Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

The homebrew forum

Moderator: Moderators

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

Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Lago_AM3P »

I explicitly do not believe in excusing weak feats like toughness and endurance as gateway feats for either better feats or PrCs. It's a sad, sad day when players are asked at first level to choose between dodge + mobility, C.E. + I. Trip and P. Attack + Cleave.

So. Here's just my quick attempt to fix up some of the poo feats.

Skill Focus: Should be a +3 bonus to two skills of your choice. Eliminate all of the crappy feats like 'alertness' and whatnot.

Toughness: Get rid of improved toughness, make this a flat +3 hit points for your first level and gives you an additional hp for every level you have. Can only be taken once. If you're playing with that silly massive damage rule, you don't have to make saves.

Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, etc.: First, streamline all of the saves like in Frank's FF d20 project. From now on, this save is always considered a good save for you and you get a +2 bonus at the level you take it.

Item Creation Feats: There should really be only two. Craft Magical Equipment (rods, wondrous items, armor and weapons) and Craft Magical Items.

Endurance: If you're playing with that silly auto-fail a save on a one rule, this eliminates any chance of it. Actually, I can't really think of anything good to do with this feat other than ignoring a rule that shouldn't be there.

Dodge: Choose one opponent. You gain a +2 to AC and the opponent never automatically hits you on a natural 20.

Mobility: You do not draw any attack of opportunities for performing a move-equivalent action that would draw one, i.e. moving, picking up items, standing up from prone, etc.

Whirlwind Attack: Like in 3.0E, only forfeits extra attacks from cleave and you can do it up to your reach.

Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Should give you proficiency in all exotic weapons.

Weapon Focus: Should give you a +1 bonus to all weapons of that category. Can be taken multiple times, even for the same category.

Weapon Specialization: Should give you a +2 bonus to damage AND an extra attack with the weapon.

Metamagic feats: All of them should give a save DC at the spell slot you use them with (this means getting rid of heighten spell). I also have no idea what to do with these.
MrWaeseL
Duke
Posts: 1249
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by MrWaeseL »

Hmmm...I like.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

I like most of your stuff. I'd recommend simply lumping the endurance benefit into toughness, becuase endurance is just crap, and there's no problem with just making it one feat.

Not sure about your item creation feats.. honestly nobody is going to bother taking craft magical items. Wondrous items and weapons/armor are about all you care about as far as item creation feats. And rods are a bonus because they let you amke metamagic rods.

For dodge, what I've done in my campaign is make it a flat +1 dodge bonus to AC against all melee attacks and dispensed with the stupid "declare an enemy" crap, because it slows down the game.

For mobility, I think your version may be a bit too powerful. What if you just made it a +4 to AC against all AoOs?

I'm not sure if weapon focus and weapon spec need any boosting. People take those feats already.
User avatar
Essence
Knight-Baron
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Olympia, WA

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Essence »

The boost to weapon spec is waay out of line with what a feat should provide. +2 to damage is totally fine on it's own; if you want to (for some reason) make it even better, it should be a very minor extra benefit, like a +2 bonus to confirm criticals.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Username17 »

The boost to weapon spec is waay out of line with what a feat should provide.


That's a very bold statement. It implies that you have a firm notion of what a feat "should" provide.

So... what should it provide?

In my opinion, a feat should, within its niche, be significantly better than having a +2 bonus to one of your stats. This is because the Human gets a Feat, instead of a whole pile of abilities and a +2 bonus to a relevent stat like all the other races get.

So a feat should be big. Really, really big. Honestly, a single feat should probably be the entire Mobility chain out to Spring Attack (possibly including some of the weirder Dodge offshoots as well). That's seriously not out of line with what all the other races are giving.

Here's a 3.5 Dwarf:

-2 to a stat you don't have to use.
-10 feet movement.
+2 Constitution
+2 to all saves (near enough)
+1 Damage when fighting sword and board style.
+2 to Appraise and Craft
The Rogue Traps ability.
A bonus free Search check to save your ass whenever you aren't in a wooden building.
+4 to defend against Trips.
The ability to move full speed and tumble in medium or heavy armor.
Darkvision
+4 AC against Giants.
+1 to attack rolls against Orcs or Goblins
+1 free language.
--

That is what a feat is worth. +2 Attack and Damage with one weapon doesn't even begin to cover it. It should give you weapon specific abilities like a chance of inflicting nausea or blindness, increase your threat range, cause you to be able to charge with the weapon without taking an AC penalty, and use it with a buckler at full attack bonus.

