Post/Author/DateTime	Post
k3fka 04-14-04, 03:01 AM	Hey, I was just thinking about this feat I read that's in my DM's home campaign I'm playing in currently. Is this gamebreaking? If so, what would you do with it? The feat works like this: It lets you fufill a requirement for a prestige class, without actually having to buy the feat, or spend the skill points, or another requirement. It's called "Hidden Talent" I think. Thoughts?
SpiritGlyph 04-14-04, 03:27 AM	Depending on the specific write-up, that feat could be ridiculous. Imagine jumping straight into the Mystic Theurge or Arcane Trickster as a mere Wiz3. I can see potential for some amusing rule breaking, such as an Elf Dwarven Defender, but there's definite room for unpleasantness.
Dauntless 04-14-04, 03:29 AM	Originally posted by k3fka Hey, I was just thinking about this feat I read that's in my DM's home campaign I'm playing in currently. Is this gamebreaking? If so, what would you do with it? The feat works like this: It lets you fufill a requirement for a prestige class, without actually having to buy the feat, or spend the skill points, or another requirement. It's called "Hidden Talent" I think. Thoughts? I'd scrap it completely. Part of the balancing of PrC's is what is necessary to get into them. With this feat, warrior PrC's wouldn't need fighter levels to get all the needed bonus feats. Arcane PrC's would be a heck of a lot easier to get into (especially for sorcerers). For some PrCs, it would completely change the nature of them or make them ridiculously easy to get, because the skill requirements are what gives them a minimum level. Duelist could be taken by straight fighters, dungeon delver would essentially have NO requirements, etc. A mistake.
Piraatje 04-14-04, 04:06 AM	Eh, yeah that is game breaking. There are a few 'dual' prestige classes that require a few levels in multiple classes, that return the effect of both. For instance: Mystic Theurge (arcane & divine spellcasting), Arcane Trickster (arcane & rogue), Eldritch Knight (melee & arcane spellcasting). IF you use that feat, any straight wizzard can enter those prestige classes. Which will mean that they become broken; Do you want: - free cleric caster levels (MT) - Fighter bab & higher hit dice (EK) - Sneak progression & more skills (AT) And all at the cost of a single feat :) If your DM really wants to use such a feat, he should word it more carefully such as 'can fill up any single PrC requirement which is not a class ability'. This will allow elven dwarven defenders (:D ) but no getting into MT without cleric levels. Or will save you 10 ranks in a skill you cant get. Or whatever. But it will not unbalance the game in a harsh way that it will now.
Cloakable 04-14-04, 10:36 AM	What about Tempest from Masters Of The Wild? ;)
Foolosophy 04-14-04, 10:49 AM	Originally posted by Piraatje EOr will save you 10 ranks in a skill you cant get. Or whatever. But it will not unbalance the game in a harsh way that it will now. Oh i consider taking Divine Oracle (or Contemplative if your DM lets you work the outsider contact thing into your backstory) at level 1 quite broken. Holy Liberator at level 2 is a tad powerful aswell ;)
Vorpal Warhammer 04-14-04, 10:57 AM	Taking Horizon Walker at 2nd level as a human is pretty broken. You'd have the Dimension Door ability as a 7th level character, before a sorceror could even cast the spell!
Piraatje 04-14-04, 11:42 AM	I dont see contemplative or divine oracle as especially powerfull; its nowhere even NEAR a wizard 3/ MT 10 anyway. However, you still have a valid point. Perhaps such a feat should explicitly word that one cannot enter a PrC earlier then without the feat ;)
SpiritGlyph 04-14-04, 12:07 PM	No, that wouldn't work either. Either you'd have a Wiz6/MT10 or you'd have a feat that let's you enter a PrC class provided you could already enter it. It's potentially workable -- a feat that allows to violate race requirements, for example, seems hard to abuse (except perhaps with a Beholder Mage) -- but needs some clear limits. No bending of BAB or spellcasting requirements, for example.
rilem 04-14-04, 12:30 PM	OK, so you could, say, take Apostle of Peace without needing to take their Vow feats (and consequently not worry about the code-of-conduct requirements)? Hysterical.
