Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Chimaera2000 06-18-07, 11:41 PM	I took a look at the Nymph's Kiss feat for a character recently, but find the feat to be a bit much. However, I do like the idea of gaining extra skill points via a feat and Open-Minded is a garbage feat (it doesn't scale; 5 skill points is neat at level one, but useless even around level 9). With that in mind, I propose a new feat: Extraordinary Learner You pick up new skills with ease. Benefit: You treat your Intelligence as two higher for the purpose of calculating skill points/level. Unlike with increasing Intelligence normally, you may apply this bonus retroactively; for example, a level six character would gain nine skill points. Thoughts?
NoldorForce 06-18-07, 11:51 PM	It doesn't seem that unbalanced. There are already examples of things that support this, like that one Eberron feat that gets you a language at each level. The whole retroactive portion seems a bit odd, however. I'd allow it, but not expect most others to.
BroadStreetBully 06-18-07, 11:55 PM	as far as the feat is concerned, why not have it simply give you a straight 1 extra skill rank per character level, and it applies to future levels as well (just like improved toughness). i still don't see how Open Minded is "useless" at level 9. i'm sure there are a ton of sorcerers, paladins, fighters, and clerics that would kill for an extra 5 skill ranks in order to qualify for prestige classes. not only that, but anyone who's ever played a rogue knows it's pretty tough to max out every single one of their skills.
Polaris 06-19-07, 12:07 AM	It's too good for a feat. At least it's too good for a standard feat. Does the feat reverse scale? I.E. Do you get skill points retroactively? At minimum, you'd have to put a first-level only restrictor on it, and even then for one feat, you are giving away half of the human racial bonus in one fell swoop. BTW, BoED is a terrible, terrible thing to scale balance from so I'd discount Nymph's Kiss. -Polaris P.S. Open Minded is a great feat.....if you need a few extra skill points to qualify for a PrC or the like (and many character conceptions do fall short on skill points) especially when combined with Able-Learner.
Crimson_Concerto 06-19-07, 12:15 AM	I think it's fine, but I would remove it's ability to grant skill points retractively. Not because it's overpowered, but just because it doesn't seem to make all that much sense. Does Nymph's Kiss grant them retroactively? (I don't have a BoED on me right now)
Polaris 06-19-07, 12:21 AM	I think it's fine, but I would remove it's ability to grant skill points retractively. Not because it's overpowered, but just because it doesn't seem to make all that much sense. Does Nymph's Kiss grant them retroactively? (I don't have a BoED on me right now) 1. IIRC You have to take Nymph's Kiss at first level, so there is nothing to be retroactive with that feat. 2. In the DMG2 (again IIRC) and in other recent mechanics that change races, you do gain (or lose) skill points retroactively when changing your race to and from human. The only mechanic that explicitly excludes this is a change in intelligence. I find this objectionable myself simply from a book-keeping PoV, but there it is....and thus going by recent precedence, such a hypothetical feat would gain skill points retroactively. 3. The feat is badly overpowered. Not only are you stealing half of the human racial abilities for a single feat, but the cost-benefit for DnD has already been laid out. One feat == +3 to one skill *logical OR* +2 to two skills *logical OR* 5 skill points to spend as you like. Allowing one feat to grant 23 skill points wrecks the balance inherent in other feats. -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-19-07, 12:27 AM	At minimum, you'd have to put a first-level only restrictor on it, and even then for one feat, you are giving away half of the human racial bonus in one fell swoop. I disagree. You're not "giving it away", because humans can take the feat, too, and then everyone's right back to where they began, relatively. Edit: It's also not strictly better than the skill bonus feats, be it the +2/+2 ones or Skill Focus. Because those give you a bonus, which at any level can give you a higher check; while the extra skillpoints mean you're still bound by the max ranks / level with it.
TheWhirlingDeathaxe 06-19-07, 12:39 AM	I think the feat sounds reasonable, but it needs a little bit of a restriction as it is a REALLY good feat. How about 14 Int as a prerequisite? You'll notice that Improved toughness has a prerequisite of base Fort. +2, which means the classes it does the most good for can't take it right away. Or maybe you need ranks in a certain number of skills before taking it.
Chimaera2000 06-19-07, 12:43 AM	i still don't see how Open Minded is "useless" at level 9. i'm sure there are a ton of sorcerers, paladins, fighters, and clerics that would kill for an extra 5 skill ranks in order to qualify for prestige classes. not only that, but anyone who's ever played a rogue knows it's pretty tough to max out every single one of their skills. I consider Open-Minded a weak feat because it doesn't scale at all. Let's say that I'm playing a character you gains five skill points per level. If I pick up Open-Minded at 1st level, that feat gives me 25% more skill points. At level 9, that feat is only giving me about 8% more skill points, while at level 20 it gives all of 4% more. Note this is for a character with only five skill points per level; for high-skill point characters like rogues, this feat is even worse. Five skill points is not much of a benefit when you're gaining eleven skill points per level! The feat is badly overpowered. Not only are you stealing half of the human racial abilities for a single feat, but the cost-benefit for DnD has already been laid out. One feat == +3 to one skill *logical OR* +2 to two skills *logical OR* 5 skill points to spend as you like. Allowing one feat to grant 23 skill points wrecks the balance inherent in other feats. Consider this: you're creating a character for a highly dangerous campaign that's challenging both in and out of combat. You need to have a strong character if you want to survive. You have a limited number of feats and every one needs to count. Do you honestly consider taking Skill Focus, Alertness, or Open-Minded? I'm guessing that you don't; you take another feat because other feats benefit you far more. The bonuses provided by skill ranks and equipment far outweigh the bonuses provided by these feats beyond the lowest levels of play. If it's an issue that humans are having their thunder stolen, you can always make it human-only. There's already a precedent with this with Able Learner (Races of Destiny), which can easily grant you far more effective skill points than this feat ever will. On the topic of retroactivity: I'd say this really depends on what amount of bookkeeping is desired for a campaign rather than for balance considerations. If a minimum of bookkeeping was desired, just make it "you gain +1 skill point/level." It's not balanced (you can't use it to max out a skill and you gain far more benefits taking it at 1st level), but the bookkeeping is ridiculously easy.
Polaris 06-19-07, 12:53 AM	I disagree. You're not "giving it away", because humans can take the feat, too, and then everyone's right back to where they began, relatively. That's not quite accurate. Suppose a class has 2 skill points per level (say a cleric). A non-human taking this feat (discounting Int) would get a increase of 50% (increasing the number to three). A human would increase from 3 to four which would be a 33% increase, so on a relative basis, this feat does hose humans. Edit: It's also not strictly better than the skill bonus feats, be it the +2/+2 ones or Skill Focus. Because those give you a bonus, which at any level can give you a higher check; while the extra skillpoints mean you're still bound by the max ranks / level with it. You are ignoring my point. The game is balanced around one feat being either +3 OR +2/+2 or five skill points you can spend as you like. You get more skill points because of the skill rank ceilings you mentioned. The feat as proposed is blatently unbalanced next to other skill feats which makes it a bad feat. [Any feat you feel you *have* to take, is by definition a bad feat.] -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:01 AM	I consider Open-Minded a weak feat because it doesn't scale at all. Let's say that I'm playing a character you gains five skill points per level. If I pick up Open-Minded at 1st level, that feat gives me 25% more skill points. At level 9, that feat is only giving me about 8% more skill points, while at level 20 it gives all of 4% more. Note this is for a character with only five skill points per level; for high-skill point characters like rogues, this feat is even worse. Five skill points is not much of a benefit when you're gaining eleven skill points per level! Ah, but you are getting five skill points to spend that level and when you are getting close to qualifying for PrCs, it's the best way to boost your skill points up to be able to afford the skill prerequisites. I also note that this benefit at any given level doesn't change. [Barring increases to base intelligence.] Consider this: you're creating a character for a highly dangerous campaign that's challenging both in and out of combat. You need to have a strong character if you want to survive. You have a limited number of feats and every one needs to count. Do you honestly consider taking Skill Focus, Alertness, or Open-Minded? I'm guessing that you don't; you take another feat because other feats benefit you far more. The bonuses provided by skill ranks and equipment far outweigh the bonuses provided by these feats beyond the lowest levels of play. I certainly do consider taking those feats if I get more out of the PrC than the opportunity cost of the feat. Open-Minded should be viewed exactly the same way. A lot of PrCs impose unrealistic skill requirements in order to gimp a character's effective skills. Open-Minded is a good way around that. In addition, when multiclassing, it's often far more important when you get those skill points and Open-Minded lets you get a skill point bonanza when you most need it (it's especially potent when combined with Psionic Reformation). If it's an issue that humans are having their thunder stolen, you can always make it human-only. There's already a precedent with this with Able Learner (Races of Destiny), which can easily grant you far more effective skill points than this feat ever will. It's not just having human's thunder stolen (although that is a concern). Rather, the skill-based feats are out and they have a balance to them and your proposed feat completely shatters this balance. If you think the balance is incorrect, then that's another discussion (and I'd actually be sympathetic to that argument) but as it is, next to other skill-based feats, your proposed feat (and Nymph's Kiss btw which is non-standard) is unbalanced. -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-19-07, 01:05 AM	That's not quite accurate. Suppose a class has 2 skill points per level (say a cleric). A non-human taking this feat (discounting Int) would get a increase of 50% (increasing the number to three). A human would increase from 3 to four which would be a 33% increase, so on a relative basis, this feat does hose humans. Give a disproportionate benefit? Okay, mathematically, somewhat, but hose? I think that's more than a little bit too strong a word... You are ignoring my point. The game is balanced around one feat being either +3 OR +2/+2 or five skill points you can spend as you like. The game is "balanced" around a whole host of various factors, and I both don't think that +1 skill point / level for a feat is particularly / greatly more powerful than +3 to a skill (and the +2/+2 feats suck. Not everything is perfectly balanced, and the +2/+2 feats are, IMO ... they're like the reverse of "broken" - they're feats no one really take. ever.), and I don't think ignoring that, in this way, is particularly unbalancing. You get more skill points because of the skill rank ceilings you mentioned. The feat as proposed is blatently unbalanced next to other skill feats which makes it a bad feat. [Any feat you feel you *have* to take, is by definition a bad feat.] Y'know, I also don't think it's a feat you "have" to take. It's nice, but it's not overly compelling.
Chimaera2000 06-19-07, 01:05 AM	[Any feat you feel you *have* to take, is by definition a bad feat.] I don't feel that I'd have to take this feat to have an effective character. After all, the impact of skills on combat is minimal (abilities, spells, and feat choices are far more important) and even if I have minimal skill ranks, I can choose to specialize in two or three specific skills and excel at them. They let me establish my own niche outside of combat; it's not important for every character concept to have a wide range of skills. After all, in a low level game, would I rather have my fighter have extra skill points or Combat Reflexes, Combat Expertise and Improved Trip? My proposed feat is not a "must-have" feat because the above combination benefits that character concept (strong reach fighter) far more than the skill points would. Rather, the skill-based feats are out and they have a balance to them and your proposed feat completely shatters this balance. If you think the balance is incorrect, then that's another discussion (and I'd actually be sympathetic to that argument) but as it is, next to other skill-based feats, your proposed feat (and Nymph's Kiss btw which is non-standard) is unbalanced. Ah, I see what you're getting at. Yes, I've been basing this feat off of the assumption that the other feats are poorly balanced. I feel that as a player, I would be making a poor choice if I took one of those feats. A feat that provides scaling numbers of skill points is worthwhile without being a "must-have," but Nymph's Kiss is an overpowered feat. I thought that starting with that and scaling it back seemed sound. As a side note, the idea of using Open-Minded for prestige class requirements is an interesting one. I find that Able Learner usually works for this purpose (and is great feat to boot!), but non-humans could get some use out of Open-Minded.
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:06 AM	On the topic of retroactivity: I'd say this really depends on what amount of bookkeeping is desired for a campaign rather than for balance considerations. If a minimum of bookkeeping was desired, just make it "you gain +1 skill point/level." It's not balanced (you can't use it to max out a skill and you gain far more benefits taking it at 1st level), but the bookkeeping is ridiculously easy. I remember my experience with 3.0 DnD where item based Intelligence changes did change your skill points. It was a nightmare and WOTC (wisely IMHO) decided to ditch it in 3.5. I find it highly obnoxious that WOTC's R+D has seemingly forgotten those lessons only a scant 4 years later. As for balance, it you "have" to take it at first level (and this feat you really do unless you make it retroactive), then it's another reason it's a bad feat. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:15 AM	I don't feel that I'd have to take this feat to have an effective character. After all, the impact of skills on combat is minimal (abilities, spells, and feat choices are far more important) and even if I have minimal skill ranks, I can choose to specialize in two or three specific skills and excel at them. They let me establish my own niche outside of combat; it's not important for every character concept to have a wide range of skills. After all, in a low level game, would I rather have my fighter have extra skill points or Combat Reflexes, Combat Expertise and Improved Trip? My proposed feat is not a "must-have" feat because the above combination benefits that character concept (strong reach fighter) far more than the skill points would. I do and I strongly disagree with you. There are some feats that are as good if not better than many feats if you have the spare skill points to put at least five ranks (or get a certain minimal DC) into those skills, and many of those skills are not usable untrained. Ask yourself this? How many times have you sweated over a build wishing you had just one (or two) more skill points in a level? I bet that has happened to most of us a large percentage (even majority) of the time. That's why this is a must-take feat! (It's also one very important reason why humans are so popular.). In addition to that, you are completely overlooking the PrC factor. In many cases it's very difficult to get enough skill points to qualify for a PrC and this feat mitigates that significantly. A short list of skills that are (or at least can be) better than feats include: Spot, Listen, Sense-Motive, Bluff, Tumble, Diplomacy, Balance (five ranks lets you ignore Dex loss due to bad footing), Use-Magic Device, Spellcraft, Hide, Move-Silently, and that's hardly even thinking about it. Hint: How many fighter types just love to have even a few ranks in tumble to at least TRY to avoid an attack of opportunity? More than you think. That's why it's a "must take" feat. If you don't take it, then you hose yourself (if you don't take it at first level) more than if you take pretty much any other first level feat (esp as a non-caster and esp since most other feats don't penalize you if you don't take it early, i.e. power-attack). -Polaris
BroadStreetBully 06-19-07, 01:22 AM	"I don't feel that I'd have to take this feat to have an effective character. After all, the impact of skills on combat is minimal (abilities, spells, and feat choices are far more important) and even if I have minimal skill ranks, I can choose to specialize in two or three specific skills and excel at them." with that mindset, why would you need/create/want this feat in the first place? (polaris, in regards to your post just below this one, it's cool. with all of the negative reaction to this feat, i lost track of who the OP was. my apologies.)
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:27 AM	YES! My previous point EXACTLY. on your argument alone, right there, you're advocating that the feat Open Mind is worth taking and therefore not "useless" as you stated in the OP. (and it is a feat which, who knew, the game designers already put into the game) Point of Clarification: I never said that Open-Minded was a useless feat. In fact I have said the opposite rather strongly (and that is why I oppose the OP's proposed feat). Given that Open-Minded is (or at least can be...and that's all that's needed) a good feat, anything strongly than that is likely unbalanced...and the OP's proposed feat is better than Open-Minded. -Polaris Edit PS: I see that you edited your post just as I posted. If it's alright with you, I'll keep my post as is to avoid confusion.
Chimaera2000 06-19-07, 01:31 AM	I do and I strongly disagree with you. There are some feats that are as good if not better than many feats if you have the spare skill points to put at least five ranks (or get a certain minimal DC) into those skills, and many of those skills are not usable untrained. Ask yourself this? How many times have you sweated over a build wishing you had just one (or two) more skill points in a level? I bet that has happened to most of us a large percentage (even majority) of the time. That's why this is a must-take feat! (It's also one very important reason why humans are so popular.). In addition to that, you are completely overlooking the PrC factor. In many cases it's very difficult to get enough skill points to qualify for a PrC and this feat mitigates that significantly. A short list of skills that are (or at least can be) better than feats include: Spot, Listen, Sense-Motive, Bluff, Tumble, Diplomacy, Balance (five ranks lets you ignore Dex loss due to bad footing), Use-Magic Device, Spellcraft, Hide, Move-Silently, and that's hardly even thinking about it. Hint: How many fighter types just love to have even a few ranks in tumble to at least TRY to avoid an attack of opportunity? More than you think. That's why it's a "must take" feat. If you don't take it, then you hose yourself (if you don't take it at first level) more than if you take pretty much any other first level feat (esp as a non-caster and esp since most other feats don't penalize you if you don't take it early, i.e. power-attack). -Polaris I strongly disagree that you need to have a large number of skill points to have an effective character. Many fighters won't put ranks in Tumble because when you're in medium or heavy armor (or a dwarf), you can't! Instead, they'll devote feats to improving their combat prowess because that's where they're needed most. You mentioned opportunity costs, and that has to be considered with this feat. When you take Exceptional Learner, you're missing out on Cleave, Improved Initiative, Leap Attack or Melee Weapon Mastery. When you take this feat, you lose out on one of those options; you trade combat options for expanded out-of-combat options. Many fighters will benefit more from the first, some will benefit more from the second, but the choice is not set in stone for either. To quote Tempest Stormwind, "Taste the indecision? That's balance right there."
Chimaera2000 06-19-07, 01:35 AM	"I don't feel that I'd have to take this feat to have an effective character. After all, the impact of skills on combat is minimal (abilities, spells, and feat choices are far more important) and even if I have minimal skill ranks, I can choose to specialize in two or three specific skills and excel at them." with that mindset, why would you need/create/want this feat in the first place? (laughs) Just because I don't need to have a lot of skill points for an effective character doesn't mean that I don't want them! I find that a wide range of skills point adds a lot to the fun factor of a character. I would consider taking this feat for characters of mine simply because I enjoy having a lot of skill points, not because I feel that I'm gaining significant mechanical power by taking it.
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:37 AM	I strongly disagree that you need to have a large number of skill points to have an effective character. Many fighters won't put ranks in Tumble because when you're in medium or heavy armor (or a dwarf), you can't! Instead, they'll devote feats to improving their combat prowess because that's where they're needed most. You mentioned opportunity costs, and that has to be considered with this feat. When you take Exceptional Learner, you're missing out on Cleave, Improved Initiative, Leap Attack or Melee Weapon Mastery. When you take this feat, you lose out on one of those options; you trade combat options for expanded out-of-combat options. Many fighters will benefit more from the first, some will benefit more from the second, but the choice is not set in stone for either. To quote Tempest Stormwind, "Taste the indecision? That's balance right there." That's a really bad example there. A dwarf fighter is one of those fighters that would benefit (probably too much) from this feat! A dwarf in platemail can attempt to tumble just fine thank you. As long as your speed is not reduced by armor or encumberance (and a dwarf's speed is never reduced by armor or encumberance) than you can always attempt to tumble. Also by taking this feat at first level you get 23 extra skill points over the life of your career (which is worth far more than a lot of feats) and you make up that feat next level. Fighters in particular run out of effective feats to buy prior to tenth level. If you were talking about a wizard or a rogue then maybe because both those archetypes tend to have copious skill points to begin with (but even then both archetypes will hungrily look for more skill points), but fighter is a really terrible example here and in fact makes my case. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:39 AM	(laughs) Just because I don't need to have a lot of skill points for an effective character doesn't mean that I don't want them! I find that a wide range of skills point adds a lot to the fun factor of a character. I would consider taking this feat for characters of mine simply because I enjoy having a lot of skill points, not because I feel that I'm gaining significant mechanical power by taking it. I am glad you emphasized the right word. Of course you want more skill points....because more skill points makes you a more effective character. Not only does it open up abilities that are worth (at least) a feat in their own right with the right skills, but also opens up PrCs earlier and that is often worth much more. The fact you admit you want more skill points makes my point for me. -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-19-07, 01:42 AM	The fact you admit you want more skill points makes my point for me. ...Howso?