Taking a feat is what you do instead of being a Dwarf - it should anticipate your needs, mow your lawn, and wax your car.

Really.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Essence »

Are we totally ignoring the +1 skill point/level for the purposes of this conversation? Because most people I've asked consider that +1sp/lvl to be, on it's own, worth a feat.

Also, the bonus feat a human gets is selectable. Few characters are going to be built to take full advantage of everything you listed under the dwarf.

Speaking of which, your list is awfully baised.
[*]+2 to *all saves*? Hardly. Any non-magical effect which produces a Reflex, Will, or non-poison Fort save -- which is a long list, including fatigue, hypo or hyperthermia, non-poison-based, non-magical traps (which is most of them at low level), CDGs, massive damage...the list goes on and on.
[*]The Rogue Traps ability only applies when in a stone structure, as does the free Search check. Assuming that all environments are either stone or wood is...an amazing assumption, especially in a fantasy game where the characters might well be climbing a tower made of welded-together zombies or solid shadows to get to the BBEG.
[*]+2 to Appraise and Craft checks only involving metal or stonework. Dwarves get no bonus to Craft (bone rattles) or to attempts to Appraise an ancient tapestry.
[*]The +1 damage to sword and board fighting doesn't exist if the class you're playing doesn't have martial weapon proficiency.


So, if that list is equivalent to 2 feats, then a feat is worth a half a pile of abilities that apply only in specific situations or are only useful for about half the classes in the game, and comes with a minor penalty. Given the existence of tactical feats as a precident, I think that's about right, actually.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by The_Hanged_Man »

It's also a little deceptive to compare the human to the dwarf, generally considered the most bang for the core buck. +2 to diplomacy and gather information, +1 to spot, listen, and search, and lowlight vision? Maaaaybe worth a feat.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Username17 »

Because most people I've asked consider that +1sp/lvl to be, on it's own, worth a feat.


It's worth more than a lot of the feats being offered - but let's face it, there's a feat that gives you some bonuses to social roles and gives you an extra skill point every level forever. It's that thing where you get blow jobs from Nymphs from BoED.

The point is, when you say something is "worth a feat" - you are saying it's "worth as much as the sorry crap they try to foist on you for a feat", not "worth as much as you give up to get a feat". That's important.

A feat is worth the Rage ability, +10 feet of movement, 1 hit point, and 2 skill points. A feat is worth Divine Grace and Lay on Hands.

A feat is worth what you pay for it - not what people are trying to give you for it. That means that the feats in the PHB are too specific and too small. The bonuses should be bigger and they should provide more then one of them.

As such, the really "overpowered" Tactical feats like Elusive Target are actually spot on correct for what a feat should provide. There's thousands of feats and almost every one of them is way too small (with obvious exceptions like Initiate of Mystra). Rather than constantly writing new feats, the feat list should simply be combined.

A single feat should get you Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Combat Expertise, Improved Combat Expertise, and Fleet of Foot. I'm not even kidding. A single feat should give you Improved Trip, Knockdown, Improved Bullrush, Improved Overrun, Defensive Throw, and Swarm Fighting. I'm not kidding about that either.

When you say blithely that things are "worth a feat" - you need to operate from a cost account and not a benefit account. Really.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1082750966[/unixtime]]
As such, the really "overpowered" Tactical feats like Elusive Target are actually spot on correct for what a feat should provide.

That diverting defense ability of Elusive target is just plain bad game design. Anything that makes something always miss is totally stupid, not to mention it attacks the opponent flat footed too. That's just plain stupid. You have your own rogue ally flank you, then make one attack on you, which transfers to the guy on the other side of you. So your rogue gains reach and a free sneak attack on the other guy for nothing.


A single feat should get you Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Combat Expertise, Improved Combat Expertise, and Fleet of Foot. I'm not even kidding. A single feat should give you Improved Trip, Knockdown, Improved Bullrush, Improved Overrun, Defensive Throw, and Swarm Fighting. I'm not kidding about that either.

The problem is that everytime you make fewer feats required, you hose the fighter.

Feats tend to offer binary benefits, you either can do what the feat allows you to or not. And sooner or later you run out of cool stuff to do. The more feats get merged, the less likely anyone will bother with the fighter, because they'll take the feats they want with their general feat, as opposed to their fighter feat.