MoogleEmpMog 04-14-04, 01:14 PM	I have to disagree with the consensus here. The ability to ignore one requirement of a PrC at the cost of an otherwise useless feat isn't at all game-breaking, and that's what I read this to mean. How is a Wizard 10/Mystic Theurge 10 any more broken than a Cleric 8/Nar Demonbinder 1/Contemplative 1/Mystic Theurge 10? How is a Sorcerer 11/Arcane Trickster 9 any more broken than a Sorcerer 9/Arcane Trickster 8/Archmage 3 using the (useful) Versatile and Bayushi's Technique feats? How is a Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 10/Archmage 5 any more broken than a Tiefling Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 10/Archmage 4? The only valid examples I've seen are the Exalted PrCs not having to live up to their feat-imposed vows. I'd make an exception in this case and not allow a character to be exempt from alignment/code of conduct restrictions. (No Neutral Good Blackguards, thank you very much...)
Vorpal Warhammer 04-14-04, 01:33 PM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog I have to disagree with the consensus here. The ability to ignore one requirement of a PrC at the cost of an otherwise useless feat isn't at all game-breaking, and that's what I read this to mean. How is a Wizard1/Fighter2/ArcaneArcher10 balanced? Or Sorceror1/DragonDisciple10? Or Fighter1/Rogue1/Duelist10? Or Ranger3/DwarvenDefender10? Or Fighter1/HorizonWalker10? Or a Cleric1/Thaumaturgist5? And that's just looking at the core PrCs. This feat allows you to enter PrCs much earlier than the designers intended. You're welcome to allow it in your campaign if you like, but you're opening up a Pandora's Box of abuse if you do.
MoogleEmpMog 04-14-04, 04:20 PM	Originally posted by Vorpal Warhammer How is a Wizard1/Fighter2/ArcaneArcher10 balanced? Or Sorceror1/DragonDisciple10? Or Fighter1/Rogue1/Duelist10? Or Ranger3/DwarvenDefender10? Or Fighter1/HorizonWalker10? Or a Cleric1/Thaumaturgist5? And that's just looking at the core PrCs. This feat allows you to enter PrCs much earlier than the designers intended. You're welcome to allow it in your campaign if you like, but you're opening up a Pandora's Box of abuse if you do. Most of the Arcane Archer's abilities are weak or 1/day, anyway. The 1/day Arrow of Death is the only potential game-breaker (DC 20 Fort save or die), but a 13th-level primary spellcaster with high ability modifiers and a few decent class features can push death spells well over that DC, and more than 1/day. Dragon Disciple finished at 11th level becomes almost tolerable compared to the Half-Dragon template class. But not quite. Duelist, like Dragon Disciple, becomes almost useful if it can be finished by 12th level. 3.0 Duelist would have been a bit strong at this point, but the current version is nothing special. A 13th-level maxed Dwarven Defender is the first build you gave that is on the high end of the power scale. Dr 6/- at 13th-level is quite powerful. It's still not game-breaking, though. An 11th-level maxed Horizon Walker isn't that scary; a 7th-level Horizon Walker is probably broken with its ability to dimension door every 1d4 rounds without any daily limit. Then again, that's a broken ability for any non-Epic PrC, and isn't any more broken at 7th level than at 11th. Maxed Thaumaturgist at 6th level isn't broken at all; the character can't even use half his abilities because he can't cast a planar ally spell yet. Augment Summoning is a feat the character could already have, while free Extend Spell is of limited utility at this level. In every one of these cases, the character is taking a littlerally useless feat (as opposed to low-utility feats like Spell Focus or Iron Will that still give SOME benefit) to get a class early. In none of these cases is the character significantly more powerful than a well-optimized core rules character... ... or a straight Druid... In none of these cases can a character get an ability that is unavailable to others of his level, and only in the case of the Horizon Walker does he get a truly broken ability (which remains broken in the straight rules).
010575 04-14-04, 05:06 PM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog Most of the Arcane Archer's abilities are weak or 1/day, anyway. The 1/day Arrow of Death is the only potential game-breaker (DC 20 Fort save or die), but a 13th-level primary spellcaster with high ability modifiers and a few decent class features can push death spells well over that DC, and more than 1/day. Yeah, shooting free +5 arrows at 12th level doesn't sound very good.
Matt Neuman 04-14-04, 06:05 PM	I like Barbarian 1/Bear Warrior 10 with this feat. Sure is nicer than waiting till 8th level.