Neutronium_Dragon 06-19-07, 01:46 AM	If I may suggest... Create a second-tier feat which requires Open Minded as a prerequisite, and which grants +1 skill point per two character levels (scaling with your current character level). This allows it to scale, but doesn't overshadow the human's ability, and while it grants more benefit than Open-Minded (at least eventually), it does so as a second-tier feat (which is allowed to be somewhat better than the first-tier one it's based on).
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:48 AM	...Howso? If a feat gives you something that you (and pretty much every player I've seen) universally wants, then that feat is very strong and possibly unbalanced. Consider. At first level, you'd get four extra skill points immediately and then 19 more over the course of your career. If you take the feat at anytime after first level (assuming it's not retroactive which is it's own headache), then you'd get far less. Already the feat at first level is worth as much as Open-Minded (effectively since the first level limit is four ranks), and you get over the life-time of your character effectively four more feats AND the ability to get PrCs sooner and better than normal. In addition, many skills you can now afford with minimal training are (or can be) better than feats (and I've already provided a short list). That makes this proposed feat a no-brainer and that's why it's a bad feat. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 01:54 AM	If I may suggest... Create a second-tier feat which requires Open Minded as a prerequisite, and which grants +1 skill point per two character levels (scaling with your current character level). This allows it to scale, but doesn't overshadow the human's ability, and while it grants more benefit than Open-Minded (at least eventually), it does so as a second-tier feat (which is allowed to be somewhat better than the first-tier one it's based on). That's an interesting suggestion. Let's break it down. Let's assume that you took Open-Minded at first level (yes that's not the best time to take that feat, but I am using this as a hypothetical to see how many skill points this would get), and then took this proposed feat at third level. If you rounded down, you'd get an extra point at third level (the same level you took the feat...and I'd say in this case the feat comes prior to the skill points...like open-minded), and one more at fourth level and every even level thereafter (rounding down). That would be a total of 10 skill points extra plus the five for open minded for 15. That's awfully good, but for two feats (one of which is second tier) it might be OK. It would be about the upper limit that I'd allow in my games, however. -Polaris
Deathmond 06-19-07, 02:05 AM	The game was balanced around 1 feat = +3 hp. That didn't last.
Chimaera2000 06-19-07, 02:05 AM	I am glad you emphasized the right word. Of course you want more skill points....because more skill points makes you a more effective character. Not only does it open up abilities that are worth (at least) a feat in their own right with the right skills, but also opens up PrCs earlier and that is often worth much more. The fact you admit you want more skill points makes my point for me. -Polaris Not quite. Just because I'd want to have Great Cleave for a character doesn't make my character more effective if I take the feat! Rather, I could take it because I enjoy the imagery of cutting through a horde. However, I would pay an opportunity cost for this, because I'm missing out on another feat that would generally be more effective, such as the aforementioned Improved Initiative, Leap Attack, and Melee Weapon Mastery. Likewise, there's an opportunity cost for taking a feat that grants extra skill points. When you take a feat like that, you miss out on options that might help you more directly. A wizard might miss out on Collegiate Wizard. A paladin might miss out on Spirited Charge. A druid might miss out on Augment Summoning. And yes, that 1st-level dwarf fighter is down one feat in his chain that he'd be using for building up Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Cleave, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Melee Weapon Mastery, Leap Attack, Endurance & Steadfast Determination, Improved Bull Rush & Shock Trooper..... my example isn't as bad as you thought. ; ) Besides, on the topic of prestige class prerequisites: many classes have feat requirements, too! For example, take a look at the Archmage, (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/archmage.htm) Dwarven Defender (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/dwarvenDefender.htm), or Shadowdancer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/shadowdancer.htm). All require a steep number of feats to get in, and the number of feats that you have is very limited compared to the number of skill points. Note that those prestige classes aren't even perfect examples; they're just the ones in the SRD! Check out the Dervish or most any other Complete Warrior base class or the Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil (Complete Arcane). Feats play just as great (if not greater!) role in qualifying for prestige classes. In fact, a feat like Open-Minded is more imbalanced than my proposed feat for this purpose. It gives you more skill points, but doesn't let you dump five skill points into Bluff when it's a class skill for one level to qualify you for Ur-Priest. That's awfully good, but for two feats (one of which is second tier) it might be OK. It would be about the upper limit that I'd allow in my games, however. It looks like you've got a bit more of a conservative attitude regarding feats. However, do you allow Natural Spell in your game? Power Attack? Improved Initiative? If you've read through the Character Optimization boards, you'll find quickly that these feats (core-only, no less) increase your character's power far more drastically than anything I'm proposing here. The game was balanced around 1 feat = +3 hp. That didn't last. Indeed not. That's one of the big problems with D & D; all feats are not created equal. In fact, some (like Toughness) were designed to be bad (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mc_los_142)! It's been a struggle to try to come up with balanced house rules for this game.
Polaris 06-19-07, 02:18 AM	The game was balanced around 1 feat = +3 hp. That didn't last. Yes it has actually. True toughness is a crappy feat, but it's still there and the game is still technically balanced around it. Not quite. Just because I'd want to have Great Cleave for a character doesn't make my character more effective if I take the feat! Rather, I could take it because I enjoy the imagery of cutting through a horde. However, I would pay an opportunity cost for this, because I'm missing out on another feat that would generally be more effective, such as the aforementioned Improved Initiative, Leap Attack, and Melee Weapon Mastery. Likewise, there's an opportunity cost for taking a feat that grants extra skill points. When you take a feat like that, you miss out on options that might help you more directly. A wizard might miss out on Collegiate Wizard. A paladin might miss out on Spirited Charge. A druid might miss out on Augment Summoning. Actually I am quite familiar with opportunity cost...enough so that I immediately saw that you picked a terrible example. I am also familiar with the concept (which you don't seem to be) of diminishing returns. Consider the cleave example. It's true that for one level if you took this feat, you wouldn't be able to cleave. That is an oppotunity cost. However at level two, you'd not only gain that ability back (at the cost of another feat...more on that in a minute), but also get a skill of five ranks that you otherwise would not have. Five ranks in a skill you otherwise wouldn't have is worth by itself at least a feat if you've picked wisely. Not only do you get +2 to another skill (or even skills), but many skills also give you special abilities at five ranks and/or a low DC (balance, tumble, diplomacy all come to mind immediately). What's more that feat you are down is worth less (assuming the Dwarven fighter example), because you are closer to the terminal end of your primary feat chains. This is a terrible problem for fighters in particular. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 02:23 AM	It looks like you've got a bit more of a conservative attitude regarding feats. However, do you allow Natural Spell in your game? Power Attack? Improved Initiative? If you've read through the Character Optimization boards, you'll find quickly that these feats (core-only, no less) increase your character's power far more drastically than anything I'm proposing here. Natural Spell is a busted feat that violates FSBNNR. If the feat is allowed, then all Druids in the game MUST take it. When I DM, my initial stance is to disallow the feat entirely (although I am open to considering it as a metamagic feat of at least +1 Spell level). Power-Attack and Improved Init do not in fact increase power level nearly as much as this feat does. Power-Attack really only comes into it's own at high levels (just when this feat becomes less effective). Thus right there it's not a fair comparison. A character that wants Power-attack can (easily) have both with little if any opportunity cost because of diminishing returns. Likewise Improved Init can be taken at any time. Great feat, but there are work arounds starting with a high Dex and at very high levels Precognition (for some casters). -Polaris
Kevin Andrew Murphy 06-19-07, 02:37 AM	The only +X to a skill feats that are really useful are the ones from OA like Great Crafter that give you +3 to a large category of skills, specifically Craft, Knowledge, Perform and Profession. If you're a skillzmonkey for any of those, having a +2 or 3 to all of them is worth it. Otherwise, all of the +X feats are basically gatekeeper feats for various prestige classes. Nymph's Kiss is actually a pretty good feat in my book because it's got a roleplaying requirement to get it--your character has to have been spirited off to faerie at some point and have some variety of fey lover. Lose the alignment or the lover, say goodbye to the fey skillz. Making a flavorless copy is just kind of blah.
StruckingFuggle 06-19-07, 02:53 AM	If a feat gives you something that you (and pretty much every player I've seen) universally wants, then that feat is very strong and possibly unbalanced. Nevermind that I've said I don't automatically want it at least once - I'd place it mid-tier, myself. Unless I had a specific build that really needed the extra skillpoints, I'd only take it "if I had nothing else to take at that level", and then there's already a lot of mid-tier feats above it; and I don't think I'm alone. Amongst the games I've been in and run, most people involved would probably take it midtier. Heck, sometimes I build characters with more skillpoints than I have uses for, and begin just assigning them wherever... I think you're either overestimating its strengths, or automatically universalizing your own personal ranking of it. Is it nice? Yeah. Would I want it? Sure, but usually not at the cost it would come with (a feat).
NoldorForce 06-19-07, 08:15 AM	Nevermind that I've said I don't automatically want it at least once - I'd place it mid-tier, myself. Unless I had a specific build that really needed the extra skillpoints, I'd only take it "if I had nothing else to take at that level", and then there's already a lot of mid-tier feats above it; and I don't think I'm alone. Amongst the games I've been in and run, most people involved would probably take it midtier. Heck, sometimes I build characters with more skillpoints than I have uses for, and begin just assigning them wherever... I think you're either overestimating its strengths, or automatically universalizing your own personal ranking of it. Is it nice? Yeah. Would I want it? Sure, but usually not at the cost it would come with (a feat).Seconded. This is really the thing, that FSBNNR is NOT violated. It's a good feat, but not so good that it's a no-brainer to choose it over something else if you're strapped for feats. (Many characters are.) More skill points per level are nice, but often grant only a small benefit - Law of Diminishing Returns and all that. The only case where you really need skill points is when you're looking to get that last full-point skill in your collection. And then it's a tradeoff between two more point-buy points or a feat. And do not ever use Toughness or the +2/+2 feats as standards of balance. They exist to suck; Monte Cook admitted nearly as much here (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mc_los_142).
jaelis 06-19-07, 09:26 AM	IMO, the proposed feat is reasonable if you make it non-retroactive. I don't think suddenly giving a level 12 character 12 skill points to spend as desired would be fair... if you want a bunch of skill points at once, take Open Minded. And I'd be tempted to put in a prereq of some kind. Probably Int 11 would be sufficient. But I could be convinced to leave that out.
risner 06-19-07, 12:01 PM	Unlike with increasing Intelligence normally, you may apply this bonus retroactively Great feat, but that line I quoted must go. It must operate like Nymph's Kiss (from this point forward) which is how the whole system is set up to work. You can't take it at 18th level and gain 18 skill points in any way that is balanced. You can't have skill points in future levels represent gains from past levels.
Polaris 06-19-07, 12:37 PM	Seconded. This is really the thing, that FSBNNR is NOT violated. It's a good feat, but not so good that it's a no-brainer to choose it over something else if you're strapped for feats. (Many characters are.) More skill points per level are nice, but often grant only a small benefit - Law of Diminishing Returns and all that. The only case where you really need skill points is when you're looking to get that last full-point skill in your collection. And then it's a tradeoff between two more point-buy points or a feat. Actually it pretty much does. Pretty much any PrC (even the most feat intensive ones) will leave you with at least one open feat if you plan it properly. Most PrCs (at least the good ones) also have steep skill requirements. As I already explained in length, what you get with this proposed feat if taken at level one is already leaps and bounds over pretty much any other equivalent feat over the lifetime of your character, and it pays for itself (twice over!) by second level!!!! That makes it a no-brainer in my book and makes it a FSBNNR problem-child because any character that doesn't take it will be under the eight-ball compared with any character that does. And do not ever use Toughness or the +2/+2 feats as standards of balance. They exist to suck; Monte Cook admitted nearly as much here (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mc_los_142). Yep. I notice that you don't mention the +3 skill feats or Open-Minded in that? Why? Oh yes......Merle was around when THOSE were written up, and Open-Minded from CAdv was actually written AFTER that policy was changed...and the proposed feat is leaps and bounds better than Open Minded. Finally as for being "retroactive", it is now precedent that any changes to your skill points OTHER than Intelligence changes have to be retroactive. One more reason not to allow this feat. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 12:46 PM	Great feat, but that line I quoted must go. It must operate like Nymph's Kiss (from this point forward) which is how the whole system is set up to work. You can't take it at 18th level and gain 18 skill points in any way that is balanced. You can't have skill points in future levels represent gains from past levels. Absolutely correct, and that is why the feat must go. As things are RAW, a character (any character) can spend a small amount of gold at high levels and get psionically reformed. This means that the feat can (and does) de facto give you all of those skill points at once. In short, if the feat would be unbalanced giving all those skill points retroactively, then it's unbalanced period because of the way DnD has recently set itself up. [And given recent precedent over changing races...DMG2, Races of Dragon, etc, Psionic Reformation rules aren't going away anytime soon.] Compare that with improved toughness. At level 18, getting 18 hit-points is nice but nothing special. Getting 21 skill points is overwhelming. Thus the proposed feat is overpowered. That is the balance yard-stick you must use given the way the RAW is set. -Polaris
jaelis 06-19-07, 01:01 PM	Just to note, don't forget that you purchase skills before feats when levelling. So if you did make it non-retroactive, you wouldn't start getting extra skill points until next level. Polaris, I don't feel myself that psychic reformation breaks it. You still have to reorganize your feats so that you meet all your prereqs, which means that you aren't getting anything that you couldn't have gotten by taking this feat at level 1 anyway.
DM Denubis 06-19-07, 01:04 PM	The proposed feat is actually weaker than something already in existence and published. I don't understand the problem. Polaris, you either like to bathe in skill points, or you don't understand balance. Power Attack less powerful than this feat? No. Just, no. That's a joke, and a poor one at that. If a feat gives you something that you (and pretty much every player I've seen) universally wants, then that feat is very strong and possibly unbalanced. That has to be one of the worst thoughts I've ever seen put down in text. I mean, did your keyboard protest while you typed it? All feats give you what you want. That's the very idea of taking them. If your argument is that everyone would want this feat, you're crazy. No fighter or cleric or self-respecting wizard would want this. In fact, there are only a few classes I can see truly wanting this feat. Rogue, bard, and maybe monk or ranger. Most other classes don't have a strong enough skill list to even bother. I propose that it's completely fine.
Pentar 06-19-07, 01:43 PM	Hmm - looked over the arguments for and against the feat and I have to say; I think I'd be cautious with it. I can see why it is superior to many other feats and I can also see why it would marginalize humans. For the cost of a Feat, you can now select a race with superior racial abilities to that of a human (bonus attributes, bonus skill checks, low-light vision, darkvision, etc.) and still gain one of the key benefits of the human race, extra skill points. While this may not necessarily be useful for all classes, it is highly desirable for many, particularly Rogues and Bards whom are skill-dependent classes. I'd say for non-human Rogues/Bards, this is practically a "Must Have" feat. I also agree that it breaks the feat balance mold of +3 to one skill or +2/+2 to two. For the cost of a single feat, you get to assign skill points where you want and within 5 levels, you have out-paced either one of the previous two feat benefits (i.e. You get more benefit in 4 levels over a feat that gives you +3 to one skill, or within 5 levels for a feat that gives +2/+2). However, I do like the idea of the Feat... and considering it's name, may I propose a modification? "Gain 1 skill point per level. This skill point must be spent on a Cross-Class skill rank".
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 01:54 PM	If your argument is that everyone would want this feat, you're crazy. No fighter or cleric or self-respecting wizard would want this. In fact, there are only a few classes I can see truly wanting this feat. Rogue, bard, and maybe monk or ranger. Most other classes don't have a strong enough skill list to even bother.THIS is insanity. (please, no Sparta knockoff jokes) A fighter needs this for combat - Climb, Jump, Balance (cross class, so even more expensive), Spot (cross class, so even more expensive), Listen (cross class, so even more expensive) are all essential to the fighter. Clerics need it to. You can't seriously tell me that a cleric only uses Concentration and Spellcraft and needs to be happy with that. :uh-huh: What about the turning bonus for Knowledge (Religion)? What about Knowlege Arcana? Diplomacy? Every class gains a benefit from this feat - classes with less than 4 skill points per level benefit more from it.
NoldorForce 06-19-07, 02:02 PM	Actually it pretty much does. Pretty much any PrC (even the most feat intensive ones) will leave you with at least one open feat if you plan it properly.Which is generally better spent on something else. Even if you're a skill monkey, you likely already have a bunch of skill points. The Law of Diminishing Returns has already kicked in, and you're likely more suited to choose another feat than this one.Most PrCs (at least the good ones) also have steep skill requirements.Actually, many of the good ones either don't have skill requirements or have token ones in skills that you'll already be maxing out.As I already explained in length, what you get with this proposed feat if taken at level one is already leaps and bounds over pretty much any other equivalent feat over the lifetime of your character, and it pays for itself (twice over!) by second level!!!! That makes it a no-brainer in my book and makes it a FSBNNR problem-child because any character that doesn't take it will be under the eight-ball compared with any character that does.You didn't explain. You asserted. I'm actually running a skill monkey of a character in a PbP game now. Said character has every skill as a class skill, and a couple of class abilities that boost them. Due to a reexamining of things, she currently has an open feat. Would she devote it to this? Of course not. She already has a high (18 and rising) Intelligence score and 8+Int skill points. She'll get enough for me to care about on her own.Yep. I notice that you don't mention the +3 skill feats or Open-Minded in that? Why? Oh yes......Merle was around when THOSE were written up, and Open-Minded from CAdv was actually written AFTER that policy was changed...and the proposed feat is leaps and bounds better than Open Minded.Leaps and bounds? You like saying that phrase. Anyway, NO. Open-Minded is passable, if a bit weak in my mind considering that it has no scaling. Skill Focus is still bad. And just because Monte was there to work on the system at the time doesn't mean he didn't regret some of the stuff he did. Come to think of it, though...perhaps granting 2 skill points + 1 per 2 character levels (ie, half of what +2 Intelligence at the start would do) might be appropriate.
NoldorForce 06-19-07, 02:04 PM	THIS is insanity. (please, no Sparta knockoff jokes) A fighter needs this for combat - Climb, Jump, Balance (cross class, so even more expensive), Spot (cross class, so even more expensive), Listen (cross class, so even more expensive) are all essential to the fighter.No, they aren't. They're helpful, but not essential.Clerics need it to. You can't seriously tell me that a cleric only uses Concentration and Spellcraft and needs to be happy with that.No, he also needs Knowledge (Religion). But only if he's going into epic.Every class gains a benefit from this feat - classes with less than 4 skill points per level benefit more from it.Just like the d4 hit die classes benefit more from a high Constitution or from Improved Toughness?