PLus it would make things very complicated. A character with 10 feats would have a total of 30 situational benefits (assuming you use the 3 ability/feat tactical feat paradigm). That's a lot of situational benefits to keep track of, so much so that it makes things exceedingly complex.

Now I see where you're coming from, balancing things by the other classes, which is a valid point, but personally I'd focus more on scaling back some of the classes, especially the ridiculously frontloaded ones like the paladin and the barbarian. The fact that both of these get basicalyl dick past the first few levels is evidence that they need a major retooling and that maybe those early abilities are too strong.

I don't think we want to change the feat power paradigm, it'd cause way too many problems. Power attack, expertise, whirlwind attack... these should be the basis for balancing feats, not the hypothetical balance derived from frontloaded classes.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Username17 »

The problem is that everytime you make fewer feats required, you hose the fighter.


Can you even hear yourself talk?

Making feats better would make getting bonus feats worse? I'm looking for a response that isn't just making fun of you - but honestly I can't think of any.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

OK, feats you take because you want to improve some aspect of yourself. How well you trip people, how well you grapple, your ability to move around in combat without taking AoOs, the ability to fight multiple opponents better... whatever.

The point is that a character build, especially a fighter build, is specialized. It generally tries to do one thing well. Archers don't want power attack, Barbarians don't bother with rapid shot.

Now applying this to feats... feats don't necessarily help each other, so having more of them isn't automatically better, and they're something everyone gets, so improving them helps everyone.

Feats also bring diminishing returns because the feats you take early on are really targetted to make you do what you do really well. Spirited charge for instance really helps the charge character, and he goes for that ASAP. Weapon focus (lance) provides only a minor bonus compared to what spirited charge is giving him. So his later feats are less beneficial than his earlier ones. After you've got weapon focus then where do you go? Probably something barely related to mounted combat, which helps even less.

What this means is that by condensing feats, the fighter becomes rather useless. If I already can take the feats I want to take in a short period, then why bother with the fighter. I may take one or two fighter levels, but that's it. Meanwhile the cleric archer is absolutely going to love these new condensed feats, because now he has all the feats he ever needs and more. So the cleric archer feels like a complete fighter archer earlier and the fighter is left taking garbage feats that aren't even remotely related to what he wants to be able to do.

It is not like the fighter can simply pick a feat and keep increasing its benefits, he must take feats that are less related, because he's already learned all the tricks in one specific area of combat.

It's much like the sorcerer versus wizard balance debate. As you make individual spells more powerful and versatile, the sorcerer's relative power goes up and the wizard's relative power goes down, because having more spells means a lot less. If the sorcerer's two spells known do basically everything he needs them to do, then there's no point in being a wizard to gain more spells.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Username17 »

:lol:

I'm sorry, that's the lamest piece of insight I've seen in weeks.

Seriously - that's completely retarded. It took me a while after reading your post to decide that you were probably serious.

More better spells don't make the Sorcerer better relative to the Wizard.

The current system in which you have to keep sinking feats into simply not falling behind does not make the Fighter viable even in concept.

You can't, for example, simultaneously complain that spellcasters are overpowered and attempt to balance nonmagical characters against having abilities that honestly suck. Getting Rage and Fast Movement together isn't all that big of a deal compared to a Cleric getting 2 domains, is it? It's also not all the big of a deal compared to a Wizard getting 2 8th level spells known and 5 new spell slots - right?

The problem here is that spellcasters get better and better all the time - and non-magical characters are expected to get their entire schtick at level 1. That's absurd. And balancing the first levels of each of those non-magical classes against the later levels only exacerbates the problem.

And while you could nerf absolutely every single class until they didn't get any good new abilities after level one, why would you do that? Wouldn't it be easier to just not have characters gain levels at all?

If characters gain levels at all, they should jolly well get new abilities when they do. And that means that all this crap like "Greater TWF" where you have to sink more feats into the same fighting style to keep from falling behind has to go.

And while we're at it, why not just make all of the feats a new ability? If I gain a level, I want to get a new ability. I don't want a +1 bonus, I want a new god damned ability. That's what a wizard gets every time he wakes up in the morning. If a Fighter doesn't get a new ability, he doesn't need to have gone up in level.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by The_Hanged_Man »

Reason for no new abilities? A lot of people like fighters that fight. If that's the fighter, and that's it. If that's what you want, there's not a lot of ways to add "new" to fightng the way you add "new" to spells.