SpiritGlyph 04-14-04, 07:02 PM	Stupid double post. Grrr....:banghead:
SpiritGlyph 04-14-04, 07:05 PM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog I have to disagree with the consensus here. The ability to ignore one requirement of a PrC at the cost of an otherwise useless feat isn't at all game-breaking, and that's what I read this to mean. How is a Wizard 10/Mystic Theurge 10 any more broken than a Cleric 8/Nar Demonbinder 1/Contemplative 1/Mystic Theurge 10? How is a Sorcerer 11/Arcane Trickster 9 any more broken than a Sorcerer 9/Arcane Trickster 8/Archmage 3 using the (useful) Versatile and Bayushi's Technique feats? How is a Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 10/Archmage 5 any more broken than a Tiefling Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 10/Archmage 4? The only valid examples I've seen are the Exalted PrCs not having to live up to their feat-imposed vows. I'd make an exception in this case and not allow a character to be exempt from alignment/code of conduct restrictions. (No Neutral Good Blackguards, thank you very much...) So, you're saying the exist of overly-powerful combinations justifies the creation of more broken things? In that case, why not remove Wish's EXP cost? After all, the PCs can get a free Wish with Shapechange and a Zodar. There are some very powerful possibilites here, and just because there are already some good class combos doesn't mean they make it okay to create even better ones. Of the 3 build pairs you suggested, I'd pick the one using this feat any day. A Wiz 3/MT 10 casts as a 13th level Wizard and a 10th level Cleric, something the NarD build can't even approach. Look at this feat from the low and middle levels, because not everything is played on 20th level.
k3fka 04-14-04, 07:17 PM	I think I worded it strangely, but I think it's one non-class specific abitlity, but even then I'm not sure. The description of the feat is kind of vague to me, and if I could find an official write up of it, I'd definately post it here. The easiest example that I can think of is: If a PrC needs "10 ranks in knowledge arcana" you can spend the feat so that you fill that requirement for the PrC even if you didn't have the 10 skill points in K:A I may be talking stupid though.
MoogleEmpMog 04-14-04, 08:25 PM	Originally posted by 010575 Yeah, shooting free +5 arrows at 12th level doesn't sound very good. Greater magic weapon on your bow would accomplish virtually the same thing. No biggie. Originally posted by SpiritGlyph So, you're saying the exist of overly-powerful combinations justifies the creation of more broken things? In that case, why not remove Wish's EXP cost? After all, the PCs can get a free Wish with Shapechange and a Zodar. There are some very powerful possibilites here, and just because there are already some good class combos doesn't mean they make it okay to create even better ones. Of the 3 build pairs you suggested, I'd pick the one using this feat any day. A Wiz 3/MT 10 casts as a 13th level Wizard and a 10th level Cleric, something the NarD build can't even approach. Look at this feat from the low and middle levels, because not everything is played on 20th level. I'm saying that the builds I suggested aren't broken in the first place; neither are the new versions. A Wiz3/Clr1/MT9 is a better spellcaster than a Clr8/NDb1/Ctmp1/MT3 (who casts as a 12th-level Cleric and a 4th-level Nar Demonbinder, which is darn good), but the latter has many powerful class features, not the least of which is about double the hit points. Do it with a Druid and the Nar build is arguably the stronger of the two. Anyway, you DO need at least one divine spellcasting level for Mystic Theurge. Otherwise, what would it advance? A Sor9/AT10/Arc3 is definitely more powerful than a Sor11/AT9; heck, the basic Rog3/Sor7/At10 is more powerful. Gaining 1 extra caster level for the Eldritch Knight build is nice, particularly since the Tiefling is a weak LA +1; nonetheless, that's not much of a difference. However... Originally posted by Matt Neuman I like Barbarian 1/Bear Warrior 10 with this feat. Sure is nicer than waiting till 8th level. I'll conceed, that is outrageously broken. Perhaps this feat needs to be restricted to DMG prestige classes?
Balthanon 04-14-04, 09:13 PM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog In every one of these cases, the character is taking a littlerally useless feat (as opposed to low-utility feats like Spell Focus or Iron Will that still give SOME benefit) to get a class early. How is a feat that gives you a +13 bonus to a skill useless? Because that's what using it to qualify for Contemplative would give a character who doesn't want Knowledge (religion). How about a feat that gives +1 base attack bonus, or +2, +3, or more? A feat that gives you three caster levels? That's what eliminating spellcasting requirements is going to do. This feat is about as useful as they come, about the only way I could see it as being remotely balanced is if all it allows is skipping a roleplaying requirement. So in other words, if you want to be a Ninja of the Crescent Moon, but you're not particularly fond of the organization, it lets you take the class. Even that could run into problems (or not make much sense, Spell Pool without other casters to provide it?) in some prestige classes.