DM Denubis 06-19-07, 02:15 PM	THIS is insanity. (please, no Sparta knockoff jokes) A fighter needs this for combat - Climb, Jump, Balance (cross class, so even more expensive), Spot (cross class, so even more expensive), Listen (cross class, so even more expensive) are all essential to the fighter. Clerics need it to. You can't seriously tell me that a cleric only uses Concentration and Spellcraft and needs to be happy with that. :uh-huh: What about the turning bonus for Knowledge (Religion)? What about Knowlege Arcana? Diplomacy? Every class gains a benefit from this feat - classes with less than 4 skill points per level benefit more from it. If it were free, yeah, I'd agree with you. But if you're telling me that you think that this is worth one of the cleric's seven feats, I'm going to go ahead and tell you that you have no idea what you're talking about. Having 23 extra skill points is not worth the opportunity cost of losing Divine Metamagic or something similarly powerful. Clerics don't have a strong skill list. For a Fighter. Climb, Jump, Balance? I present to you the third level spell and any number of items based off of it, fly. Yeah. That's totally worth a feat. However, Fighter is, of course, rolling in feats, and can afford to take a few garbage ones. Spot, Listen? They're cross-class. Cross-class skills are pretty much a joke, extra skill points or not. You're all making a mountain out a molehill. Does anyone complain that Improved Toughness is way too powerful compared to Toughness, and therefore shouldn't be allowed? The point is, this is weaker than something already published. The OP saw that Nymph's Kiss is a little on the strong side, and weakened it, and somehow people still think it's overpowered.
Pentar 06-19-07, 02:16 PM	The point is, this is weaker than something already published. The OP saw that Nymph's Kiss is a little on the strong side, and weakened it, and somehow people still think it's overpowered. I saw this feat mentioned a few times - where is it published and/or what does it do?
DM Denubis 06-19-07, 02:21 PM	I saw this feat mentioned a few times - where is it published and/or what does it do? It's in the Book of Exalted Deeds (Which means that most people automatically assume it's broken, broken, broken.). It does what this feat does, plus a few other things that are pretty damned useful, like bonuses to some saves and skills. Nymph's Kiss is a tiny bit on the strong side, but more because of the combination of bonuses, not because of the skill points.
DragonDan 06-19-07, 02:23 PM	but the cost-benefit for DnD has already been laid out. One feat == +3 to one skill *logical OR* +2 to two skills *logical OR* 5 skill points to spend as you like. -Polaris You are assuming those feats are good/balanced, but I suggest that there is a reason nobody waste slots on those feats; they're weak. Personally I would never take Agile, Stealthy, Nimble Fingers or any other +2 skill feat (and I love playing rogish characters), nor would I take a feat that only gives a 1 time bonus of 5 skill points. You simply don't take feats that can be accomplished through cheap (relatively) magic items. Dan.
Pentar 06-19-07, 02:28 PM	It's in the Book of Exalted Deeds (Which means that most people automatically assume it's broken, broken, broken.). It does what this feat does, plus a few other things that are pretty damned useful, like bonuses to some saves and skills. Nymph's Kiss is a tiny bit on the strong side, but more because of the combination of bonuses, not because of the skill points. Hmm, that does sound pretty broken. And yes, I pretty much avoid play with either BoED or BoVD. I don't really like either of those splat books. Be that as it may, the only reason I'm skeptical about "open minded" is that it sort of marginalizes a key human racial ability.
NoldorForce 06-19-07, 02:29 PM	You are assuming those feats are good/balanced, but I suggest that there is a reason nobody waste slots on those feats; they're weak. Personally I would never take Agile, Stealthy, Nimble Fingers or any other +2 skill feat (and I love playing rogish characters), nor would I take a feat that only gives a 1 time bonus of 5 skill points. You simply don't take feats that can be accomplished through cheap (relatively) magic items. Dan.Despite the name, the core rules are not a standard of balance. They are in fact the least balanced set of things compared to every rules supplement if you go by quantity of broken stuff. And but for a few exceptions (that I could likely count on two hands or even one), they are qualitatively more broken as well.Core doesn't mean balanced. Core means the lead designer wanted it to be Core.
CryoSilver 06-19-07, 02:35 PM	Base don experience more than number-crunching, an extra skill point per level is fair. IMC, if you take a level in your favored class, you get a skill point for free. My campaign world has not fallen under the almighty swords of PCs with one extra skill.
DM Denubis 06-19-07, 02:37 PM	Be that as it may, the only reason I'm skeptical about "open minded" is that it sort of marginalizes a key human racial ability. Except that humans get it for free, and a bonus feat on top of that. Other races would have to spend their one starting feat to have this from level one.
Pentar 06-19-07, 02:51 PM	Except that humans get it for free, and a bonus feat on top of that. Other races would have to spend their one starting feat to have this from level one. If by "free" you mean "At the expense of other racial abilities".
magmer2 06-19-07, 03:06 PM	THIS is insanity. (please, no Sparta knockoff jokes) A fighter needs this for combat - Climb, Jump, Balance (cross class, so even more expensive), Spot (cross class, so even more expensive), Listen (cross class, so even more expensive) are all essential to the fighter. The fighter would be better off with able learner, if he is human. Giving comparatively 27-33 points.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 03:28 PM	Despite the name, the core rules are not a standard of balance. They are in fact the least balanced set of things compared to every rules supplement if you go by quantity of broken stuff. And but for a few exceptions (that I could likely count on two hands or even one), they are qualitatively more broken as well.However, they are still the standard by which everything else has to be compared to. Not everyone has every splatbook you want to use as a justification for this feat. However, everyone always has access to the core books (via the SRD) so it is the only universal measure that we have for game balance. It is not perfect (nowhere near, in point of fact), but it is the basis that everything must be compared to.
DragonDan 06-19-07, 03:32 PM	Despite the name, the core rules are not a standard of balance. Funny then how everyone uses the core books as a starting point. Though I agree with you. A few weeks ago my local group was discussing whether the MIC is broken or not. Some thought it was, I did not. After pointing out the Candle of Invocation from the DMG, the discussion simply stopped. Dan.
DM Denubis 06-19-07, 03:33 PM	If by "free" you mean "At the expense of other racial abilities". A bonus feat isn't enough of a racial ability for you? I mean, there's also Favored Class: Any, but it's the feat people go for.
Pentar 06-19-07, 03:40 PM	A bonus feat isn't enough of a racial ability for you? I mean, there's also Favored Class: Any, but it's the feat people go for. It's not a matter of enough or not enough. The concept behind racial benefits is that they should balance each other out. Humans don't get nice little benefits against certain enemies, extra weapon proficiencies, skill bonuses, amongst other things. I don't think it needs go be said, but I'll say it anyway - part of the balance of the human race in comparison to others is the +1 skill point / level. If you give a feat that allows for the same thing, that makes other races more desirable because now part of the human advantage is off-set at the cost of a feat.
StruckingFuggle 06-19-07, 04:54 PM	If you give a feat that allows for the same thing, that makes other races more desirable because now part of the human advantage is off-set at the cost of a feat. I still don't buy this argument, in part because it costs a feat to do so, and in part because humans can also take the feat. Edit: Oh, and still come out ahead if they do, too, since they're still up a feat over a non-human.
jaelis 06-19-07, 05:01 PM	A non-human wouldn't get 4 extra skill points at first level, either.
Polaris 06-19-07, 05:09 PM	The fighter would be better off with able learner, if he is human. Giving comparatively 27-33 points. No reason a fighter can't get both if human (and he should). The problem with fighters is that fighters get more feats than they can use, so this feat lets you get four (or more!) effective feats for one feat that is relatively worthless to the fighter. The fighter is a terrible example if you want to defend this proposed feat. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 05:11 PM	A non-human wouldn't get 4 extra skill points at first level, either. Who says? Starting skill points are always multiplied by four for your first hit-dice and/or level without exception. Because this feat alters your skill points per level, it would be multiplied by four (and certainly Nymph's Kiss is). -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 05:13 PM	I still don't buy this argument, in part because it costs a feat to do so, and in part because humans can also take the feat. I've already explained why this feat marginalizes the human ability. A human gets less relative gain from this feat than a non-human. That's a fact and not subject to opinion. Edit: Oh, and still come out ahead if they do, too, since they're still up a feat over a non-human. And as mentioned before, the human lacks nifty sense bonuses, combat bonuses, Darkvision, racial spells, and/or other racial modifiers. That human feat is not free. Essentially this feat lets a non-human character have a key human ability and still keep the advantages of being non-human. That's a bad precedent. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 05:22 PM	Just to note, don't forget that you purchase skills before feats when levelling. So if you did make it non-retroactive, you wouldn't start getting extra skill points until next level. I am pretty sure that Open-Minded allows you to take the feat first and this proposed feat wouldn't be any different. I note that the feat it's based off ALSO allows you to spend the skill points you get from it immediately. Honestly the Skills then Feats for leveling up is actually considered interchangeable. Polaris, I don't feel myself that psychic reformation breaks it. You still have to reorganize your feats so that you meet all your prereqs, which means that you aren't getting anything that you couldn't have gotten by taking this feat at level 1 anyway. Yes it does. The proposed feat HAS NO PREREQUISITES, and thus there is no reason you can't get yourself psychically reformed and then replace that Power-Attack (or whatever feat doesn't scale) that you took at first level and replace it with this feat (and then taking that swapped out non-scaling feat last). With very little book-keeping, the feat DOES effectively give you character level +3 skill points instantaneously (+1 extra for each future level) and that's brokity-broke-broke-broke. The point is that with psionic reformation and like mechanics firmly entrenched in the game now, all feats that scale should be assumed to scale retroactively to determine balance....and when this proposed feat is allowed to be retroactive, it's clearly broken. Enough said. -Polaris
Pentar 06-19-07, 05:24 PM	Any feat that precisely replicates a racial ability should be considered thoroughly. Your argument that "it costs a feat" doesn't mean anything, because it just gives you the option of having one of the human benefits while still retaining all the benefits of being a non-human race. Marginalize does not mean humans are useless - but they become less desirable, because something that was uniquely theirs and theirs alone is now technically available to everyone. If there was a feat that gave you +2 racial bonus to constitution and -2 to Charisma, does that not marginalize dwarves?
Polaris 06-19-07, 05:28 PM	If there was a feat that gave you +2 racial bonus to constitution and -2 to Charisma, does that not marginalize dwarves? If I might, an even better example would be to consider a feat that gave Darkvision. Power-wise, this probably wouldn't be too overwhelming, but it would certainly marginalize all races that got Darkvision for free...and thus it would be a bad feat (and IMHO is probably why it doesn't exist). Same-same for a "low-light" vision feat and that is even more in line otherwise within the power of a feat. -Polaris
Crimson_Concerto 06-19-07, 06:24 PM	I see you still haven't learned how to quote more than one person in the same post, Polaris? :rolleyes:
Polaris 06-19-07, 08:09 PM	I see you still haven't learned how to quote more than one person in the same post, Polaris? :rolleyes: Post #28 of this thread. It might help to read the thread before making innane commentary about other posters. -Polaris
Crimson_Concerto 06-19-07, 08:48 PM	Post #28 of this thread.I saw. I also saw how post #29 too is one of yours. I congratulate you on being able to do it once. Did you have to take a feat to get that ability 1/day or something? Oh, no, wait, I'm sorry, that feat would be WAY overpowered, am I right? :rolleyes: For goodness sake, Chimaera2000 has said he bases this feat off of Nymph's Kiss. If you really want to actually be helpful for once, assume Nymph's Kiss is balanced and work from there.
Zelck 06-19-07, 09:11 PM	Humans are underpowered already. You see, any other race can "expend" their 1st level class feat to get a "bonus" feat, which is a very important part of the Human race bonuses! Now instead of being Human, the other races can get those cool skill bonuses and stuff and still get a huge chunk of the Human race bonus! I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. Let's do a quick comparison, shall we? So we have an elf who uses his level 1 class feat to pick up +1 skill points per level. He gets the following as well: * +2 Dexterity, -2 Constitution. * Immunity to magic sleep effects, and a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells or effects. * Low-Light Vision: An elf can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. She retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions. * Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats. * +2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it. * Automatic Languages: Common and Elven. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Gnoll, Gnome, Goblin, Orc, and Sylvan. * Favored Class: Wizard. A multiclass elf’s wizard class does not count when determining whether she takes an experience point penalty for multiclassing. The above costs 2 feats and Favored Class: Any. Let me ask you, how many characters have you played/built that would spend 2 feats to buy the above bundle? Sure, the benefits would have to come from multiple feats, but they're not very powerful, and I'd take 2 feats over those any day. Heck, sometimes I'd take 1 feat over that bundle! By the way, Psychic Reformation is broken enough that we really shouldn't be worried about how a new feat would interact with it. It's similar (to a lesser degree, of course) to saying that we should create an excellent balanced and flavorful ability for a new monster because Pun-Pun would pick it up and wreak havoc (yes, I know he can technically create abilities for himself. Let's pretend he can't).
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 09:25 PM	Take it to PM's boys (girls?).For goodness sake, Chimaera2000 has said he bases this feat off of Nymph's Kiss. If you really want to actually be helpful for once, assume Nymph's Kiss is balanced and work from there.That is a horrible assumption. Nymph's kiss is not a remotely balanced feat - especially since it relies on DM fiat in order to balance mechanical rules. This isn't World of Darkness, where that kind of poor game design is going to fly. Compared against Core feats, Nymph's kiss is overpowered. In addition to granting a scaling bonus (not found in any skill feat in the Core) it also grants other abilities? :nonono: Comparing Open Minded against Core feats leaves that feat a little strong (stronger than the Core skill modifying feats almost certainly), but not brokenly so. It is still limited by total rank and does not stack on top of ranks like Skill focus, so it is a little strong. A little stronger than many Core feats, but not horribly stronger. When placed against the measuring stick of the Core feats (which, while Core is not remotely balanced, it is the only measuring stick we have) your "proof of balance" (Nymph's Kiss) is found horribly wanting. A scaling skill feat which replicates a Core racial ability is more powerful than every skill feat in the SRD. It becomes, by default, the only feat you would select if you were selecting a feat to modify skills. Just Like Natural Spell, your proposed feat creates more problems than it solves - it is overpowered.
Zelck 06-19-07, 09:33 PM	A scaling skill feat which replicates a Core racial ability is more powerful than every skill feat in the SRD. It becomes, by default, the only feat you would select if you were selecting a feat to modify skills. Incorrect. This feat is limited by max ranks, while feats like Skill Focus (which are somewhat weaker than most feats) provide additional bonuses on top of your max ranks, which is the whole point of getting them. Skill Focus is +15% chance of winning an opposed check, or hit the auto-succeed threshold 3 levels sooner. In many cases, that's more powerful than max ranks in some other skill.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 09:45 PM	But it is a non-scaling ability. A +3 modifier is nice at low levels, but with access to items that boost your stats (and the accompanying stat mod) it becomes less and less of an impact. gaining 23 skill ranks scales to level and never lessens in value. Additionally, once you hit 5 ranks in a skill purchased using the proposed feat you often (not always) gain a +2 bonus to another skill thanks to synergy. This lessesn the value of Skill Focus even further, as you get 2/3 of its benefit for free. At level 2 with the proposed feat. So that means that Skill focus grants a +15% gain for one level then a 5% gain for every level after that. I am sorry, but that is not even remotely balanced.
Chimaera2000 06-19-07, 09:49 PM	I saw. I also saw how post #29 too is one of yours. I congratulate you on being able to do it once. Did you have to take a feat to get that ability 1/day or something? Oh, no, wait, I'm sorry, that feat would be WAY overpowered, am I right? :rolleyes: For goodness sake, Chimaera2000 has said he bases this feat off of Nymph's Kiss. If you really want to actually be helpful for once, assume Nymph's Kiss is balanced and work from there. Just to clarify: I wrote this feat because I believe Nymph's Kiss to be overpowered and Open-Minded to be underpowered. This was written in an attempt to find a middle ground.
Polaris 06-19-07, 09:57 PM	I saw. I also saw how post #29 too is one of yours. I congratulate you on being able to do it once. Did you have to take a feat to get that ability 1/day or something? Oh, no, wait, I'm sorry, that feat would be WAY overpowered, am I right? :rolleyes: If you had bothered to check the time-stamps, you'd realize that I wrote post 29 AFTER you modified the post I referred to in post 28. I also note in passing that it's easy to be snide about other ancillary issues when one is losing the primary argument. For goodness sake, Chimaera2000 has said he bases this feat off of Nymph's Kiss. If you really want to actually be helpful for once, assume Nymph's Kiss is balanced and work from there. I don't consider much if anything in the BoED and BoVD to be balanced precisely because they rely on RP restriction to "balance" out otherwise horribly unbalanced abilities. The books in question even admit this albeit indirectly. Using RP restrictions for mechanical balance is a classic no-no in RPG balance. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 10:05 PM	Humans are underpowered already. You see, any other race can "expend" their 1st level class feat to get a "bonus" feat, which is a very important part of the Human race bonuses! Now instead of being Human, the other races can get those cool skill bonuses and stuff and still get a huge chunk of the Human race bonus! I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. Let's do a quick comparison, shall we? So we have an elf who uses his level 1 class feat to pick up +1 skill points per level. He gets the following as well: +2 Dexterity, -2 Consitution Immunity to magic sleep effects, and a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells or effects. Low-Light Vision: An elf can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. She retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions. Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats. +2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it. Automatic Languages: Common and Elven. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Gnoll, Gnome, Goblin, Orc, and Sylvan. Favored Class: Wizard. A multiclass elf’s wizard class does not count when determining whether she takes an experience point penalty for multiclassing. The above costs 2 feats and Favored Class: Any. Let me ask you, how many characters have you played/built that would spend 2 feats to buy the above bundle? Sure, the benefits would have to come from multiple feats, but they're not very powerful, and I'd take 2 feats over those any day. Heck, sometimes I'd take 1 feat over that bundle! Actually if you cost all of this out, quite a few. That list is easily worth more than two feats. There is a reason why some characters choose to be Elves rather than humans especially if they want certain martial weapons. By the way, Psychic Reformation is broken enough that we really shouldn't be worried about how a new feat would interact with it. It's similar (to a lesser degree, of course) to saying that we should create an excellent balanced and flavorful ability for a new monster because Pun-Pun would pick it up and wreak havoc (yes, I know he can technically create abilities for himself. Let's pretend he can't). Sorry but no-can-do. If you read the DMG2 and Races of the Dragon, it is now RAW canon that you can and sometimes do change races or restructure your character from first level or all too often both. Psionic Reformation and abilities like it are here to stay (even if you don't allow psionics, it is by RULE within the power of a limited wish). As such, you must balance all scaling feats as though you got the benefit retroactively and that makes this proposed feat very obviously broken. Finally I note that some are saying that all the skill-type feats are underpowered and certainly many are. However, there is at least one that is a solid feat by any standard for pretty much any caster: Skill Focus: Concentration -Polaris
Zelck 06-19-07, 10:26 PM	So that means that Skill focus grants a +15% gain for one level then a 5% gain for every level after that. I am sorry, but that is not even remotely balanced. But to a different skill. If I want my character to be really good at hiding, Skill Focus gives me +15% chance of succeeding. Who cares if I can't dress up and pretend to be the government official if no one can see me? For a caster, that Skill Focus (Concentration) can mean the difference between auto-succeeding on the cast defensively or cast while mount is running check or having a 15% chance of failure. +10 ranks in Knowledge (The Planes) isn't going to make up for that. Actually if you cost all of this out, quite a few. That list is easily worth more than two feats. There is a reason why some characters choose to be Elves rather than humans especially if they want certain martial weapons. Sure, it takes more than 2 feats (much more, actually) to provide the same benefits. My question is, who would actually spend 2 feats to pick up those benefits? I wouldn't for most characters I make; I value those two feats to spend as I choose much more than that grab bag of weak abilities. I think many would agree. Sorry but no-can-do. If you read the DMG2 and Races of the Dragon, it is now RAW canon that you can and sometimes do change races or restructure your character from first level or all too often both. Psionic Reformation and abilities like it are here to stay (even if you don't allow psionics, it is by RULE within the power of a limited wish). I thought we were staying core? ;) And where does it say retraining is within the power of a Limited Wish? OK, fine, so you swap out your first level feat for a maxed skill at level 20. What's the big deal? For most characters, they have more important feats to grab. And it's not even open to abuse; you still have to spend the skill points as if you were gaining them with levels, so no dumping them all into a skill during the one level you had it as a class skill.
