdan_Mervolam at [unixtime wrote:1083628741[/unixtime]]
Okay, I'm confused. If a fighter attacks an illusion, then it's the fighters own damned fault because he should have chosen a non-illusionary target, but if that fighter gets punked accidentally by his rogue buddy because they were flanking an Elusive target, it's not his fault, even though he had about as much likelyhood of knowing how the guy can move as he would knowing that the mage who teleported into camp and started prophesising the gorey end of the party at the hands of the death-cult of Imokillyathoth was an illusion?


Yes, because you're not even attacking the right target. You get a choice... you see two wizards, which one is the one you want to kill? You can choose right or wrong. Wiht elusive target, there is no choice. You can choose to not attack, and so you do no damage and you get boned. You can choose to attack and automatically miss and possibly hit your ally and get boned. It's a lose/lose situation, as opposed to the win/lose situation of an illusion.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

You get a choice... you see two wizards, which one is the one you want to kill?


With Mislead, of course, you only see one wizard. And it's the wrong one.

Even with Minor Image - you see one wizard and like two hundred and fifty trees.

You have the option of attacking trees and empty spaces, but a priori, why would you do that?

How is "not declaring your attack against some random empty area" considered a "failure" on your part? With Elusive Target you get the opportunity to pull whacky hijinx to turn their dodge bonus off - how exactly are you supposed to turn off illusion magic before you've wasted at least one action?

-Username17
Lago_AM3P
Duke
Posts: 1268
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Lago_AM3P »

Can we please frickin' stop holding sword-based characters to a higher level of 'realism' and 'flavor' than magic-users?

Pretty please?
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1083651476[/unixtime]]
With Mislead, of course, you only see one wizard. And it's the wrong one.

You don't have see invisibility. You could have dust of appearance, there's a bunch of stuff you could have. To the average fool without a way to detect invisibility, then yeah, you're hosed, but I have no problem with raping people of a lower level than you are. Thor would see through such a trick easily, I mean without even taking a second thought then he'd proceed to pound you into the dirt. It is by no means an automatic thing.


Even with Minor Image - you see one wizard and like two hundred and fifty trees.

Easily beaten. Take a charge action into towards the wizard's square. Automatic disbelief because you passed right through a "solid" object. Now all the illusion appears transparent and you can see the actual wizard without any problem, and you then proceed to pound him into the dirt with your charge.

At worst it costs you a move action to move into one of the illusory trees. The problem with creating tons of illusions with one spell is you only have to disbelieve one of them to disbelieve the entire spell.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Basic Feat Design Rules

Post by Username17 »

You don't have see invisibility. You could have dust of appearance, there's a bunch of stuff you could have.


And all of this costs you an action - which means that this action you automatically miss.

At worst it costs you a move action to move into one of the illusory trees.


And if it's a real tree - it costs you your whole turn. And if it's a fake tree with no Wizard in it, you get a save. And if it's a fake tree with a wizard in it you get a save and suffer an attack of opportunity.

How is any of this different from activating Blink, or in some other way denying your opponent their Dodge Bonus and getting past Elusive Target?

Or just jolly well taking a 5' step to a non-flanking square and pummeling the guy if you are Dodge trarget boy?

-Username17
Post Reply