Look at the fiasco those tactical feat things are. They either add a marginally useful feat that requires otherwise useless feats, or let you win. But they don't give you "new" abilities, and that's the way a lot of people like them. They just let you open up the same ole can of whup-ass, only maybe faster, or longer, or a slightly better can, or maybe w/ less chance of cutting yourself on the lid one your done.

If you want your fighter to have abilities besides just feats that add to the normal stuff any PC can do, the vast majority of people are going to say fine, multiclass or take a PrC.

With feats, there's always the problem that unless the feats are fighter-specific, if they're any good the cleric will take them, or the rogue or wizard. My guess is that sucky feats are there largely so that the fighter will take them, b/c they're too sucky for the other classes to waster their time on. That's the big reason Mobility is a feat chain instead of a feat - Rogues blow 3 feats on it. Fighters just kind of get it b/c there's nothing else to do with those bonus feats.

Personally, I agree with you. Give the fighter some modular abilities to swap out. It should be the most customizable class, not just the way you qualify for PrC's the quickest.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1082761723[/unixtime]]
More better spells don't make the Sorcerer better relative to the Wizard.

Sure they do. A wizard wants to be able to do certain things. Teleport, see invisibility, buff, and kill stuff. If a sorcerer has 2 swiss army knife spells that do all of those, then there's really no reason to be a wizard (aside from the quicken spell thing, but that's stupid anyway). Basically the disadvantage of the sorcerer is that he's not very versatile.. the more you take that away, the more ground he gains on the wizard.

The very reason I play a wizard is so I can do things the sorcerer can't, therefore the more the sorcerer can do, the less I want to play a wizard.

The current system in which you have to keep sinking feats into simply not falling behind does not make the Fighter viable even in concept.

I'm not saying the fighter is good now, I'm saying that we should probably cut back some of the other classes, not in overall power mind you, but in frontloadedness. The barbarian flat out gets too much early in level. Rage +4/+4 at 1st level and then his rage just improved by +2/+2 every 10 levels or so. That's completely retarded as the best bonus is given at 1st level, and it's an unnamed bonus. It's just bad class design.


You can't, for example, simultaneously complain that spellcasters are overpowered and attempt to balance nonmagical characters against having abilities that honestly suck. Getting Rage and Fast Movement together isn't all that big of a deal compared to a Cleric getting 2 domains, is it? It's also not all the big of a deal compared to a Wizard getting 2 8th level spells known and 5 new spell slots - right?

Well, the thing is that it all comes down to the same problem with feats. Spellcaster's casting ability can be looked at as one giant feat chain, and fighters have nothing similar to it. You can't simply take weapon focus at first level, weapon spec at 2nd, greater weapon focus 3rd, greater spec 4th, and keep increasing like that. And it's why casters really have it good... because their abilities are designed to constantly build on each other. The fighter's aren't.


The problem here is that spellcasters get better and better all the time - and non-magical characters are expected to get their entire schtick at level 1. That's absurd. And balancing the first levels of each of those non-magical classes against the later levels only exacerbates the problem.

Well, they need to be less frontloaded that's for sure. You should get rewarded for sticking to a class, not boned like you are currently playing a high level barbarian or fighter.



And while you could nerf absolutely every single class until they didn't get any good new abilities after level one, why would you do that? Wouldn't it be easier to just not have characters gain levels at all?

No, that's not what I'm talking about at all. I'm talking about nerfing classes so they don't get many abilities at level one. I'd like to see the barbarian and fighter more rear loaded as opposed to frontloaded, so you're encouraged to stick wtih them as opposed to just multiclassing like a whore.


If characters gain levels at all, they should jolly well get new abilities when they do. And that means that all this crap like "Greater TWF" where you have to sink more feats into the same fighting style to keep from falling behind has to go.

Well, I'd agree lumping some feats together is a good idea. You could probably merge TWF and two weapon defense, for instance. Some styles, especially TWF need some help, and it'd be ok to lessen the burden of feats on these styles.

Other styles, like "man with greatsword" don't need to be lessened feat wise, because to do so would give the fighter absolutely nothing to do.


And while we're at it, why not just make all of the feats a new ability? If I gain a level, I want to get a new ability. I don't want a +1 bonus, I want a new god damned ability. That's what a wizard gets every time he wakes up in the morning. If a Fighter doesn't get a new ability, he doesn't need to have gone up in level.