JulesCARV 06-19-07, 10:28 PM	Okay. I have an idea. What if, if you took this feat, you selected a single skill, and that skill would always have maximum ranks for a character of your class and level, without requiring that any skill points be spent. This would, in some ways, be less powerful than the original feat, since you can't say, use the extra points to buy five ranks for synergies or somesuch, and the ranks are allocated inflexibly, but it would also be in some ways more powerful, since, for instance, a rogue 1/cleric 8 who picked tumble would have 12 tumble ranks, something that would ordinarily cost 20 skill points (4 for 4 rogue ranks, 16 for 8 cleric ranks). A simple cleric 9 would have only 6 tumble ranks, though. Here's the writeup: Natural Skill [General] You have a talent that you learn seemingly without effort, improving your abilities constantly and unconsciously. Prerequisites: Open Minded Benefit: Select one skill (other than speak language). You automatically have maximum ranks in that skill, without spending any skill points. If the skill is in class, you have 3 + character level ranks, and if the skill is cross-class, you have half that number. Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different skill.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 10:36 PM	But to a different skill. If I want my character to be really good at hiding, Skill Focus gives me +15% chance of succeeding. Who cares if I can't dress up and pretend to be the government official if no one can see me? For a caster, that Skill Focus (Concentration) can mean the difference between auto-succeeding on the cast defensively or cast while mount is running check or having a 15% chance of failure. +10 ranks in Knowledge (The Planes) isn't going to make up for that. Different skill or not, You are still getting 2/3 of the same numeric bonus for free. That right there, when balanced against core, is enough to prove this feat is overpowered. It is also an argument why Open minded is also overpowered - since it has the same possibility when all 5 ranks are applied to the same skill.Sorry but no-can-do. If you read the DMG2 and Races of the Dragon, it is now RAW canon that you can and sometimes do change races or restructure your character from first level or all too often both. Psionic Reformation and abilities like it are here to stay (even if you don't allow psionics, it is by RULE within the power of a limited wish).Sorry Polaris, I cry foul at this justification. The only rules that are RAW are the core rules supplied by the SRD and the Errata to the SRD - they are OGL, and available for everyone to reference at all times. Other sources are not RAW.When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct.Okay. I have an idea. What if, if you took this feat, you selected a single skill, and that skill would always have maximum ranks for a character of your class and level, without requiring that any skill points be spent Decent Idea, but bad mechanical follow through. How about this as the benefit of your feat:Select one skill (other than speak language). You gain +1 skill ranks each level that may only be used to purchase ranks in this skill. This skill is always treated as a class skill for the purpose of purchasing a skill rank with this feat only.Your Maximum Skill Rank still applies.I think that actually balances it out a little better, don't you? Plus, it allows you to add more SP and doesn't give an "auto max" ability so stays mechanically streamlined. :)
Polaris 06-19-07, 10:37 PM	But to a different skill. If I want my character to be really good at hiding, Skill Focus gives me +15% chance of succeeding. Who cares if I can't dress up and pretend to be the government official if no one can see me? For a caster, that Skill Focus (Concentration) can mean the difference between auto-succeeding on the cast defensively or cast while mount is running check or having a 15% chance of failure. +10 ranks in Knowledge (The Planes) isn't going to make up for that. That "different" skill can (and should be assumed for balance purposes) give you a +2 synergy bonus to the skill or skills you really want. That's by level 2. This proposed feat lets you do it multiple times over. Likewise this proposed feat allows you to sink points into tertiary skills needed for PrC qualification and the like and still keep your most important skills maxxed out. What's more you can get multiple syngeries (eg diplomacy). Sure, it takes more than 2 feats (much more, actually) to provide the same benefits. My question is, who would actually spend 2 feats to pick up those benefits? I wouldn't for most characters I make; I value those two feats to spend as I choose much more than that grab bag of weak abilities. I think many would agree. Anyone that wants to play an elf. Seriously, that's the tradeoff when you chose this race. I thought we were staying core? ;) And where does it say retraining is within the power of a Limited Wish? I am staying core. Psionics and the XPH are part of the SRD. Also Limited Wish says that Psionic Reformation is within the power of a limited wish since Psionic Reformation is a spell or spell-like ability of level 4 or less. OK, fine, so you swap out your first level feat for a maxed skill at level 20. What's the big deal? For most characters, they have more important feats to grab. And it's not even open to abuse; you still have to spend the skill points as if you were gaining them with levels, so no dumping them all into a skill during the one level you had it as a class skill. Actually you can do exactly that (dump everything into one skill) with just a trivial amount of book-keeping so de-facto it is open to abuse and is as problematic as some have said. -Polaris
Polaris 06-19-07, 10:39 PM	Sorry Polaris, I cry foul at this justification. The only rules that are RAW are the core rules supplied by the SRD and the Errata to the SRD - they are OGL, and available for everyone to reference at all times. Other sources are not RAW. Fine. My point still stands. Psionic Reformation is part of the XPH which makes it part of the SRD and that is core and even if you don't use psionics, the wording of limited wish (which is definately core) allows this in. -Polaris
Crimson_Concerto 06-19-07, 10:48 PM	Just to clarify: I wrote this feat because I believe Nymph's Kiss to be overpowered and Open-Minded to be underpowered. This was written in an attempt to find a middle ground.Fair enough. If you had bothered to check the time-stamps, you'd realize that I wrote post 29 AFTER you modified the post I referred to in post 28.First of all, I didn't modify any post you were talking about in post 28, so... what? :confused: Second of all, this has to do with your shiny new 1/day ability, so good job trying to defend yourself with something completely unrelated... Hmm, it almost seems familiar... ;) I also note in passing...In other words, you'd like to specifically point out...that it's easy to be snide about other ancillary issuesOoh, "ancillary." Making good use of our "Word-A-Day" calendar, are we?when one is losing the primary argument.I dont' know who you think I am, but I've posted a grand total of 4 times in this topic, including this one, and no post made any argument to you or anybody else in any way about the topic. I stated my opinion to the OP once, and that was it. Do I think you're wrong? As usual, yes. For some reason the two of us never agree on anything. Am I going to argue with you? Of course not. I mean, why should I? It's not like you ever admit being wrong about anything, so what would be the point? :P And now, just as you have done so many times before, I will take my leave in the middle of a conversation without ever coming back. Good night! :D
NobodyRemembersThis 06-19-07, 10:54 PM	Fine. My point still stands. Psionic Reformation is part of the XPH which makes it part of the SRD and that is core and even if you don't use psionics, the wording of limited wish (which is definately core) allows this in. -PolarisLimited Wish does not say explicitly that it can mimic Psionic Powers - but the catch all "any other effect whose power level is in line with the above effects" can be used to justify it. And you could also get in an argument about it being OGL, not core as it is listed as a supplement, not a core book :P "Core" (as opposed to OGL) is almost universally accepted as PHb, DMG, and MM only. But that is splitting hairs. That it is in the SRD should be good enough (it is for me ;) ) So yes, such retraining can be argued as legal - I personally wouldn't allow it because I don't use the XPH in game (my group just doesn't like the flavor, is all) From a balancing perspective, it is most certainly valid to bring into the argument. :)
Zelck 06-19-07, 11:10 PM	That "different" skill can (and should be assumed for balance purposes) give you a +2 synergy bonus to the skill or skills you really want. That's by level 2. This proposed feat lets you do it multiple times over. Likewise this proposed feat allows you to sink points into tertiary skills needed for PrC qualification and the like and still keep your most important skills maxxed out. What's more you can get multiple syngeries (eg diplomacy). This assumes that 1) the skill you want to boost has synergies, and 2) you wouldn't have picked up those synergies without the extra skill point per level. And many more PrCs require lots of feats as opposed to some random skills that you wouldn't have picked up without this feat. Anyone that wants to play an elf. Seriously, that's the tradeoff when you chose this race. Yes, and humans are still a popular race. I don't think giving other races the ability to trade their first level feat for +1 skill points per level is going to make much difference. In fact, people might pick human to get +2 skill points per level. I am staying core. Psionics and the XPH are part of the SRD. Also Limited Wish says that Psionic Reformation is within the power of a limited wish since Psionic Reformation is a spell or spell-like ability of level 4 or less. As much as I wish it were so, SRD != core. Core is the PHB, DMG, and MM only. Additionally, even the defenders of psionics admit that Psychic Reformation is broken and should be banned (A psion/wilder having access to any power on their power list for 50 XP per switch? Yes please!). EDIT: Heck, you can do the equivalent of this without the new feat. Just change every single feat you have to Open Minded temporarily, get a ton of skill points, and change it back when you're done being a skillmonkey. You might as well argue that the Choker's Quickness ability is overpowered because you can get access to it with Shapechange. Actually you can do exactly that (dump everything into one skill) with just a trivial amount of book-keeping so de-facto it is open to abuse and is as problematic as some have said. No, you have to redo the skills as if you were gaining levels one by one. That means you can't max at least one skill without using cross-class ranks if you try point-dumping shenanigans.
StruckingFuggle 06-19-07, 11:26 PM	Okay, I'm curious. People keep saying that this feat would "marginalize" humans. Would anyone (other than Polaris, who seems to have a thing for having as many skill points as possible - but then again, he might just play a human with the feat in that case) really be tempted to play another race with this feat instead of a human, where you'd otherwise want to play a human? And how often? (numerically, it may minorly diminish - not remove, but dimnish - a racial traits of humans due to diminishing returns, but I'm curious how much it would make people less likely to use humans in practice...)
Scion of Coldshard 06-20-07, 12:01 AM	Great feat ;) I think it should be part of the core. The only problem is that retroactive thing, but you know what? The core mechanic for skill point gaining and int is already really crazy, I dont mind something bending that rule, especially if it gets to break someday. I think of it like this: NPC and prereqs for powerful feats -Toughness -Open minded -+2/+2 skill feats -skill focus PC and typically non-chain building feats -Improved toughness -This feat -Improved initiative As for nymphs kiss, it is a really powerful feat. Personally, I get rid of the silly 'must be good' requirement, tone up on the rp difficulties (very tough campaign to campaign, hence this being a general no-no), and change the benefits around a little. Still powerful, but not quite as much. Making the skill points retroactive might be a decent addition to the feat but it is already so tough that it would be really hard to justify without some sort of extra major prereq and anything major enough to make the feat balanced might just push it into the 'too weak to bother with' area, depending. All in all though, extra skill point feat is great! Works well for those characters who want more skill points and have an extra feat to spend on it vs those other skill boosters which take you above the normal maximum and are good feats for tree/prc building.
DM Denubis 06-20-07, 12:33 AM	Would anyone (other than Polaris, who seems to have a thing for having as many skill points as possible - but then again, he might just play a human with the feat in that case) really be tempted to play another race with this feat instead of a human, where you'd otherwise want to play a human? And how often? Of course not. Mechanically, it's one of the best races. The bonus feat is amazing.
Polaris 06-20-07, 01:44 AM	Of course not. Mechanically, it's one of the best races. The bonus feat is amazing. If that were true, then there would be a tremendous run on Strongheart Halflings as well as PCs given that they too get a bonus feat at first level. I haven't seen any evidence of that (certainly not when compared with humans!) Thus I am forced to conclude it's the combination of bonus skill points AND a bonus feat which makes humans so popular. Allowing another race to buy half of the human racial qualities does marginalize humans because it makes humans less unique and humans get less from the same feat (both points proven earlier). In fact, it's the same reason you won't (and shouldn't) see a feat for Darkvision or Low-Light Vision even though both of those are probably well in line for balance purposes with the power of most feats. Same arguments apply since any feat that would grant those abilities marginalize races that get superior vision. Marginalize doesn't mean the race is worthless, simply less attractive. -Polaris
Polaris 06-20-07, 01:54 AM	This assumes that 1) the skill you want to boost has synergies, and 2) you wouldn't have picked up those synergies without the extra skill point per level. And many more PrCs require lots of feats as opposed to some random skills that you wouldn't have picked up without this feat. Since this is a balance discussion, that is exactly what you should assume. You always balance around the worst, i.e. most abusive, case. Yes, and humans are still a popular race. I don't think giving other races the ability to trade their first level feat for +1 skill points per level is going to make much difference. In fact, people might pick human to get +2 skill points per level. I never said that humans weren't a popular race. I am saying that you are marginalizing humans by letting other races pick up a human racial feature and that's bad precedent. Essentially you are allowing non-humans the ability to have human skill and have their non-human racial abilities as well which diminishes the value of humans because it makes the opportunity cost for being a non-human much lower. As much as I wish it were so, SRD != core. Core is the PHB, DMG, and MM only. Additionally, even the defenders of psionics admit that Psychic Reformation is broken and should be banned (A psion/wilder having access to any power on their power list for 50 XP per switch? Yes please!). If it's in the SRD, then it's available to everyone and thus part of the balance we have to deal with RAW. Even if you don't allow Psionics in your campaign, the open-ended wording on Limited Wish means by a strict interpretation, RAW, you HAVE to allow Psionic Reformation in via limited wish. I think it's broken too, but WOTC apparently disagrees with us and they write the rules (unless talking about house-rules of course). This is where I point to DMG2 and Races of Dragon as evidence of where WOTC is leaning on this issue. I disagree with WOTC, but for this thread, that's not relevant. EDIT: Heck, you can do the equivalent of this without the new feat. Just change every single feat you have to Open Minded temporarily, get a ton of skill points, and change it back when you're done being a skillmonkey. You might as well argue that the Choker's Quickness ability is overpowered because you can get access to it with Shapechange. Doesn't work that way as WOTC clarified in DMG2. I know; I know. I hate the fact that WOTC is putting out FAQ and Errata in non-core supplements, but they've been doing that for some time. Essentially, yes you can do that....and then when you swap the feats back out, you retroactively lose the skill points. Also Shapechange is brokity-broke-broke and the Choker's quickness ability is just the icing on the proverbial cake on that one.....and WOTC has recognized that by slowly weaning the game away from Polymorph type spells including shapechange (much discussion of that last year but I digress). In this case WOTC is embracing Psionic Reformation. No, you have to redo the skills as if you were gaining levels one by one. That means you can't max at least one skill without using cross-class ranks if you try point-dumping shenanigans. Of course you can. As long as you have at least one class where it's a class skill, you can shift your points level by level to do just that (point dumping). This dirty little secret has been known on the Psi-Boards pretty much forever. In fact it's one way to abuse Psionic Reformation, i.e. you recover points spend on cross-class skills and respend them when you spend skill points as class skills on the rewrite. I also note that if human (or even of human heritage, i.e. half-elf or half-orc if using a Races of Destiny official rule varient), that you can retroactively get Able Learner in which case you CAN skill dump with little to no book-keeping. -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-20-07, 02:12 AM	Marginalize doesn't mean the race is worthless, simply less attractive. No, marginalize means it does so to a significant degree.
DM Denubis 06-20-07, 02:23 AM	If that were true, then there would be a tremendous run on Strongheart Halflings as well as PCs given that they too get a bonus feat at first level. I haven't seen any evidence of that (certainly not when compared with humans!) Thus I am forced to conclude it's the combination of bonus skill points AND a bonus feat which makes humans so popular. There is. They're much more popular than the average halfling. Allowing another race to buy half of the human racial qualities does marginalize humans because it makes humans less unique and humans get less from the same feat (both points proven earlier). In fact, it's the same reason you won't (and shouldn't) see a feat for Darkvision or Low-Light Vision even though both of those are probably well in line for balance purposes with the power of most feats. Same arguments apply since any feat that would grant those abilities marginalize races that get superior vision. Marginalize doesn't mean the race is worthless, simply less attractive. -Polaris But it's not a half. The skill points aren't as important as the feat. Also, low-light and darkvision aren't big enough to be considered huge benefits. Not to mention, while not core, there is a feat to grant Darkvision, from Dragon 356 or some such number. Much like this feat, however, it's not something someone will always take. It does not make the dwarf or half-orc any less appealing (Though how you could make the half-orc less appealing is beyond me.). Nobody is going to look at this feat and say, "Oh, great, I can play a dwarf with this feat instead of a human!". That's stupid. Did I mention that it's stupid? There are better feats for just about every class or build. Please stop acting like this is the all-important feat that every class must take or be gimped out. It's not a "Of course I'm taking it!" kind of decision, which is what you're making it out to be. Power Attack it ain't.
Zelck 06-20-07, 02:46 AM	Since this is a balance discussion, that is exactly what you should assume. You always balance around the worst, i.e. most abusive, case. Well, let's get an example, shall we? It seems the skill with the most synergies is Diplomacy, from Bluff, Knowledge Nobility, and Sense Motive. So in the most abusive case, we get +6 bonus from synergies as well as 5 ranks in 3 skills. More realistically, however, a Diplomacy-focused character would invest 15 skill points into those 3 skills anyway. So the feat doesn't really grant that +6 bonus over not taking the feat, just some more flexibility with skill points. Skill Focus, on the other hand, makes that +6 bonus into a +9 bonus. So we have flexibility vs. power, seems OK to me. I never said that humans weren't a popular race. I am saying that you are marginalizing humans by letting other races pick up a human racial feature and that's bad precedent. Essentially you are allowing non-humans the ability to have human skill and have their non-human racial abilities as well which diminishes the value of humans because it makes the opportunity cost for being a non-human much lower. It costs a feat. A non-human character usually has 7 feats, unless they don't have class features. It'll probably cost their first level feat, which could delay entry into PrCs. That's a huge cost. If it's in the SRD, then it's available to everyone and thus part of the balance we have to deal with RAW. Even if you don't allow Psionics in your campaign, the open-ended wording on Limited Wish means by a strict interpretation, RAW, you HAVE to allow Psionic Reformation in via limited wish. I think it's broken too, but WOTC apparently disagrees with us and they write the rules (unless talking about house-rules of course). This is where I point to DMG2 and Races of Dragon as evidence of where WOTC is leaning on this issue. I disagree with WOTC, but for this thread, that's not relevant. Regardless of what retraining rules get put into place, Psychic Reformation is brokedy broke broke. I'd say it's arguably more broken than Shapechange. If a group plays with Psychic Reformation, they have bigger problems to worry about than a level 20 character trading out a feat for 23 skill points (like Sorcerers having access to all spells with Limited Wish -> Psychic Reformation; the class is not that bad if they have almost unlimited spells known). Doesn't work that way as WOTC clarified in DMG2. I know; I know. I hate the fact that WOTC is putting out FAQ and Errata in non-core supplements, but they've been doing that for some time. Essentially, yes you can do that....and then when you swap the feats back out, you retroactively lose the skill points. Also Shapechange is brokity-broke-broke and the Choker's quickness ability is just the icing on the proverbial cake on that one.....and WOTC has recognized that by slowly weaning the game away from Polymorph type spells including shapechange (much discussion of that last year but I digress). In this case WOTC is embracing Psionic Reformation. Losing skill points is OK. The point is, when you need the skills, you swap to Open Mind and get tons of skills. When you need to fight, you swap to your combat feats and fight. Just one of the small abuses of Psychic Reformation. And even with retraining, I doubt 23 skill points at the cost of a feat is unbalanced at level 20.