010575 04-14-04, 09:54 PM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog Greater magic weapon on your bow would accomplish virtually the same thing. No biggie. What? There's a big difference between +3 and +5. And with your "Only DMG PrC's" errata, Fighter 3 into Dwarven Defender would still be munchy.
MoogleEmpMog 04-14-04, 10:00 PM	Originally posted by Balthanon How is a feat that gives you a +13 bonus to a skill useless? Because that's what using it to qualify for Contemplative would give a character who doesn't want Knowledge (religion). How about a feat that gives +1 base attack bonus, or +2, +3, or more? A feat that gives you three caster levels? That's what eliminating spellcasting requirements is going to do. This feat is about as useful as they come, about the only way I could see it as being remotely balanced is if all it allows is skipping a roleplaying requirement. So in other words, if you want to be a Ninja of the Crescent Moon, but you're not particularly fond of the organization, it lets you take the class. Even that could run into problems (or not make much sense, Spell Pool without other casters to provide it?) in some prestige classes. Let's say you need 13 ranks of Bluff to qualify for a PrC. Now, you take this feat instead of having 13 ranks of Bluff. You gain the benefits of the PrC. You do NOT gain any other benefit of 13 ranks of Bluff. Your Bluff check is not improved by 13. You do not gain a synergy bonus to Disguise. You can't even qualify for that other useful PrC that requires 7 ranks of Bluff. And you'd better hope that the PrC you DID qualify for doesn't require you to make Bluff CHECKS to use its abilities. And of course, if you later get 13 ranks in Bluff, then that feat is there on your list doing absolutely nothing. All right, perhaps Bluff isn't universally useful. I'll admit that qualifying for a PrC may be its greatest use. (Not really, but for the sake of argument...) However, to claim that this feat gives you three caster levels is absurd. Since when are three caster levels only useful to qualify for a PrC? I guess the three caster levels, three levels' worth of spells, and any associated benefits of three levels of the original class are all meaningless; the only point to having caster levels is to qualify for a PrC, right? A feat that gave actually character a +1 BAB... would effectively be an Epic feat, according to WotC. Personally, I disagree with that - the lowest BAB a single-classed character can have is +10, the lowest feats a character can have is 6, while the highest are +20 and 18, respectively. Either way, this feat only gives you the feat for one purpose, obtaining a single PrC. This is a pure 'useless' feat in the sense that other feats that are prerequisites of a PrC but are otherwise sub-optimal for a particular character concept (i.e., taking Whirlwind Attack to qualify for a PrC used by a Grappling specialist) are considered useless. But, those feats are NOT useless - they do something for the character OTHER THAN ALLOW THEM TO QUALIFY for a PrC, something the character could concievably use.
MoogleEmpMog 04-14-04, 10:10 PM	Originally posted by 010575 What? There's a big difference between +3 and +5. Not in 3.5, in my experience. I recently upgraded from +1 to +5 (at 13th level), and, frankly, it hasn't done much for my character. This isn't 3.0, where PCs needed high +'s to deal with damage reduction. Originally posted by 010575 And with your "Only DMG PrC's" errata, Fighter 3 into Dwarven Defender would still be munchy. Muchy? More than Druid 13? High hit points, DR 6/- and some nice class features vs. 7th-level spells off the best spell list in the game, two good saves, and the ability to transform into a superior melee force, along with a free high-powered cohort, tracking immunity and an unnamed +4 save bonus against all the abilities of an entire creature type? For pure power, I'll still stick with the Druid. The mastered Bear Warrior at 11th level IS muchy. A mastered DD at 13th is still just treading water with a Druid.