Eh... I dunno part of the fighter's thing is having a +1 bonus. The advantage to having those bonuses in feats, is that they're something the cleric doesnt' get when he casts divine power.

Abilities are nice and all but it's also ok to just numerically make the fighter the best... well... fighter.

If you want abilities, the first kinds of abilities I think you could give out would be ones that make the fighter less equipment dependant. Stuff that gives him inherent natural armor enhancement bonuses or luck or insight bonuses. The fighter also needs save enhancing stuff bad. When you have a high hit die, that should also give you good saves. A fighter type is supposed to be a tank of sorts, good at taking damage. Saves should likewise be better to accomodate this.

I'm not sure why you don't like numerical bonuses, because they're the bread and butter of combat. Pumping attack rolls, damage, saves and AC is going to help you a lot. If your enemy can't hit you and the enemy wizard has trouble landing spells on you, that keeps you alive. If you can't hit your foe or you're held by a hold person, then all the special little tricks you've got amount to nothing.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Username17 »

I'm talking about nerfing classes so they don't get many abilities at level one.


Which is nerfing them down until they don't get new good abilities at all. The Barbarian's first level doesn't overpower anything when you get it at character level 15. It's still not really catching up to a straight Wizard at that level. The Wizard gets two limited use abilities same as that Barbarian level - and let's face it, Polymorph Any Object and Mind Blank are a bigger deal than +10 feet of movement and Rage once per day could ever hope to be.

The front loaded bonuses of the Fighting classes aren't enough at higher levels. This doesn't mean that you should tear them down and give more abiltiies later - it means that you should leave the front loaded abilities where they are and give them more front loaded abilities.

When you multiclass into those front loaded classes, you don't unbalance yourself relative to the spellcasters - so obviously those front loaded abilities are in no need of nerfage. When you don't multiclass - you completely suck.

Look at the fiasco those tactical feat things are. They either add a marginally useful feat that requires otherwise useless feats, or let you win. But they don't give you "new" abilities, and that's the way a lot of people like them.


Sure they do. They let you bullrush people in non-straight paths. They let you catch people's weapons. Just because it's a new ability doesn't mean that you have to have magic or lazers or wings.

If you aren't getting anything new, you don't need to be getting a new level. A level lets you get Polymorph Any Object and Mindblank. That's the real opportunity cost.

Which means that the versatility and power of a new level needs to be balanced against that.

When you attempt to hold up feats themselves as exemplars of what feats should be - you have an inherently circular and meaningless argument. When you have two feats, and one is stronger and one is weaker - the claim that the strong one is too strong and the claim that the weak one is too weak are equally valid. Within that contextual void, there is no reference point.

The reference point is the opportunity cost - what you could have been getting instead. And what you could have been getting instead is two spells known and 3 or more spells per day.

That versatility and power doesn't have to be in the form of supernatural abilities - but you definately have the option of having those supernatural abilities - and if you choose nonmagical abilities they should be just as good. This is basic economics, not rocket science.

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

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1082826006[/unixtime]]The front loaded bonuses of the Fighting classes aren't enough at higher levels. This doesn't mean that you should tear them down and give more abiltiies later - it means that you should leave the front loaded abilities where they are and give them more front loaded abilities.

uhhh... that's pretty dumb.

All frontloaded abilities do is encourage you to multiclass. If you want to create a bunch of frontloaded crap you might as well just make all the fighting classes 3 level classes, because nobody is going to take 10-20 levels worth if they're garbage.


When you multiclass into those front loaded classes, you don't unbalance yourself relative to the spellcasters - so obviously those front loaded abilities are in no need of ner[EDITED]e. When you don't multiclass - you completely suck.

You just proved my point. When you don't multiclass - you completely suck. This is all the evidence I need to say that frontloading abilities suck from a game design point of view.

You should be able to go full barbarian and be good. If you can't then the barbarian class is poorly designed. Instead of creating 10 billion PrCs, the fighter and barbarian classes need to get better.

The reference point is the opportunity cost - what you could have been getting instead. And what you could have been getting instead is two spells known and 3 or more spells per day.

And this is just as ultimately circular. I could use levels in monk or levels in wizard, or levels in rogue... or levels in barbarian. If I'm a 12th level barbarian who took a level in fighter to get a feat, the opportunity cost is almost zero, because 13th barbarian level gives me basically nothing.

Balancing by opportunity cost simply states that all feats need to be equal. When I choose a feat, one of my options isnt' ability to cast mind blank, so that's irrelevant.