Melayl 06-20-07, 02:47 AM	Remove the "retroactive" part and I think this is perfectly balanced. If you really want a compareson of balance, check out www.seankreynolds.com and look for his "feat point" system. You'll be able to judge the power of this feat off of those.
Polaris 06-20-07, 02:58 AM	Remove the "retroactive" part and I think this is perfectly balanced. If you really want a compareson of balance, check out www.seankreynolds.com and look for his "feat point" system. You'll be able to judge the power of this feat off of those. The problem is (well one of them) is that he can't remove the retroactive part and remain RAW. That's because a PC can use this feat to get retroactive benefits whether the feat grants them or not. -Polaris
Polaris 06-20-07, 03:01 AM	No, marginalize means it does so to a significant degree. Humans have two things going for them. 1. An extra Skill Point per level. 2. A bonus feat at first level. By allowing any race to puchase one of the two seems significant to me! That's doubly true when you consider that non-human racial abilities add up to more than two feats in worth....usually much, much more. -Polaris
Polaris 06-20-07, 03:10 AM	There is. They're much more popular than the average halfling. Sure. Twice zero is still zero. Compare the strongheart halfing to the various LA+0 elves or better yet humans and we'll talk. My point stands on this. But it's not a half. The skill points aren't as important as the feat. They can be, easily. In fact five skill points in the right skill (esp the first five) is often worth MORE than a feat. Five skill points gives +2 to a skill and can give abilities that you otherwise wouldn't get for the right skill. Such skills include (but aren't limited to): Autohypnosis, Tumble, Balance, Use Magic Device, Spellcraft, etc. Also, low-light and darkvision aren't big enough to be considered huge benefits. I never said they were. I said that such feats would diminish races with superior vision. Not to mention, while not core, there is a feat to grant Darkvision, from Dragon 356 or some such number. Much like this feat, however, it's not something someone will always take. It does not make the dwarf or half-orc any less appealing (Though how you could make the half-orc less appealing is beyond me.). IMX most groups avoid Dragon Magazine feats (and PrCs) like the Black Death because of balance and playtesting issues (or the lack thereof). Bad example. Nobody is going to look at this feat and say, "Oh, great, I can play a dwarf with this feat instead of a human!". That's stupid. Did I mention that it's stupid? You can say it's "stupid" all day long, but that doesn't mean it is. As others have mentioned, it's a great feat for a Dwarf Fighter or Dwarf Rogue since he gets the human skill points and gets his racial stuff too. In fact for a non-human rogue or bard, it would be almost "must take" because of the skill point demand on those classes. There are better feats for just about every class or build. Please stop acting like this is the all-important feat that every class must take or be gimped out. It's not a "Of course I'm taking it!" kind of decision, which is what you're making it out to be. Power Attack it ain't. It's at least three if not four times better than any other skill type feat including Open-Minded from CAdv. If you care about skill points at all (and most characters will), then you have to take this or be left behind. It is that important. -Polaris
Melayl 06-20-07, 03:14 AM	The problem is (well one of them) is that he can't remove the retroactive part and remain RAW. That's because a PC can use this feat to get retroactive benefits whether the feat grants them or not. -Polaris Huh???? Why can't he change it and remain RAW???? And why could a PC get the retroactive benefit if the feat doesn't say he can??? You've got me seriously confused here. It might just be the hour and the caffeine...
Polaris 06-20-07, 03:18 AM	Well, let's get an example, shall we? It seems the skill with the most synergies is Diplomacy, from Bluff, Knowledge Nobility, and Sense Motive. So in the most abusive case, we get +6 bonus from synergies as well as 5 ranks in 3 skills. More realistically, however, a Diplomacy-focused character would invest 15 skill points into those 3 skills anyway. So the feat doesn't really grant that +6 bonus over not taking the feat, just some more flexibility with skill points. Skill Focus, on the other hand, makes that +6 bonus into a +9 bonus. So we have flexibility vs. power, seems OK to me. It's not. For one feat, you get +6 Diplomacy for free and over the life of your character 8 more skill points besides. By "free", I mean that a character that just specializes in Diplomacy (and the type exists) will be able to fully invest in other skills without worrying about the skill point hit he'd otherwise take by making sure you get those synergies. So it most definately matters. It costs a feat. A non-human character usually has 7 feats, unless they don't have class features. It'll probably cost their first level feat, which could delay entry into PrCs. That's a huge cost. As I said before, it doesn't have to. Most PrC "builds" allow for at least one floater feat....and you can reform to get the feat retroactively RAW so the cost is less than you think. Regardless of what retraining rules get put into place, Psychic Reformation is brokedy broke broke. I'd say it's arguably more broken than Shapechange. If a group plays with Psychic Reformation, they have bigger problems to worry about than a level 20 character trading out a feat for 23 skill points (like Sorcerers having access to all spells with Limited Wish -> Psychic Reformation; the class is not that bad if they have almost unlimited spells known). You can't use Psionic Reformation to change your spells knowns. Read the power. You can adjust your skills and feats. That's all. That said, I won't argue the point about Psionic Reformation. I tend to agree with you on this, but WOTC does not and they wrote the rules. Losing skill points is OK. The point is, when you need the skills, you swap to Open Mind and get tons of skills. When you need to fight, you swap to your combat feats and fight. Just one of the small abuses of Psychic Reformation. And even with retraining, I doubt 23 skill points at the cost of a feat is unbalanced at level 20. 23 skill points in one shot sure seems unbalanced to me (and I'm not alone on that one apparently...even from those that otherwise would be favorably inclined towards this hypothetical feat). -Polaris
Polaris 06-20-07, 03:24 AM	Huh???? Why can't he change it and remain RAW???? And why could a PC get the retroactive benefit if the feat doesn't say he can??? You've got me seriously confused here. It might just be the hour and the caffeine... The problem is Psionic Reformation (SRD) and the new retraining rules (DMG2) which essentially puts WOTC's seal of approval on Psionic Reformation regardless of what I think (and others). Psionic Reformation is a spell-like ability that is less than fourth level and is in the SRD (which means it's available to every group baring house-rules). Even without psionics, that puts it squarely within the power of a limited wish. Thus RAW, you can always take feats "retroactively" by reforming yourself (for a very modest GP cost) by anyone that has access to fourth level powers (if psi is present) or 7th level arcane spells (if psi is not present) so that you have access to the feat when it is most advantagous. In short, with this feat you can adventure for 18 levels, go to a large town and reform yourself back to first level and instead of taking this feat at 18th level, you "take" it at first with reformation and swap it with the feat you originally took which becomes your feat at 18th level. Before you say it's the power that's broke (and I don't disagree), the new WOTC retraining rules lets players do this with no power whatsoever (albeit in DMG2 which is non-core at least so far). -Polaris
Melayl 06-20-07, 03:32 AM	The problem is Psionic Reformation (SRD) and the new retraining rules (DMG2) which essentially puts WOTC's seal of approval on Psionic Reformation regardless of what I think (and others). Psionic Reformation is a spell-like ability that is less than fourth level and is in the SRD (which means it's available to every group baring house-rules). Even without psionics, that puts it squarely within the power of a limited wish. Thus RAW, you can always take feats "retroactively" by reforming yourself (for a very modest GP cost) by anyone that has access to fourth level powers (if psi is present) or 7th level arcane spells (if psi is not present) so that you have access to the feat when it is most advantagous. In short, with this feat you can adventure for 18 levels, go to a large town and reform yourself back to first level and instead of taking this feat at 18th level, you "take" it at first with reformation and swap it with the feat you originally took which becomes your feat at 18th level. Before you say it's the power that's broke (and I don't disagree), the new WOTC retraining rules lets players do this with no power whatsoever (albeit in DMG2 which is non-core at least so far). -Polaris Actually, Psychic Reformation requires a scaling XP cost, not a GP cost. Psychic Reformation Telepathy [Mind-Affecting] Level: Psion/wilder 4 Display: Auditory, mental, and visual Manifesting Time: 10 minutes Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Target: One creature Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: None Power Resistance: No Power Points: 7, XP; see text When this power is manifested, the subject can choose to spend its most recently gained skill points differently (picking new skills and abandoning old ones if it chooses) and to choose a different feat from the one it selected when advancing from its previous level to its current level. The subject can also choose to forget powers it acquired when advancing to its current level, replacing them with new ones. The subject can undo decisions of these sorts that were made at lower levels, if both the subject and the manifester agree to pay the necessary XP before this power is manifested (see below). The subject must abide by the standard rules for selecting skills and feats, and so it cannot take feats for which it doesn’t qualify or take crossclass skills as class skills. XP Cost: This power costs 50 XP to manifest to reformat choices made when the character reached her current level. For each additional previous level into which the revision reaches, the power costs an additional 50 XP. The manifester and subject split all XP costs evenly. I don't view the power (or Retraining) as broken, just stupid. He can change the feat as he desires. Noone needs to allow it in their game. Actually noone needs to allow Psychic Reformation in their game, either (after all, the DM and party decide what rules to use). Using Psychic Reformation or Retraining or such to this feat or another feat or ability is broken doesn't make much sense to me.
Polaris 06-20-07, 03:46 AM	Actually, Psychic Reformation requires a scaling XP cost, not a GP cost. Buying a spell costs GP so it is a GP cost. The XP cost makes it more expensive but not much more. Honestly 50XP per level isn't much at all (and neither is 250gp per level which would be the going rate for XP used in spells). I don't view the power (or Retraining) as broken, just stupid. He can change the feat as he desires. Noone needs to allow it in their game. Actually noone needs to allow Psychic Reformation in their game, either (after all, the DM and party decide what rules to use). Oberani Fallacy. Using Psychic Reformation or Retraining or such to this feat or another feat or ability is broken doesn't make much sense to me. Then let me explain: Rules as written, you can get the benefits of a feat retroactively if the feat explicitly permits this or not. Given that fact, you have to balance a feat as though it were retroactive. Hence the problem. -Polaris
Melayl 06-20-07, 03:57 AM	... you have to balance a feat as though it were retroactive. Hence the problem. -Polaris I guess I don't agree with that. It seems I won't change your mind, and I know you won't change mine, so we'll have to agree to disagree. :) I think the feat's fine, and I'll allow it in my game. Have fun.
DragonDan 06-20-07, 07:58 AM	Compared against Core feats, Nymph's kiss is overpowered. Haven't we been through this. Core is not balanced. Nymphs Kiss seems overpowered only because most Core feats that grant bonuses to skills are pathetically weak.
CryoSilver 06-20-07, 10:59 AM	Haven't we been through this. Core is not balanced. Nymphs Kiss seems overpowered only because most Core feats that grant bonuses to skills are pathetically weak. Nymph's Kiss is powerful, but balanced by the fact that if you do anything even questionably evil (based on the BoED standards, too) ever of your own free will you lose the feat forever. So no poison, killing of prisoners, lying, stealing, cheating, hurting people's feelings, etc..
risner 06-20-07, 12:18 PM	Just to clarify: I wrote this feat because I believe Nymph's Kiss to be overpowered and Open-Minded to be underpowered. This was written in an attempt to find a middle ground. If that was your goal, then you ended up with a feat more powerful than both of your low and high water marks.
DM Denubis 06-20-07, 12:20 PM	Sure. Twice zero is still zero. Compare the strongheart halfing to the various LA+0 elves or better yet humans and we'll talk. My point stands on this. According to whom? Yourself? There's a surprise. Polaris agrees with Polaris. Look, I'm telling you, mechanically, Strongheart halfings are superior. You lose your racial bonus to saves and pick up a bonus feat. Well, if you miss it so much, just take Luck of Heroes. Oh, look, now you're exactly the same. But say you needed something else, like Weapon Focus to qualify for a prestige class. Guess what? You can take it. The added versatility makes them more powerful. They can be, easily. In fact five skill points in the right skill (esp the first five) is often worth MORE than a feat. Five skill points gives +2 to a skill and can give abilities that you otherwise wouldn't get for the right skill. Such skills include (but aren't limited to): Autohypnosis, Tumble, Balance, Use Magic Device, Spellcraft, etc. No. Wrong. Sorry. Play again. If you need those skills and have access to them, you are not going to need this feat to take them. Open Minded is garbage. Always has been, always will be. Five skill points is nothing compared to the power of a feat. I never said they were. I said that such feats would diminish races with superior vision. I'm saying that they don't. Congratulations, now we know which side we're arguing! IMX most groups avoid Dragon Magazine feats (and PrCs) like the Black Death because of balance and playtesting issues (or the lack thereof). Bad example. But you yourself said that the power would be perfectly in line with what a feat could do. There would not be any balance issues, and you admitted that yourself. Also, way to ignore the part where I explained my point by saying that the dwarf and half-orc would not be any less appealing. You can say it's "stupid" all day long, but that doesn't mean it is. As others have mentioned, it's a great feat for a Dwarf Fighter or Dwarf Rogue since he gets the human skill points and gets his racial stuff too. In fact for a non-human rogue or bard, it would be almost "must take" because of the skill point demand on those classes. This is not a good feat for a dwarf fighter, or any other race of fighter. Fighters, news flash, do not need skill points. Anyone saying they need skill points does not know how this game works. After level five or seven or so, everyone flies. There's no need for almost anything on a fighter's skill list. Because their list is awful. Please, think about what you're saying. A dwarf rogue would benefit from this a lot. But, more than he would benefit than from simply playing a human? Hell no. This isn't any more "must take" than playing a human is. It's like, "Hmmm... Do I want to play a dwarf and spend my first feat on this, or do I want to play a human, have this for free, and have two feats to play with?" That's why I said it's stupid. And it is exactly that. Stupid. It's at least three if not four times better than any other skill type feat including Open-Minded from CAdv. If you care about skill points at all (and most characters will), then you have to take this or be left behind. It is that important. -Polaris Once again, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Almost none of that is true. Yes, it's way better than Open Minded. Which is a terrible, stupid, piece of trash feat for anyone to take. Most characters will not care too much about skill points. They're not nearly as important as you're making them out to be. The party usually has one person who's the skill monkey, and another person to be a party face. Sometimes it's the same person. You do not have to take this, because it puts you a feat behind. Feats are more important than skills in almost every case. Also, if your character is based off skill points, than you're going to have the skill points to get what you need anyhow. It is not that important. OP, there's only one person here who's saying no to this feat, and that's Polaris, who seemingly has little grasp on reality or balance, treats skill points like Gollum treats the Ring, and also seems to be the most stubborn human being I've ever seen or heard of. My opinion is obvious. Use the feat.