Balthanon 04-15-04, 12:18 AM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog This is a pure 'useless' feat in the sense that other feats that are prerequisites of a PrC but are otherwise sub-optimal for a particular character concept (i.e., taking Whirlwind Attack to qualify for a PrC used by a Grappling specialist) are considered useless. But, those feats are NOT useless - they do something for the character OTHER THAN ALLOW THEM TO QUALIFY for a PrC, something the character could concievably use. All I'm really trying to say is that this feat essentially eliminates opportunity costs. There are many builds where the only reason you're going to take a given class or skill is because of a prestige class, and the class/skill otherwise does next to nothing for your character. Feat for feat, yes, I'll admit you might as well take the regular feat since they usually include the whole chain in the requirements. But if you can avoid having to take 2 levels of cleric, that feat is allowing you to take 2 levels of wizard (or fighter, rogue, whatever) that you otherwise couldn't have had in a traditional build. If you can avoid taking those 10 ranks in Craft (weaponsmithing) that would save you maybe a couple thousand gold over your characters life, you can apply those ranks directly to a skill you will be using. You're not going to use this feat on a skill that you would need to use with the prestige class or that is otherwise very useful. It's going to be in skills that you have no use for--profession, knowledge, and craft probably being popular dropped skills. Dropping something you wouldn't otherwise have had any use for and adding something that directly enhances your characters abilities is more or less pure gain--thus a feat that gives you a +13 skill bonus, 3 caster levels, or 3 base attack bonus. I was exaggerating and playing with the wording when I said those things and they're obviously not literally true, but the gist of it remains valid.
MoogleEmpMog 04-15-04, 02:31 AM	Originally posted by Balthanon All I'm really trying to say is that this feat essentially eliminates opportunity costs. There are many builds where the only reason you're going to take a given class or skill is because of a prestige class, and the class/skill otherwise does next to nothing for your character. Feat for feat, yes, I'll admit you might as well take the regular feat since they usually include the whole chain in the requirements. But if you can avoid having to take 2 levels of cleric, that feat is allowing you to take 2 levels of wizard (or fighter, rogue, whatever) that you otherwise couldn't have had in a traditional build. If you can avoid taking those 10 ranks in Craft (weaponsmithing) that would save you maybe a couple thousand gold over your characters life, you can apply those ranks directly to a skill you will be using. You're not going to use this feat on a skill that you would need to use with the prestige class or that is otherwise very useful. It's going to be in skills that you have no use for--profession, knowledge, and craft probably being popular dropped skills. Dropping something you wouldn't otherwise have had any use for and adding something that directly enhances your characters abilities is more or less pure gain--thus a feat that gives you a +13 skill bonus, 3 caster levels, or 3 base attack bonus. I was exaggerating and playing with the wording when I said those things and they're obviously not literally true, but the gist of it remains valid. I agree with part of what you're saying: it's beneficial to take this feat. Otherwise, why take it? However, I've yet to encounter any skill that is truly useless, much less extra BAB or caster levels (does anyone take BAB *just* to qualify for a PrC?). Knowledge skills can be very useful if the party lacks a bard (I think the last 10 gaming sessions I've had have all involved multiple knowledge checks, sometimes for crucial information), for instance. Either way, my point is that the benefit gained from this feat is not unbalancing (if limited to DMG PrCs and others approved by the DM). Getting into a PrC at 2nd or 3rd level just doesn't 'break' the game, especially since it's available to everyone. At most, it makes characters who need a PrC (sorcerers, fighters) more effective and able to compete with those that don't (clerics, druids) and gives easier access to 'signature' abilities. Now, it's a bit powerful for a core feat, I'll give you. It's a bit too odd for a WotC feat of any kind. But it's not a gamebreaker if it's limited to DMG classes, and it WOULD be fun to play around with.
Balthanon 04-15-04, 04:39 PM	Originally posted by MoogleEmpMog However, I've yet to encounter any skill that is truly useless, much less extra BAB or caster levels (does anyone take BAB *just* to qualify for a PrC?). Knowledge skills can be very useful if the party lacks a bard (I think the last 10 gaming sessions I've had have all involved multiple knowledge checks, sometimes for crucial information), for instance. All skills have some use sometime, otherwise they wouldn't exist, but some are more useful than others and in more situations. (Knowledge skills in the right campaign can make or break you in some instances, I'll admit, but not all characters require them.) I would argue that there are characters that take levels of classes with a good base attack bonus just to qualify for a prestige class and the same with spellcasting classes (Hammer of Moradin sticks out as a recent entry into this category.) The feat in general just needs too many clauses in how it works and has too many reaching effects that would be difficult to predict to be viable in my opinion. Using only DMG prestige classes will limit those effects, but I don't believe it will eliminate them completely. I don't really agree that acquiring prestige classes earlier isn't going to have any effect on balance either, but I think that's just going to have to be a difference of opinion.