I'm not sure how you can call feats an opportunity cost of any kind beyond a feat. By taking a feat I'm not giving up the opportunity to become a wizard... only if I'm taking a feat as a fighter, and there's no way to differentiate if it's a fighter feat or a normal feat... because with the exception of weapon spec, they're both the same.

The ability to cast mind blank is an opportunity cost for a 14th level wizard deciding if he wants a fighter level or another wizard level. It has nothing to do with feats... at all.


That versatility and power doesn't have to be in the form of supernatural abilities - but you definately have the option of having those supernatural abilities - and if you choose nonmagical abilities they should be just as good. This is basic economics, not rocket science.


The problem is it's difficult to do this. For one, magic stuff is inherently more versatile, at least for a wizard or cleric. The wizard can do lots of different stuff with level 8 spells, whereas the fighter feats or barbarian class abilities only let him do one thing.

Also, the wizard's spell constantly build on each other. They constantly get better because spellcasting is all the wizard does. This makes the wizard inherently better. Unlike the fighter, the spellcaster doesnt' suddenly throw his hands up and say "eh... spellcasting tree ran out, all I can do now is improve my accuracy with ray spells."

Running out of useful feats is the #1 killer of the fighter, because it prevents you from specializing like a wizard does. The wizard is always getting higher level spells up until epic. If you're a trip based fighter, you get something that helps you trip people through levels 1-4 then after that you're taking crap thats only marginally effective or worse forced to start working on another combat style.

Feats don't build off each other like spells do, that's the problem and it always will be a problem for feat based characters.
Oberoni
Knight
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Oberoni »

I think Frank's trying to say that fighter types and caster types should be roughly equivalent in strength--if they're not, that's poor game design.

If he's not saying it, then I will.

I'll also say that if feats are so inherently designed that it would be impossible to keep a feat-based character on par with others, then quite simply, there should be no feat-based characters.

However, I do believe that a feat-based class can exist and function well; it would just require a retooling of the current feat system, and indeed, fixing the sorrier ones.
Lago_AM3P
Duke
Posts: 1268
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Lago_AM3P »

For real.

The whole gain 7 feats and then maybe gain extra feats depending on who you were is a disgustingly retarded idea to maintain with a game as vibrant as D&D.

The feats characters were given was balanced against all the feats in the PHB being about what you could get. Fighters were actually expected to pick up crap like two things of weapon focus, whirlwind attack, and toughness.

Now there are literally hundreds of feats, and people are telling me that the same model is supposed to let people keep up with spellcasters, two of which get all of their mojo just when your DM buys a new book and one who pays a piddling amount of money to get more?

Please.

Since everyone seems extremely reluctant to give everyone more feats--even to the point where PrCs that give bonus feats are called infringing on the fighter--we should combine all of the feats into one model.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

Lago_AM3P at [unixtime wrote:1082917638[/unixtime]]
The feats characters were given was balanced against all the feats in the PHB being about what you could get. Fighters were actually expected to pick up crap like two things of weapon focus, whirlwind attack, and toughness.


Yeah, I still can't believe toughness wasn't changed in 3.5. That has to be the worst waste of a feat ever.

Basically I think that if you have your feats more or less all be as good as power attack or expertise, then you'll do well balance wise. I think those two set the standard for what a feat should be. If a feat has a lot of prereqs it can slightly be better I suppose.
Lago_AM3P
Duke
Posts: 1268
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Lago_AM3P »

Basically I think that if you have your feats more or less all be as good as power attack or expertise, then you'll do well balance wise. I think those two set the standard for what a feat should be. If a feat has a lot of prereqs it can slightly be better I suppose.


That's incorrect.

If all I got for a level was the feat power attack, any spellcaster or the rogue would scream his damn head off.

Yet that's what the first level of fighter is like. About the best feat you can get is power attack.
Lago_AM3P
Duke
Posts: 1268
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Lago_AM3P »

In my opinion, a feat should be more like this.

The feats are balanced off of Frank's d20 FF, where shield characters get a bonus equal to their constitution, two-weapon fighters get a bonus to-hit instead of extra attacks, and two-weapon fighters are the same except for crazy bonuses.

Unfortunately, as anyone who has played the later Final Fantasy games will tell you, the 'fight with a single weapon in one hand', while extremely common among the protagonists in these games, is a really poor way to actually fight in TT. So, I'm putting up this feat to show what feats should really do.