Polaris 06-20-07, 12:43 PM	According to whom? Yourself? There's a surprise. Polaris agrees with Polaris. Look, I'm telling you, mechanically, Strongheart halfings are superior. You lose your racial bonus to saves and pick up a bonus feat. Well, if you miss it so much, just take Luck of Heroes. Oh, look, now you're exactly the same. But say you needed something else, like Weapon Focus to qualify for a prestige class. Guess what? You can take it. The added versatility makes them more powerful. I never said that strongheart halfings weren't superior to the standard sort. What I did and do say is that if the bonus feat were really the draw to playing a human (rather than the feat AND skill points), you'd see a lot more strongheart halflings than you do. In fact from what I've seen, halfling players of any sort are uncommon at best. If you feel otherwise, I am sure it won't be any problem to prove me wrong with....evidence? Otherwise, my point stands. No. Wrong. Sorry. Play again. If you need those skills and have access to them, you are not going to need this feat to take them. Open Minded is garbage. Always has been, always will be. Five skill points is nothing compared to the power of a feat. Odd, you are the one that is persistantly missing the point. Five points in a skill is worth more than a feat. I have shown that over and over again, and so have others here. This feat lets you get FOUR such packages over the life of your character starting at second level AND without digging into your primary skill point expenditure. I'm saying that they don't. Congratulations, now we know which side we're arguing! You are wrong. As a matter of fact, you are wrong. The ability to use a feat to buy a racial feature (any racial feature), means that the race becomes less unique and it removes at least one reason to take that race. Hence the race is marginalized. No opinion involved on this. We can disagree about the degree of maginalization but not the fact of it. But you yourself said that the power would be perfectly in line with what a feat could do. There would not be any balance issues, and you admitted that yourself. Also, way to ignore the part where I explained my point by saying that the dwarf and half-orc would not be any less appealing. Wrong. I said such a vision feat would be within the power of a feat, but it would be a bad feat because it lets you buy a racial feature. See above. This is not a good feat for a dwarf fighter, or any other race of fighter. Fighters, news flash, do not need skill points. Anyone saying they need skill points does not know how this game works. After level five or seven or so, everyone flies. There's no need for almost anything on a fighter's skill list. Because their list is awful. Please, think about what you're saying. Really? It's a wonderful feat for a dwarf fighter. A fighter gets more feats over the life-time of his character than he can possibly spend which means that spending one feat early costs him very little. In addition, with those extra skill points, the dwarf can take tumble (even cross-class, tumble is great) where he otherwise would have had difficulty.....and you CAN tumble when you fly, and a dwarf can tumble in any armor. Read the rules. That's just one example. If you underestimate how important skills are, then you really don't know the rules very well (to throw it back in your face). A dwarf rogue would benefit from this a lot. But, more than he would benefit than from simply playing a human? Hell no. This isn't any more "must take" than playing a human is. Which is why this feat marginalizes humans. Let's say you want to play in the "World's Largest Dungeon". You want to be a Dwarf Rogue (solid reasons for that in this particular case too!). You DON'T want to be human because humans can't see in the dark and a dwarf can. With this feat you can have all the skill points of a human rogue and still have the abilities of a Dwarf. Otherwise you'd have to make the painful choice between skill points and racial abilities. Thank you for illustrating my point. It's like, "Hmmm... Do I want to play a dwarf and spend my first feat on this, or do I want to play a human, have this for free, and have two feats to play with?" That's why I said it's stupid. And it is exactly that. Stupid. Racial abilities are worth more than two feats, so it's hardly stupid, your commentary not withstanding. Once again, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Almost none of that is true. Yes, it's way better than Open Minded. Which is a terrible, stupid, piece of trash feat for anyone to take. Back on page one of this thread, we've established (even proponents of this feat) that Open Minded was hardly a 'trash' feat....and this feat is better than that. More reason for pause at least. Most characters will not care too much about skill points. They're not nearly as important as you're making them out to be. The party usually has one person who's the skill monkey, and another person to be a party face. Sometimes it's the same person. Really? I've seen a few, but very few. The usual I've seen in all sorts of play is that characters are starved for skill points and must wish they had just "one or two more". Skills are that important at least to most characters. You do not have to take this, because it puts you a feat behind. Feats are more important than skills in almost every case. Also, if your character is based off skill points, than you're going to have the skill points to get what you need anyhow. It is not that important. 23 skill points is far better than any single feat, and that's the point here. OP, there's only one person here who's saying no to this feat, and that's Polaris, who seemingly has little grasp on reality or balance, treats skill points like Gollum treats the Ring, and also seems to be the most stubborn human being I've ever seen or heard of. My opinion is obvious. Use the feat. OP, my opposition may be the most vocal, but it's not the only one. There is at least plenty of reason for caution at the very least. Frankly this feat is flat out overpowered and marginalizes humans, and those are reasons enough not to use it. -Polaris
DM Denubis 06-20-07, 01:06 PM	I never said that strongheart halfings weren't superior to the standard sort. What I did and do say is that if the bonus feat were really the draw to playing a human (rather than the feat AND skill points), you'd see a lot more strongheart halflings than you do. In fact from what I've seen, halfling players of any sort are uncommon at best. If you feel otherwise, I am sure it won't be any problem to prove me wrong with....evidence? Otherwise, my point stands. Right, let me just get out my book of completely useless information. Let's see you give some evidence on the matter, other than personal experience. Odd, you are the one that is persistantly missing the point. Five points in a skill is worth more than a feat. I have shown that over and over again, and so have others here. This feat lets you get FOUR such packages over the life of your character starting at second level AND without digging into your primary skill point expenditure. All the synergy bonuses in the world won't make your fighter hit harder, and guess what fighters are meant to do? Oh, right, hit stuff. You are wrong. As a matter of fact, you are wrong. The ability to use a feat to buy a racial feature (any racial feature), means that the race becomes less unique and it removes at least one reason to take that race. Hence the race is marginalized. No opinion involved on this. We can disagree about the degree of maginalization but not the fact of it. Oh, I'm not saying that it doesn't make humans less unique, but it certainly doesn't make them less appealing. Wrong. I said such a vision feat would be within the power of a feat, but it would be a bad feat because it lets you buy a racial feature. See above. And then you proceeded to say that your group stayed away from Dragon because it felt that it created too many balance issues. You said balance first, not me. For the record, I think it's a terrible feat. Not because it makes races less unique, but because it's rarely worth taking. Really? It's a wonderful feat for a dwarf fighter. A fighter gets more feats over the life-time of his character than he can possibly spend which means that spending one feat early costs him very little. In addition, with those extra skill points, the dwarf can take tumble (even cross-class, tumble is great) where he otherwise would have had difficulty.....and you CAN tumble when you fly, and a dwarf can tumble in any armor. Read the rules. That's just one example. If you underestimate how important skills are, then you really don't know the rules very well (to throw it back in your face). If you're so worried about Tumble, buy an item that gives a competence bonus to it. Doesn't even need to be very high, because most of Tumble is set DCs, not variable ones. I never said a dwarf fighter in armor while flying couldn't tumble. Please don't put words in my mouth, and I won't do the same to you. Which is why this feat marginalizes humans. Let's say you want to play in the "World's Largest Dungeon". You want to be a Dwarf Rogue (solid reasons for that in this particular case too!). You DON'T want to be human because humans can't see in the dark and a dwarf can. With this feat you can have all the skill points of a human rogue and still have the abilities of a Dwarf. Otherwise you'd have to make the painful choice between skill points and racial abilities. Thank you for illustrating my point. I've done nothing of the sort. Two feats will be more helpful than Darkvision. A simple +1 weapon glows. Also, if he's a dwarven rogue, he's got at least eight skill points a level. Hide, Move Silently, Search, Disable Device, Open Lock, Use Magic Device, Tumble. Now, how much else does he need to do? He's got every rogue job down. He doesn't need the extra skill points. Racial abilities are worth more than two feats, so it's hardly stupid, your commentary not withstanding. Ah, and here's where we just simply disagree. Nothing to be done about it. In my opinion, two feats are much better than racial abilities. Herein lies the problem. Back on page one of this thread, we've established (even proponents of this feat) that Open Minded was hardly a 'trash' feat....and this feat is better than that. More reason for pause at least. Then you were wrong? Really? I've seen a few, but very few. The usual I've seen in all sorts of play is that characters are starved for skill points and must wish they had just "one or two more". Skills are that important at least to most characters. Welcome to the future. You don't even need a rogue in a party to deal with traps anymore. We've got the Cloistered Cleric with the Kobold domain now. 23 skill points is far better than any single feat, and that's the point here. Do I get to pick the feat we compare its in-combat benefits to? OP, my opposition may be the most vocal, but it's not the only one. There is at least plenty of reason for caution at the very least. Frankly this feat is flat out overpowered and marginalizes humans, and those are reasons enough not to use it. -Polaris That's your opinion. Mine is different. Anyhow, Polaris, I'm done here. You and I are polar (Ha, get it?) opposites. Neither one of us is going to convince the other of anything, because we both appear to be pretty stubborn. Have a good one.
Pentar 06-20-07, 02:06 PM	Okay, I'm curious. People keep saying that this feat would "marginalize" humans. Would anyone (other than Polaris, who seems to have a thing for having as many skill points as possible - but then again, he might just play a human with the feat in that case) really be tempted to play another race with this feat instead of a human, where you'd otherwise want to play a human? And how often? (numerically, it may minorly diminish - not remove, but dimnish - a racial traits of humans due to diminishing returns, but I'm curious how much it would make people less likely to use humans in practice...) Yes, Strucking - I would. A Tiefling Rogue comes to mind, actually. I've never said the feat is no good - nor have I said I would never implement it - I'm just saying be aware that it does in fact marginalize humans. People will still want to play humans for the free feat and the bonus skill points, but one of the main benefits for being the race is now accessible by a Feat. It's not just ONE extra skill point - it can also potentially change the way you distribute points to your attributes at char-gen. If I'm rolling a Tiefling Rogue and I want extra skill points, but I don't want to dump attribute points into Int, I can instead spend a Feat, get the extra skill point and have my Dex at 20, or extra Con, or whatever... instead of Int, which is really only good for skill points for a Rogue anyway. One of the great things about being a Human (anything) is that if you want those extra skill points, you don't have to dump pnts into Int to obtain it.
Polaris 06-20-07, 03:59 PM	Right, let me just get out my book of completely useless information. Let's see you give some evidence on the matter, other than personal experience. I recall here on these very boards the question why people didn't play certain races...and halflings including strongheart halflings were one of those mentioned. I also note (admittedly annecdotal) that there are very few described characters here or other forums that stray much from human, elf (of some type), dwarf (of some type), or some sort of exotic. If strongheart halfling were as good as you claim, we should see more of them. We haven't. All the synergy bonuses in the world won't make your fighter hit harder, and guess what fighters are meant to do? Oh, right, hit stuff. 5 ranks in balance will keep said fighter from getting hit in bad footing. It will help him from being snuck attacked as well. That seems feat worthy in a strict combat sense. Being able to make DC 15 tumble allows you to avoid AoOs from movement pretty much altogether. That's actually better than Mobility is is nearly as good as Spring Attack. Shall I go on? Oh, I'm not saying that it doesn't make humans less unique, but it certainly doesn't make them less appealing. Less unique makes any race less appealing and certainly marginalizes them. And then you proceeded to say that your group stayed away from Dragon because it felt that it created too many balance issues. You said balance first, not me. For the record, I think it's a terrible feat. Not because it makes races less unique, but because it's rarely worth taking. Dragon Feats are poorly edited, thought out, and implemented, and IMX anyway very few regard them as official. There is solid reason for this. If you're so worried about Tumble, buy an item that gives a competence bonus to it. Doesn't even need to be very high, because most of Tumble is set DCs, not variable ones. I never said a dwarf fighter in armor while flying couldn't tumble. Please don't put words in my mouth, and I won't do the same to you. No can do. Tumble is trained only and skill bonuses for items prior to epic have a ceiling of 10 IIRC....and with 3.5 it may in fact be +5. I certainly don't see any standard items in the DMG or other sources that gives compentance boni of more than +5. Also skill enhancers in 3.5 are expensive. So in short, you're wrong. I've done nothing of the sort. Two feats will be more helpful than Darkvision. A simple +1 weapon glows. Also, if he's a dwarven rogue, he's got at least eight skill points a level. Hide, Move Silently, Search, Disable Device, Open Lock, Use Magic Device, Tumble. Now, how much else does he need to do? He's got every rogue job down. He doesn't need the extra skill points. A magic weapons glows for 10' radius which in a dungeon is virtually useless. As for the Dwarven Rogue, how about: Spot Listen Bluff (so he can sneak attack) Climb Jump (for that synergy bonus with tumble) Balance (to keep your Dex AC in bad footing) That's just off the top of my head and just to keep him on par with the old ADnD conception of "Thief". Ah, and here's where we just simply disagree. Nothing to be done about it. In my opinion, two feats are much better than racial abilities. Herein lies the problem. Except they aren't. That not an opinion. It's very easy to show by comparing feats and racial abilities side by side and it's been done here and elsewhere a bunch of times. In fact racial abilities are typically worth about 4 feats unless the race is really weak (Half-Elf and Half-Orc). Welcome to the future. You don't even need a rogue in a party to deal with traps anymore. We've got the Cloistered Cleric with the Kobold domain now. Clerics are overpowered? What else is new? You still need skills, however, regardless of class. Find traps merely gives the cleric "trapfinding". You still need the high search skill to go with it. Do I get to pick the feat we compare its in-combat benefits to? Apples and oranges. Besides, I've already explained at length just how good skills are in combat....or avoiding it....or even setting it up to your advantage. -Polaris
Scion of Coldshard 06-20-07, 05:03 PM	I recall here on these very boards the question why people didn't play certain races...and halflings including strongheart halflings were one of those mentioned. I also note (admittedly annecdotal) that there are very few described characters here or other forums that stray much from human, elf (of some type), dwarf (of some type), or some sort of exotic. If strongheart halfling were as good as you claim, we should see more of them. We haven't. I would be playing a strongheart halfling right now except that they are not allowed in the setting (eberron). One of the benefits that was not mentioned about being human was that they are medium size. For a lot of builds being small sized is a hit in areas that they do not want hits in. But, for builds that do not care about those type of things, or that really want the benefits of being small sized, the strongheart halfling is definately a very good option. The movement is also a problem. 20' vs 30' can be a really big issue with certain builds. So, for all of that human and strongheart have a lot of differences that arent all overcome by the bonus feat. I think that halfling is a pretty tough choice for a race, and the strongheart variety is even tougher, but each has their own particular nitch.
Polaris 06-20-07, 05:09 PM	So, for all of that human and strongheart have a lot of differences that arent all overcome by the bonus feat. I think that halfling is a pretty tough choice for a race, and the strongheart variety is even tougher, but each has their own particular nitch. True, and that was really my point. You can not say (as some here have implied) that the big draw to being a human is the bonus feat. As you just cojently explained, there is a lot more to it than that....and the bonus skill points are a large part of the draw of being human. We can dispute how much of the draw is due to the feat and how much is due to the skills, but it definately is the combination that matters. That's one reason the proposed feat is problematic....it allows you to buy a unique human racial ability and keep your non-human advantages...and as you just explained, those matter (or at least can). -Polaris
Scion of Coldshard 06-20-07, 05:26 PM	You can not say (as some here have implied) that the big draw to being a human is the bonus feat. Sure you can. The bonus feat is the draw, the other factors are what makes it a deal or a deal breaker. If the two choices were: Human 1: same as human Human 2: same as human but small size This choice would be more interesting except the big draw is likely to be the feat, otherwise picking a different race for either would likely be preferable, but being medium size has enough advantages or disadvantages (relative to small) that one wins over the other depending on the build. That doesnt mean that the big draw isnt the feat though ;) Generally, if you dont care about the rp factors you look for the race that will get you the bonuses that you want. If you want medium size then you look at the various medium size guys. To me the big draw of the human is almost always the feat. You get into feat chains faster, can get into prcs easier, and have a bit more flexibility. Occasionally I will rate the skill points as being as important as the feat though, character dependent. If I was going for a small sized guy strongheart halfling is almost always going to be at the top of the list of choices unless something else gets in the way. That's one reason the proposed feat is problematic....it allows you to buy a unique human racial ability and keep your non-human advantages This isnt a problem, it isnt even true ;) The extra skill points are a human racial ability, but they are effectively not unique to humans. Plus, races without that bonus feat are really strapped for feats. An extra feat spent for the skill points is just an extra option in case that character concept needs them for some purpose. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this feat. I highly endorse it and hope it sees official backing in some d&d book in the future. Possibly the next incarnation of a psionics booster book ;)
NoldorForce 06-20-07, 10:55 PM	Don't gray elves, drow, and tieflings get the same skill-point racial ability as humans? And aren't there even more races that get this outside of core? Sure, they don't have explicit text granting them extra skill points. But they all have +2 Intelligence or higher. Really, this whole "stepping on another race's toes" thing has already been ground into the dust by the multitude of races WotC has put out that do all sorts of things. Want an increase to any given ability score? Want Powerful Build? Want to be an outsider? Want to be an aberration? Want more essentia? Want more power points? Want to be able to fly nonmagically? For any of these questions and more, there are at least two LA +0 races that fulfill their requirements. As above, for every single racial benefit that humans get...there's another LA +0 race that has it. The primary reason that strongheart halflings don't show up is that people just don't know about them. What book are they in, anyway? I'd only found them after someone on the CO Boards (hint hint) mentioned them, and even then the WotC site had little mention of them. Finally, I'd like to mention the azurin. Despite the fact that incarnum characters generally need skill points more than the average one, azurins are still a solid incarnum choice without the skill points. The +1 essentia is more than adequate.
Zelck 06-20-07, 11:57 PM	It's not. For one feat, you get +6 Diplomacy for free and over the life of your character 8 more skill points besides. By "free", I mean that a character that just specializes in Diplomacy (and the type exists) will be able to fully invest in other skills without worrying about the skill point hit he'd otherwise take by making sure you get those synergies. So it most definately matters. A character that specializes in Diplomacy would pick up those synergy feats with or without this feat, so no, this is not a free +6 bonus to Diplomacy. This feat just makes the character more flexible with skills. Such a character would probably want to pick up Skill Focus (Diplomacy) more than this. You can't use Psionic Reformation to change your spells knowns. Read the power. You can adjust your skills and feats. That's all. That said, I won't argue the point about Psionic Reformation. I tend to agree with you on this, but WOTC does not and they wrote the rules.Read the power? OK! When this power is manifested, the subject can choose to spend its most recently gained skill points differently (picking new skills and abandoning old ones if it chooses) and to choose a different feat from the one it selected when advancing from its previous level to its current level. The subject can also choose to forget powers it acquired when advancing to its current level, replacing them with new ones. The subject can undo decisions of these sorts that were made at lower levels, if both the subject and the manifester agree to pay the necessary XP before this power is manifested (see below). The subject must abide by the standard rules for selecting skills and feats, and so it cannot take feats for which it doesn’t qualify or take crossclass skills as class skills. Oh, shnap (especially with magic/psionic transparency). Let's put it this way: if a game allows the use of Psychic Reformation, they have much more things to be worried about than someone picking up 23 skill points at level 20. Yes, retraining exists. But 1) retraining isn't core, and 2) picking up 23 skill points for a feat isn't broken at level 20. Which has a bigger impact, 23 skill points or Shock Trooper? 23 skill points or Twin Spell? 23 skill points or 1/2 price magic items? Humans have two things going for them. 1. An extra Skill Point per level. 2. A bonus feat at first level. By allowing any race to puchase one of the two seems significant to me! That's doubly true when you consider that non-human racial abilities add up to more than two feats in worth....usually much, much more. Let's put this way: by your logic, humans are already marginalized because anyone can purchase their second benefit (the bonus feat) with their first level feat. How is "spending" a feat to "purchase" a bonus feat any different from spending a feat to purchase the extra skill point per level? Are you saying people play human because they value the extra skill point MORE than the extra bonus feat? And if your argument is that humans get two feats at level 1, then my argument will be that humans can spend their bonus feat on this feat and get +2 skill points per level, which preserves their uniqueness.
Polaris 06-21-07, 12:15 AM	Don't gray elves, drow, and tieflings get the same skill-point racial ability as humans? And aren't there even more races that get this outside of core? Sure, they don't have explicit text granting them extra skill points. But they all have +2 Intelligence or higher. Really, this whole "stepping on another race's toes" thing has already been ground into the dust by the multitude of races WotC has put out that do all sorts of things. It's not at all the same thing. Theses races (except Grey-Elves which are broken anyway...another long thread), all pay for their +2 Int with a level adjustment, and even Grey-Elves pay for that +2 Int with a penalty in another stat. That's hardly the same thing at all. Want an increase to any given ability score? Want Powerful Build? Want to be an outsider? Want to be an aberration? Want more essentia? Want more power points? Want to be able to fly nonmagically? For any of these questions and more, there are at least two LA +0 races that fulfill their requirements. As above, for every single racial benefit that humans get...there's another LA +0 race that has it. There are no core LA+0 outsiders. The best you can do is use some varient rules from FR or the Otherworldly feat which is a regional feat (and thus by WOTC's own admission overpowered...regional feats are designed to be) and also not core. Also IIRC, Half-Griants are LA+1. The primary reason that strongheart halflings don't show up is that people just don't know about them. What book are they in, anyway? I'd only found them after someone on the CO Boards (hint hint) mentioned them, and even then the WotC site had little mention of them. They are not hard to find being an LA+0 FR race and it's not like WOTC has been shy about promoting FR. Finally, I'd like to mention the azurin. Despite the fact that incarnum characters generally need skill points more than the average one, azurins are still a solid incarnum choice without the skill points. The +1 essentia is more than adequate. Could we stick with core to be sure of balance please? -Polaris
Polaris 06-21-07, 12:29 AM	A character that specializes in Diplomacy would pick up those synergy feats with or without this feat, so no, this is not a free +6 bonus to Diplomacy. This feat just makes the character more flexible with skills. Such a character would probably want to pick up Skill Focus (Diplomacy) more than this. You don't get the point. This feat would allow the Diplomat specialist to sink skill points to get these syngeries WITHOUT robbing Peter to pay Paul for other benefits. Thus the feat does directly give the +6....and there is no reason said character can't take both feats. Read the power? OK! Oh, shnap (especially with magic/psionic transparency). Read the power again. Powers are not spells. Powers are spell-like abilities. That's why Precocious Apprentice is allowed to qualify you for second level spells for the Cerebmancer, but it's not allowed for the Mystic Theurge. If the power doesn't let you change out new SPELLS, then it doesn't....and it doesn't. Let's put it this way: if a game allows the use of Psychic Reformation, they have much more things to be worried about than someone picking up 23 skill points at level 20. Yes, retraining exists. But 1) retraining isn't core, and 2) picking up 23 skill points for a feat isn't broken at level 20. Which has a bigger impact, 23 skill points or Shock Trooper? 23 skill points or Twin Spell? 23 skill points or 1/2 price magic items? Except you are ignoring my point again. The fact that retraining exists and was written into the game is effectively WOTC's seal of approval of Psionic Reformation. Let's put this way: by your logic, humans are already marginalized because anyone can purchase their second benefit (the bonus feat) with their first level feat. How is "spending" a feat to "purchase" a bonus feat any different from spending a feat to purchase the extra skill point per level? Are you saying people play human because they value the extra skill point MORE than the extra bonus feat? And if your argument is that humans get two feats at level 1, then my argument will be that humans can spend their bonus feat on this feat and get +2 skill points per level, which preserves their uniqueness. I already showed that this wasn't the case. In the first place humans will always get less relative benefit from this proposed feat than non-humans. In the second place, it is a unique human benefit (this is for Scion as well). Humans are the only race that get bonus skill points in this manner. Races that have intelligence bonuses invariably pay for that with either a penalty in another attribute or a level adjustment (which costs skill points AND maximum skill ranks) or most usually both! Also consider the opportunity cost. For a feat, you aren't just getting +1 skill point per level. You are getting +2 (or nearly this) in the stat of your choice at character creation! That's because with this feat (unless you are an Int based caster), you can effectively spend character points for two few Intelligence than you otherwise would need and those points can be leveraged into better attributes elsewhere. The rogue in paricular makes out like a bandit. That's certainly overpowered for a feat. -Polaris
Deathmond 06-21-07, 12:41 AM	Actually, then you've just used a feat...to get what you could have with 2 character points. Sure, now you get those character points somewhere else, but you've given up a feat to do it.
magmer2 06-21-07, 12:42 AM	Wrong. I said such a vision feat would be within the power of a feat, but it would be a bad feat because it lets you buy a racial feature. See above. Which is why this feat marginalizes humans. Let's say you want to play in the "World's Largest Dungeon". You want to be a Dwarf Rogue (solid reasons for that in this particular case too!). You DON'T want to be human because humans can't see in the dark and a dwarf can. With this feat you can have all the skill points of a human rogue and still have the abilities of a Dwarf. Otherwise you'd have to make the painful choice between skill points and racial abilities. Thank you for illustrating my point. Actually with two feats a human gets 60 foot dark vision. Eyes of the Abyss + a prerequisite feat. The feet will also give +x on spot and search and -2 to diplomacy so its not exact.
Yareb 06-21-07, 12:47 AM	The "retroactive" part is questionable, other than that I love it.
Polaris 06-21-07, 12:52 AM	Actually, then you've just used a feat...to get what you could have with 2 character points. Sure, now you get those character points somewhere else, but you've given up a feat to do it. Not at all. I've gotten +2 over the normal rank limit for one skill, while getting the benefits of a different skill (which can be worth at least a feat in of itself). This proposed feat lets you do that more than four times. Actually with two feats a human gets 60 foot dark vision. Eyes of the Abyss + a prerequisite feat. The feet will also give +x on spot and search and -2 to diplomacy so its not exact. Source? First I am pretty sure this is non-core and thus may not be the best for balance comparisons. In the second place, it does indicate that Darkvision should not be aquired with a single feat (IIRC you have to give up some of your humanity). Why? Becuase it marginalizes those races that have it naturally. -Polaris
Zelck 06-21-07, 01:01 AM	You don't get the point. This feat would allow the Diplomat specialist to sink skill points to get these syngeries WITHOUT robbing Peter to pay Paul for other benefits. Thus the feat does directly give the +6....and there is no reason said character can't take both feats. Let's look at a Bard with 14 int. That's 8 skill points per level. 1 to max perform, 1 to max Diplomacy, 1 to max Bluff, 1 to max Sense Motive, 1 to UMD, 1 to pump various synergies. And there's still 2 skill points left over. Read the power again. Powers are not spells. Powers are spell-like abilities. That's why Precocious Apprentice is allowed to qualify you for second level spells for the Cerebmancer, but it's not allowed for the Mystic Theurge. If the power doesn't let you change out new SPELLS, then it doesn't....and it doesn't. With transparency, powers are considered spells for the purposes of spells/powers text and some other stuff. A notable exception is feats. Feats that say they affect spells only affect spells, and feats that say they affect powers only affect powers. Hence why Precocious Apprentice is different. If you think this isn't the case, then please tell me how Dispel Psionics can dispel magical effects. Or if manifesters lose powers known when level drained. Except you are ignoring my point again. The fact that retraining exists and was written into the game is effectively WOTC's seal of approval of Psionic Reformation. And the fact that Nymph's Kiss exists and all those +0 LA +2 int races exist is effectively WOTC's seal of approval for extra skill points for characters? Seriously, even if retraining isn't broken, Psychic Reformation is. And that's the only "core" option (it's not even core). I already showed that this wasn't the case. In the first place humans will always get less relative benefit from this proposed feat than non-humans. In the second place, it is a unique human benefit (this is for Scion as well). Humans are the only race that get bonus skill points in this manner. Races that have intelligence bonuses invariably pay for that with either a penalty in another attribute or a level adjustment (which costs skill points AND maximum skill ranks) or most usually both! Wait, then what about the human's totally non-unique bonus feat? I mean, every race gets one at their first HD or class level. I mean, that totally marginalizes humans, right? Seriously, if a player really wants the skill points, why don't they just be human? Amongst the core (or any) races, is there a race with a must-have ability worth sacrificing two feats for? I can't think of anything like that. Also consider the opportunity cost. For a feat, you aren't just getting +1 skill point per level. You are getting +2 (or nearly this) in the stat of your choice at character creation! That's because with this feat (unless you are an Int based caster), you can effectively spend character points for two few Intelligence than you otherwise would need and those points can be leveraged into better attributes elsewhere. The rogue in paricular makes out like a bandit. That's certainly overpowered for a feat. This is the best point you've brought up so far. I'd say placing a restriction on the feat would fix this, say a requirement of 14+ (13+? 15+?) int. That way, the people who want lots of skills don't have to cripple themselves in other areas, while preventing those who want to just dump Int from taking it.
Polaris 06-21-07, 01:32 AM	Let's look at a Bard with 14 int. That's 8 skill points per level. 1 to max perform, 1 to max Diplomacy, 1 to max Bluff, 1 to max Sense Motive, 1 to UMD, 1 to pump various synergies. And there's still 2 skill points left over. Congratulations. You do nothing well except Diplomacy. Of the two left over, at least one should be allocated for maximum concentration for what should be obvious reasons. The other really should be allocated to spellcraft. You now have a bard with No knowledge skills (other than Nobility for synergy), no Gather Information, no Stealth, and short pretty damned poor. One feat helps this situation significantly. With transparency, powers are considered spells for the purposes of spells/powers text and some other stuff. A notable exception is feats. Feats that say they affect spells only affect spells, and feats that say they affect powers only affect powers. Hence why Precocious Apprentice is different. Page 55 of the XPH: Psionics-Magic Transparency: Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions in the Player's Handbook or the magic item descriptions in the Dungeon Master's Guide, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics (unless the DM uses the Psionics is Different option described later in this chapter). When a rules about psionics-magic transparency is in effect it has the following implications. Spell Resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. (The effects have similiar ends despite being brought about by different means.) All spells that dispell magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa. The spell detect magic detects powers, their number, and their strength and location within 3 rounds (though a psicraft check is necessary to identify the discipline of the psionic aura). Dead magic areas are also dead psionic areas. I want you to notice two things. NOWHERE does it say that feats are somehow an exception to magic-psionic transparency. Rather what it does say, and what WOTC has repeatedly ruled is that spells and psionics are interchangeable as they affect one another. That in no way says that Psionic powers are in fact spells (and in fact WOTC has explicitly stated more than once that they are not which is why metamagic feats don't apply to them), and the power (Psionic Reformation) specifically referrs to chosing different powers. The power does not affect powers...if affects your character and his mental makeup (class construction). Thus no transparency for you. If you think this isn't the case, then please tell me how Dispel Psionics can dispel magical effects. Or if manifesters lose powers known when level drained. See above. Powers and Spells affect each other. Otherwise they are different. The quoted section is quite explicit about what is transparent and by ommission what is not. And the fact that Nymph's Kiss exists and all those +0 LA +2 int races exist is effectively WOTC's seal of approval for extra skill points for characters? Seriously, even if retraining isn't broken, Psychic Reformation is. And that's the only "core" option (it's not even core). Psionic Reformation (via Limited Wish) is SRD and thus definately core. As for Nymph's Kiss, it is by no means a seal of approval by any means. All BoVD and BoED feats assume they are balanced by egregious RP restrictions. Enough said. Wait, then what about the human's totally non-unique bonus feat? I mean, every race gets one at their first HD or class level. I mean, that totally marginalizes humans, right? Nope. Humans get two. The Strongheart ability does marginalize humans, however. Seriously, if a player really wants the skill points, why don't they just be human? Amongst the core (or any) races, is there a race with a must-have ability worth sacrificing two feats for? I can't think of anything like that. Think again. Almost every racial package is worth at least two feats...usually around 3 or 4. -Polaris
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 01:46 AM	Congratulations. You do nothing well except Diplomacy. So, for you, bluff and sense motive are worthless aside from their ability to pump up diplomacy? Well, I guess if you feel that way then once you hit 5 skill points in each of those you can move on to pumping 5 points into knowledge (nobility) and then move on to the stealth/gather info/knowledge X/etc. Of course there is also bardic knowledge and you seem to regard use magic device as useless.. so I am not really sure what you are thinking at this point.
Polaris 06-21-07, 01:55 AM	So, for you, bluff and sense motive are worthless aside from their ability to pump up diplomacy? Worthless? Not quite, but not all that great for the example in question (a bard). Of the two, bluff is better, but even that is pretty situational (bluff is great for a rogue or anyone with sneak attack for obvious reasons). Also remember that while Sense Motive is useful to avoid being bluffed, you do get to add your Bab to that, so I think it's fair to say that for the example build the primary uses of these two skills was social and primarily to boost diplomacy (which isn't subject to any opposed roll). Well, I guess if you feel that way then once you hit 5 skill points in each of those you can move on to pumping 5 points into knowledge (nobility) and then move on to the stealth/gather info/knowledge X/etc. Depends on what you want, but if you want to boost a select number of skills as high as possible, then sure, you'd want the most number of synergies...and a disturbing number of skills have fixed benefits after only five ranks or fixed DCs or both (and some of this skills are trained only). Of course there is also bardic knowledge and you seem to regard use magic device as useless.. so I am not really sure what you are thinking at this point. 1. Bardic knowledge is not a substitute for knowledge skills. 2. Use Magic Device until mid levels (around 10th or so at least) is pretty useless since you can never take 10 or 20 with the skill (at least not as a bard), and the DCs start from 20 and go higher from there (usually much higher)....and the penalty for a low roll tends to be less than forgiving. In addition to that, having one level of a class with that class list opens up all spell-activation items for that class for you. So while it's a stretch to call UMD useless, it is fair to say that it's a situational skill at best. -Polaris
magmer2 06-21-07, 10:03 AM	Source? First I am pretty sure this is non-core and thus may not be the best for balance comparisons. In the second place, it does indicate that Darkvision should not be aquired with a single feat (IIRC you have to give up some of your humanity). Why? Becuase it marginalizes those races that have it naturally. -Polaris Fiendish Codex 1, as to whether or not it its core, shouldn't matter. Nothing has reached the level of brokenness that is core. Also it wasn't that it was worth one feat, it was that dark-vision could be gotten by a human at level one.
Pentar 06-21-07, 12:00 PM	Don't gray elves, drow, and tieflings get the same skill-point racial ability as humans? And aren't there even more races that get this outside of core? Sure, they don't have explicit text granting them extra skill points. But they all have +2 Intelligence or higher. Really, this whole "stepping on another race's toes" thing has already been ground into the dust by the multitude of races WotC has put out that do all sorts of things. Want an increase to any given ability score? Want Powerful Build? Want to be an outsider? Want to be an aberration? Want more essentia? Want more power points? Want to be able to fly nonmagically? For any of these questions and more, there are at least two LA +0 races that fulfill their requirements. As above, for every single racial benefit that humans get...there's another LA +0 race that has it. I don't know about Gray elves, but Drow are +3 LA and Tieflings +1. The only creature I know with Powerful Build is a Goliath, and it has a +1 LA. The only races I know of that gets a free feat at level 1 with a +0 LA is the Strongheart Halfling and Humans. The only race I know of that gets +1 skill point per level with a +0 LA is human. The primary reason that strongheart halflings don't show up is that people just don't know about them. What book are they in, anyway? I'd only found them after someone on the CO Boards (hint hint) mentioned them, and even then the WotC site had little mention of them. I found them in one of the Races of "Something" book - perhaps Races of Faerun? Can't recall. But they only had a thematic description of them, with no statistic block or character generation information. So I don't know where it says Strongheart Halfling statistics. I'm only going by what people have mentioned on the forums.
Pentar 06-21-07, 12:11 PM	Actually, then you've just used a feat...to get what you could have with 2 character points. Sure, now you get those character points somewhere else, but you've given up a feat to do it. And this is a highly variable benefit for certain classes. For Bards and Rogues whom are skill dependent characters, Intelligence provides them nothing but skill points. Rogues could always benefit with more Dexterity and Bards Charisma. So in giving them a Feat that replicates the Human skill point bonus, they are now able to dump character points into their primary attributes instead of a "dump" stat, like Intelligence. Look, there are going to be many thousands of iterations and arguments about why someone would, or would not want to have Open Minded as a feat. People keep saying "giving up a feat"... you're not giving up a feat, you're spending it to gain a real benefit. Saying you're "giving it up" implies that you're not getting anything worthwhile for its expenditure. People who are saying that this does not marginalize humans are simply not seeing the big picture. As I asked before, if you could get +2 DEX/-2 CON as a feat, does that not marginalize elves? There are a lot of race/class combinations that could really benefit from Open Minded, as it is presently written. There are some that will not benefit and there are some that would be fairly neutral to this feat. Does that make it balanced? Not really. Because the race/class combinations that would benefit from it, gain quite a bit of benefit - enough that it begs the question whether or not it is too good. That being said, I still propose that you could rewrite the feat to say: "Gain +1 skill point per level, retroactively when you take the feat. These skill points must be spent on cross class skills". To me, that reflects the nature of "Open Minded" a bit more.
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 12:55 PM	People keep saying "giving up a feat"... you're not giving up a feat, you're spending it to gain a real benefit. Saying you're "giving it up" implies that you're not getting anything worthwhile for its expenditure. Using a feat, spending a feat, in any event using a feat to get a benefit is what feats are for. This feat not being part of a chain of feats nor giving you extra skills known makes this a choice that is far from a no brainer. In fact, if a character really wants a lot of skill points they can be a human, take this feat, find a way to get nymphs kiss (or a modified version), get an 18 int, and play a class with a lot of skill points and choices. Now that is a skill guru! And I like having the option personally. As I asked before, if you could get +2 DEX/-2 CON as a feat, does that not marginalize elves? Why would it? If there was a series of feats that gave you all of the abilities of an elf I dont see why that would marginalize elves either for that matter.
DM Denubis 06-21-07, 01:18 PM	I don't know about Gray elves, but Drow are +3 LA and Tieflings +1. The only creature I know with Powerful Build is a Goliath, and it has a +1 LA. The only races I know of that gets a free feat at level 1 with a +0 LA is the Strongheart Halfling and Humans. The only race I know of that gets +1 skill point per level with a +0 LA is human. Azurin gives a bonus feat, too. I found them in one of the Races of "Something" book - perhaps Races of Faerun? Can't recall. But they only had a thematic description of them, with no statistic block or character generation information. So I don't know where it says Strongheart Halfling statistics. I'm only going by what people have mentioned on the forums. The actual stats for them are in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, I believe.
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 01:22 PM	People who are saying that this does not marginalize humans are simply not seeing the big picture. As I asked before, if you could get +2 DEX/-2 CON as a feat, does that not marginalize elves? Why would it? If there was a series of feats that gave you all of the abilities of an elf I dont see why that would marginalize elves either for that matter. I agree with Scion of Coldshard. First, it absolutely would not marginalize elves. First, there's more to an elf than the ability score adjustments. Second, a feat is no small cost - elves are still better at "being elves" than even a human who takes the feat "elf stats". This disparity only grows with the number of feats you can take to make you elflife ... "sense bonuses of an elf", "low-light vision", "trance" ... lets say a human took all four of those feats. Congrats. Your first four feats are spent on becoming an elf with no feats, whereas the ELF is an elf already ... plus the other elftraits you didn't get, plus three feats. How, exactly, is this marginalizing elves? And granted, I just skimmed parts of it, but I don't think I saw anyone answer my question for the practical test of this: someone can SAY the feat in question here "marginalizes" humans - but how much is that going to be the case? How many times would anyone here, if you had access to this feat, go "because I can take this feat, now I don't want to play a human!" or "oh, the % return is better for nonhumans, so I'll take it with a nonhuman, but not with a human!" (you know, also, even if the % return is a bit smaller, so what? The human still gets more skill points, too, and could benefit from them, too - who says feats need to benefit everyone equally? Because others don't, either, anyway.) Still. Other than Polaris, how many other people would be now less likely than they normally would (for whatever their normal is) to play a human, if they could take this feat?
Archtyrant Terevoth 06-21-07, 01:25 PM	Normally trading feats for skills is a terrible proposition. Really weak feat. You need to hand out at least +2 skill points and give some other small benefit, maybe something like the Able Learner feat ability too. If you're going to give up feats for skills, they better be awesome skills.
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 01:27 PM	I agree with Scion of Coldshard. Yey! ;) Other than Polaris, how many other people would be now less likely than they normally would (for whatever their normal is) to play a human, if they could take this feat? I think that playing a human with this feat actually could be fun. Basically similar to taking 'able learner'. Being a human and getting this feat plus able learner would actually be a lot of fun for a skill based build.
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 01:31 PM	I think that playing a human with this feat actually could be fun. Basically similar to taking 'able learner'. Being a human and getting this feat plus able learner would actually be a lot of fun for a skill based build. And then don't forget to take Factotutm at first level so all skills have the max ranks of class skills, no matter your class. :D
Polaris 06-21-07, 02:20 PM	And then don't forget to take Factotutm at first level so all skills have the max ranks of class skills, no matter your class. :D Sounds to me like someone wants to break the skill system using this proposed feat along with other non-core material. That's exactly what I (and others) are trying to avoid and helps crystalize my opposition (if further crystalization were possible). -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 02:24 PM	Sounds to me like someone wants to break the skill system using this proposed feat along with other non-core material. That's exactly what I (and others) are trying to avoid and helps crystalize my opposition (if further crystalization were possible). -Polaris :roll: You do realize that I wasn't really being serious, right? (hence the :D) (Also, out of curiosity, what the heck do you keep bringing up "core" and "non-core" for?)