Note: None of these feats work until the character's next turn if the weapon held in one hand is a shield or the characters engages in two-weapon fighting with a weapon that is not in the forehand; i.e. armor spikes or unarmed strikes.

Relentless Strikes: Your rapid swings with the weapon put an opponent off of their guard. Designate one opponent for the round. That opponent: does not get a bonus to-hit against you when fighting with two-weapons. Adds half of their normal shield bonus (constitution and all) if they are using a shield, does not get the bonus damage from strength.

All On One: Your strikes show that the best way to fight is to have your attention undivided with one manageable weapon. This feat can only be used on someone fighting with two-weapon fighting with non-unarmed strikes, holding a weapon in two hands, or holding a weapon and shield. If for whatever reason the target changes their grip on the same weapon(s) (i.e. someone with a shield loosening it, one of their shortswords getting disarmed, dropping their greatsword and quick-drawing a greataxe), the character gets to make an attack of opportunity.

Rapid Stabbing: As a standard action, the attack made during a spring attack if he has this feat, or during a charge (partial or regular), the character may make a second attack with the same weapon at a -5 penalty. This stacks with the 'pounce' special ability.

Deflect Arrows: When holding a weapon in one hand and nothing in the other, you automatically deflect the projectile.

Snatch Weapon: When disarming a weapon and the combatant has a free forehand, he may elect to catch it and immediately make an attack, as a free action, at the opponent.
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by RandomCasualty »

Lago_AM3P at [unixtime wrote:1082961837[/unixtime]]
Relentless Strikes: Your rapid swings with the weapon put an opponent off of their guard. Designate one opponent for the round. That opponent: does not get a bonus to-hit against you when fighting with two-weapons. Adds half of their normal shield bonus (constitution and all) if they are using a shield, does not get the bonus damage from strength.

All On One: Your strikes show that the best way to fight is to have your attention undivided with one manageable weapon. This feat can only be used on someone fighting with two-weapon fighting with non-unarmed strikes, holding a weapon in two hands, or holding a weapon and shield. If for whatever reason the target changes their grip on the same weapon(s) (i.e. someone with a shield loosening it, one of their shortswords getting disarmed, dropping their greatsword and quick-drawing a greataxe), the character gets to make an attack of opportunity.

not really sure how I feel about these two feats... They really should be part of a bigger tactical feat. Whenever you're using feats that help only against targets using manufactured weapons in a special fighting style, that's really specialized, so generally it should be a tactical feat with a bunch of uses.


Rapid Stabbing: As a standard action, the attack made during a spring attack if he has this feat, or during a charge (partial or regular), the character may make a second attack with the same weapon at a -5 penalty. This stacks with the 'pounce' special ability.

This one is really powerful. I'd definitely put in a provision against charge based bonuses, otherwise you have any kind fo mounted combat character loving this feat. A cavalier doing an unstoppable charge with this feat would be super broken. Even spirited charge would be incredibly powerful. This one comes very close to being a must take feat.


Snatch Weapon: When disarming a weapon and the combatant has a free forehand, he may elect to catch it and immediately make an attack, as a free action, at the opponent.


This one looks pretty good, though you may want to add in some kind of bonus to the free weapon attack and require that the free attack be made on the person the character just disarmed, because as I said earlier, feats that only work against manufactured weapons tend to be infrequently chosen because the majority of opponents tend to be monsters.
User avatar
Essence
Knight-Baron
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Olympia, WA

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Essence »

You know what else is starting to piss me off? Weapon Focus, and any other feat which punishes you for switching weapons mid-game. They suck.

Weapon Focus needs to be replaced with "Combat Prowess" that gives you a straight +1 to hit, and can be taken once, plus once per five Fighter levels.

Weapon Specialization needs to be replaced with "Combat Specialist" that gives you a straight +2 to damage rolls, and can be taken once, plus once per six Fighter levels.

Improved Critical needs to be rewritten to apply to any weapon you use, and can be taken once, plus once per ten Fighter levels.

Et cetera.
User avatar
Desdan_Mervolam
Knight-Baron
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Desdan_Mervolam »

Why do you say that?

-Desdan
Don't bother trying to impress gamers. They're too busy trying to impress you to care.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Fixing some of the sorrier feats in the PHB.

Post by Username17 »

That's not going far enough. This combat prowess should expand itself on its own - you shouldn't have to continually invest abilities into the same ability just to keep up.

-Username17
Post Reply