Polaris 06-21-07, 02:24 PM	Normally trading feats for skills is a terrible proposition. Really weak feat. You need to hand out at least +2 skill points and give some other small benefit, maybe something like the Able Learner feat ability too. If you're going to give up feats for skills, they better be awesome skills. Sorry AT but no it's not. If the feat just gave one skill point, then sure it would be a terribly weak feat. It gives one skill piont per level retroactively and that not only marginalizes humans but is brokity broke. As Pentar explained quite well, for some classes (such as rogue), skill points come at a premium and such a feat effectively lets you boost your primary attribute at character creation because you don't have to put as much into intelligence (whose only benefit is skill points for non-Int based skill based classes like rogue or bard). It's also pretty trivial to show that even five ranks in the right skill is often worth more than a feat, and this feat by level twenty returns that benefit 4.6 times over. -Polaris
Polaris 06-21-07, 02:27 PM	:roll: You do realize that I wasn't really being serious, right? (hence the :D) I was. As far as I'm concerned you were kidding on the square at best. I've run into players like this (and you do seem to be the type) that are willing with a straight face to argue like a supreme court barrister that something is fine balance-wise or even underpowered while plotting to break the game with it. (Also, out of curiosity, what the heck do you keep bringing up "core" and "non-core" for?) Not everyone has non-core (by which I mean non-SRD) material, and thus the game is balanced around the SRD/Core and balance discussions should be as well. In addition to that, WOTC's playtesting has been criminally negligent for a lot of non-core material, especially recent stuff. -Polaris
Pentar 06-21-07, 02:32 PM	Using a feat, spending a feat, in any event using a feat to get a benefit is what feats are for. This feat not being part of a chain of feats nor giving you extra skills known makes this a choice that is far from a no brainer. In fact, if a character really wants a lot of skill points they can be a human, take this feat, find a way to get nymphs kiss (or a modified version), get an 18 int, and play a class with a lot of skill points and choices. Now that is a skill guru! And I like having the option personally. The point is not getting as many skill points as possible. The point is that you can now get those skill points without having to be human, or putting another +2 character points into INT. Basically, it is creating the option of replicating a racial ability. Something I just don't think should happen (and rarely does with many feats). Why would it? If there was a series of feats that gave you all of the abilities of an elf I dont see why that would marginalize elves either for that matter. o.O Are you serious? Well, I guess this is really in the eyes of the individual. I disagree with you entirely. To me, if I can get some of the key benefits of a race, without being that race, to me, that's a great benefit and it marginalizes the race whose benefits are being converted from racial benefits to general benefits. Basically, there's no point in being an elf any more... you just be anything else + elf abilities. At which point in time, why even bother with races? Start as amorphous blobs and customize your character with feats. Double the number of feats people can take, make all racial abilities "racial feats" and let people min/max to their hearts content... There are plenty of game systems that do this.
Polaris 06-21-07, 02:36 PM	At which point in time, why even bother with races? Start as amorphous blobs and customize your character with feats. Double the number of feats people can take, make all racial abilities "racial feats" and let people min/max to their hearts content... There are plenty of game systems that do this. Exactly. You may as well play GURPS or HERO both of which construct races (as point packages) in exactly or almost exactly the same way that characters are constructed. -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 02:37 PM	Not everyone has non-core (by which I mean non-SRD) material, and thus the game is balanced around the SRD/Core and balance discussions should be as well. This seems twofold absurd. First: Core isn't even balanced, anyway. Second, and more importantly: Almost no one (in my experience) (and even discounting my experience, still a lot to maybe even most people) plays core-only, so for most people (includng, especially, the games that the OP might use this feat in), there's more (often a lot more) than "just core only" that should need to be taken into account. Besides, then, how would you, for example, have a balance discussion about something that doesn't exist in Core, like ToB or the Dread Necromancer? Well, I guess this is really in the eyes of the individual. I disagree with you entirely. To me, if I can get some of the key benefits of a race, without being that race, to me, that's a great benefit and it marginalizes the race whose benefits are being converted from racial benefits to general benefits. Basically, there's no point in being an elf any more... you just be anything else + elf abilities. Once more, I'll point out my reply to Scion's proposal... "This disparity only grows with the number of feats you can take to make you elflike ... "sense bonuses of an elf", "low-light vision", "trance" ... lets say a human took all four of those feats. Congrats. Your first four feats are spent on becoming an elf with no feats, whereas the ELF is an elf already ... plus the other elftraits you didn't get, plus three feats. " So ... At which point in time, why even bother with races? Why? Because in such an environment, no race is actually marginalized. They're still quite better at being their race than the feat-fueled imposters are.
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 02:40 PM	Oops. Double posted. Had meant to write this, copy the text to the edit in another tab, and close this tab without posting. >.< Sorry.
Polaris 06-21-07, 02:43 PM	This seems twofold absurd. Wrong. It's standard operating procedure since I've been posting (and I have been posting longer than this current ID indicates...quite a bit longer...lost a prior ID during a board changeover). First: Core isn't even balanced, anyway. And so adding other stuff that has less playtesting is? That's ridiculous. Sure Core isn't perfectly balanced. No one claimed that it was. However, CORE/SRD material is available to everyone and thus forms the standard around which balance needs to be judged. Second, and more importantly: Almost no one (in my experience) (and even discounting my experience, still a lot to maybe even most people) plays core-only, so for most people (includng, especially, the games that the OP might use this feat in), there's more (often a lot more) than "just core only" that should need to be taken into account. Taken into account <> balancing around. Again SRD/Core is universally available and thus needs to be the standard. That is SOP. Besides, then, how would you, for example, have a balance discussion about something that doesn't exist in Core, like ToB or the Dread Necromancer? Too easy. You consider the sourcebook that the rule/PRC/feat is in next to the SRD core. Otherwise you risk comparing apples to kumquats. -Polaris Edit: Once more, I'll point out my reply to Scion's proposal... "This disparity only grows with the number of feats you can take to make you elflike ... "sense bonuses of an elf", "low-light vision", "trance" ... lets say a human took all four of those feats. Congrats. Your first four feats are spent on becoming an elf with no feats, whereas the ELF is an elf already ... plus the other elftraits you didn't get, plus three feats. " So ... Except that with such feats you get to pick and choose which racial features you want while retaining the racial features you originally had. That does indeed marginalize races because you get the 'good stuff' of a race (whatever that might be to your concept) for a discount. At which point in time, why even bother with races? Why? Because in such an environment, no race is actually marginalized. They're still quite better at being their race than the feat-fueled imposters are. Not if you are allowed to pick and choose the best parts at a discount. That is why most systems that use racial construction systems severely limit what you can buy outside a racial package (GURPS does this for certain). -Polaris
pupilofyah 06-21-07, 02:46 PM	i havent and wont read all five pages but from what i am seeing is a bunch of bickering ninnies. skill feats suck when compaired to other feats. in low lvls they are useful at best at high lvls having a spot check of 23 +wiz and 26 +wiz really isnt much of an advantange. this feat is not over powering if taken early (3 lvl is the limit) but the retro-active feature needs bounds. at 18th lvl it is worth 18 skill points! here is what i would feel comfortable with if it is to retroactive: speacial if taken after 3rd lvl then the retroactive skill points may only be applied to skill in which you have at least half you lvl in ranks already asigned. any skill points left over are lost. this way you suddenly max out an unlearned(or even barely learned) skill out of no where. plus there is (virtually ::in case of psychos) no way that you would have 18 skills that would qualify. see nothing really game breaking with a skill that goes good to better or even great but for one that you are bad at to suddenly become godly is not reasonable.
Pentar 06-21-07, 02:48 PM	Once more, I'll point out my reply to Scion's proposal... "This disparity only grows with the number of feats you can take to make you elflike ... "sense bonuses of an elf", "low-light vision", "trance" ... lets say a human took all four of those feats. Congrats. Your first four feats are spent on becoming an elf with no feats, whereas the ELF is an elf already ... plus the other elftraits you didn't get, plus three feats. " So ... The problem with your example is you're assuming that Low Light Vision, Trance and Sensory bonuses would all count as separate feats. In reality, that may all be one or two feats at most. A human has what, 4 racial benefits? +1 Feat, +4 skill points at level 1, +1 skill point per level, no favored class (questionable "benefit"). An elf, equivalently, has about 6 benefits? Racial attribute modifiers, Immunity to sleep, bonus vs. charm/enchantment effects, Low Light, racial weapon proficiencies, racial skill checks (+2 to 3 skills). So if you were to say that the human +1 skill point/level is 1 feat, then reasonably, 1 elf racial equivalent feat should be a packaged deal... perhaps the Immunity to Sleep/+2 save vs. Charm and Low Light Vision would be packaged into one feat. However, you're still missing the point; the point is not becoming another race, it's being able to shop around for other race's abilities as Feats to enhance your current racial abilities. Why? Because in such an environment, no race is actually marginalized. They're still quite better at being their race than the feat-fueled imposters are. You're forgetting that you still have the full benefits of whatever race you have actually chosen. Look, it doesn't matter in the end. I won't be implementing this new feat - I feel it would marginalize humans. You feel differently. Hurrah! Enjoy the feat. Come back in 3 months and tell us how it plays.
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 02:49 PM	Wrong. It's standard operating procedure since I've been posting (and I have been posting longer than this current ID indicates...quite a bit longer...lost a prior ID during a board changeover). Okay, post the standards, then. Or did you mean standard for you? Taken into account <> balancing around. Again SRD/Core is universally available and thus needs to be the standard. That is SOP. Doesn't that attitude result in more stuff being broken one way or the other? What might be good in core might be worthless in a broader perspective; or conversely and probably more importantly, what is balanced for core, but ignorant of the rest of the game, can end up interacting quite poorly with the rest of the game - so nothing ends up being balanced. It seems like your argument on balance concerns is why the Nightsticks + DMM + Persistant Spell exists in the first place... Too easy. You consider the sourcebook that the rule/PRC/feat is in next to the SRD core. Otherwise you risk comparing apples to kumquats. First: SRD != Core. Second: see bigger objection previously. Look, it doesn't matter in the end. I won't be implementing this new feat - I feel it would marginalize humans. You feel differently. Hurrah! Enjoy the feat. Come back in 3 months and tell us how it plays. That would be kinda hard since it won't overmuch affect my NPCs and no one at my table would pick it up at the cost of other feats.
Polaris 06-21-07, 02:57 PM	Okay, post the standards, then. Or did you mean standard for you? It's only been the standard since 2001 (since I started posting). Game balance is determined around CORE/SRD stuff because that's what's available. It also exists to try to diminish power-creep. Doesn't that attitude result in more stuff being broken one way or the other? What might be good in core might be worthless in a broader perspective; or conversely and probably more importantly, what is balanced for core, but ignorant of the rest of the game, can end up interacting quite poorly with the rest of the game - so nothing ends up being balanced. That doesn't invalidate the standard. Instead it shows the more playtesting was needed. Here's the problem...if you insist on using every scrap of material ever published for balance standards then nothing would ever get playtested...the system and material are simply too much. It's much better to playtest around a core/srd that everyone has and then fix problems. BTW, Divine-Pesistant was broken long before nightsticks ever came around. It was a mistake that WOTC had no business repeating in 3.5...did I mention that non-core playtesting (esp of late) generally sucked? One more reason not to allow non-core/srd material in balance discussions unless necessary. It seems like your argument on balance concerns is why the Nightsticks + DMM + Persistant Spell exists in the first place... See above. It's called lack of memory, bad playtesting, and power-creep. First: SRD != Core. Second: see bigger objection previously. SRD is what's available to everyone and it forms the CORE of all d20 games. Good enough. -Polaris
StruckingFuggle 06-21-07, 03:03 PM	I'm not gonna try and discuss the rest with you anymore, us agreeing or convincing the other is nigh unto impossible. SRD is what's available to everyone and it forms the CORE of all d20 games. Good enough. Really now. Since when is XPH and UA "Core"? I had thought Core was what was printed in the PHB, DMG, and MM 3.5s. And the SRD includes more than just those three books.
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 03:19 PM	The point is not getting as many skill points as possible. The point is that you can now get those skill points without having to be human, or putting another +2 character points into INT. By spending a feat. Yes, it is possible to get benefits from spending feats. I know it is a tough concept, but you really can! Is this benefit disproportionate in power to other feats? I dont see why it is and if the only reason that people think so is because it simulates a racial ability then I have to ask, why should anyone care? There is a luck of the heroes feat which grants +1 to all saves, does this make the halflings +1 bonus to all saves mean less? I dont see why it would. Are you serious? Sure, why not? Feats are pretty precious things. If someone wants to spend several to simulate being another race more power to them. The shifter has a racial feat that lets them gain some sort of bonuses from a specifically chosen race, I forget which bonuses it gains though and I dont have the book with me. If someone wants to spend a feat on it then I am certainly not going to stop them. Well, I guess this is really in the eyes of the individual. I disagree with you entirely. To me, if I can get some of the key benefits of a race, without being that race, to me, that's a great benefit and it marginalizes the race whose benefits are being converted from racial benefits to general benefits. Basically, there's no point in being an elf any more... you just be anything else + elf abilities. No point in being an elf? How about getting those abilities without having to spend a pile of feats? That seems pretty nice to me! If someone wants to spend several feats in order to gain the [elf] subtype, sleeping schedule, low-light vision, and ability to spot secret doors then why should I stand in their way? It certainly isnt unbalanced on the overpowered side, although it likely is on the underpowered side. How does one character being able to spend a bunch of resources to emulate something marginalize the something? The something could just point and laugh at the other guy most likely. I take it that you hate the belt of dwarven kind and all spells and powers which allow you to emulate various abilities as well? At which point in time, why even bother with races? Over-react much?
Llathos 06-21-07, 03:20 PM	As usual, board drama reigns supreme. It's a simple feat with a simple suggestion that is perfectly fine for most campaigns. I'm surprised Tarkin hasn't landed with his scaled approach for campaign acceptance. For a power game or anything goes, this is fine as written. Loose games I'd back off the retroactive. Strict games (yawn) would probably disallow it entirely. In my opinion, "broken" means something is so strong it takes the fun away from everyone else. When someone can buy 10 levels worth of this effect (+10 skill point magic item) for 10k quite easily, I really don't see this turning a campaign on its head. Can it be tweaked intelligently to slip into a PrC a bit earlier? Maybe. Is that going to omfgb0rken! your campaign? I doubt it. Unless you're playing a very low powered campaign, the initial race modifiers are trivial in the long haul once powerful magic spells/items/effects start to weigh in. Deep breaths. Let's get some perspective people.
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 03:23 PM	Since when is XPH and UA "Core"? Completely off-topic but I consider the 3.5 psionics handbook to be 'core' ;)
Pentar 06-21-07, 03:25 PM	By spending a feat. Yes, it is possible to get benefits from spending feats. I know it is a tough concept, but you really can! *sigh* Why do people always resort to becoming a*sholes? I thought we were having a perfectly fine discussion. Is this benefit disproportionate in power to other feats? I dont see why it is and if the only reason that people think so is because it simulates a racial ability then I have to ask, why should anyone care? If you don't see the problem, then in your campaign, there is no problem. Go play test it and come back and tell us how it went! Really! Believe it or not, I don't give a good god-damn what happens in your campaign. You could allow players to play flying tarrasques who wield Spiked-Chain Vorpal Katanas +5 for all I care. There is a luck of the heroes feat which grants +1 to all saves, does this make the halflings +1 bonus to all saves mean less? I dont see why it would. Well aside from the fact that it has to be taken at 1st level (thus not retroactive) and is only available as a Regional feat (if role-playing is important to you at all). EDIT: The bottom line is simple - if the concept of "shopping around" for racial abilities does not bother you, or if you simply don't understand what it means, then this Feat is totally and perfectly fine. If you think that racial abilities should remain racial, then this feat may not be that great. As for magical items that produce racial effects, that's totally different, because you can't SUNDER the +1 skill points off of a character, now can you?
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 03:43 PM	Why do people always resort to becoming a*sholes? Perhaps you shouldnt be quite as sensitive to jokes ;) I know with polaris around it is tough.. but still... If you don't see the problem, then in your campaign, there is no problem. Of course there wouldnt be a problem in my game, what is there about the ability that would cause a problem? You see a problem though, but I dont understand the problem that you are having. Why is it a problem if a feat can be spent to get an ability that is the same or similar to another race? Exotic weapon prof allows proficiency with weapons that some races get basically for free, luck of the heroes is basically the same as the halflings ability, a character can grow or shrink in a size category, effects give lowlight/darkvision/secret door detection... Well aside from the fact that it has to be taken at 1st level (thus not retroactive) and is only available as a Regional feat (if role-playing is important to you at all). No worries, none of that has any effect on my point. I dont have the book with me to check if it is correct either, but since it doesnt matter then who cares? ;) Since it is already possible to get abilities that some races get as part of their package what is the problem with this feat? Several races get skill points or skill bonuses already anyway and the effect isnt exactly overpowering. Where is the problem? Where is the brokeness?
Pentar 06-21-07, 03:56 PM	All my points about why I think you should be careful with this feat have already been made. See the edit in my previous post for my final thoughts. I have never said this feat is broken. I have said it marginalizes humans and that you should be careful with any feat that completely replicates the racial ability of another race. Luck of Heroes fails to pass this test because; a) It is a regional feat b) It can only be taken at 1st level The feat can be found in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, FYI. Not only that, but it specifies a luck bonus. I'm rusty on this, but I don't think luck bonuses stack with each other, so if you get another item that gives you a +1 luck bonus to save, it doesn't help you. Magical items fail because they take up a magical item slot and they are destroyable. You cannot destroy a racial ability, and in most cases, you cannot remove a person's feats. Again, I will note, I have never said the feat was broken. I am just voicing caution. The point is that if you start allowing people to shop around for racial abilities, you start to diminish the need for races altogether. you may as well make all abilities "feats" and let people shop around for what they want most.
Scion of Coldshard 06-21-07, 04:02 PM	Very likely there are no racial abilities which only show up as abilities for races and no where else. Feats are meant to show some sort of ability, trained or innate. Spending those feats for things that other races get for free seems perfectly reasonable to me, in fact it has already been done. The only caution that is important here is the same caution that is always important, dont make things too powerful or too weak. The extra skill points does not fit into the first at all and likely not the second (as long as the bonus is retroactive at least).
Nelyo 06-21-07, 09:43 PM	Interesting thing on the subject of marginalizing races: In Races of Stone there is a 3 level PrC which can be entered after level 2, that gives away several racial abilities or dwarves or gnomes or goliaths. For example, the dwarf version gives the +2 bonus on appraise and craft check related to metal, +4 dodge bonus, +1 bonus on attack rolls vs. orcs and goblinoids, +2 Con, Stonecunning, and even allows you to be treated as a dwarf for all purposes such as feats, magic items, ranger's favored enemy, and prestige classes. Since it is only three levels long and can be entered so early, you're done by level 5, giving you plenty of time to meet the pre-requisites for racial PrC's like Deepwarden and Dwarven Defender. Seems like this PrC would pretty seriously marginalize Dwarves, Gnomes, and Goliaths, since it gives nearly all of their racial abilities away, including the +2 Con without any stat penalties. Funny thing though, I have never seen that PrC used, and people still continue to make builds using the Dwarf, Gnome, and Goliath races. PS. I'd bring up something from Unearthed Arcana, since it's OGL thus "core" by Polaris' definition, but I'm sure Polaris considers the bulk of that book a wretched hive of cheese and brokity-broke-brokeness, so it would probably be counter-productive.
Polaris 06-21-07, 09:50 PM	Interesting thing on the subject of marginalizing races: In Races of Stone there is a 3 level PrC which can be entered after level 2, that gives away several racial abilities or dwarves or gnomes or goliaths. For example, the dwarf version gives the +2 bonus on appraise and craft check related to metal, +4 dodge bonus, +1 bonus on attack rolls vs. orcs and goblinoids, +2 Con, Stonecunning, and even allows you to be treated as a dwarf for all purposes such as feats, magic items, ranger's favored enemy, and prestige classes. Since it is only three levels long and can be entered so early, you're done by level 5, giving you plenty of time to meet the pre-requisites for racial PrC's like Deepwarden and Dwarven Defender. Seems like this PrC would pretty seriously marginalize Dwarves, Gnomes, and Goliaths, since it gives nearly all of their racial abilities away, including the +2 Con without any stat penalties. No it's not the same thing at all. Using a PrC to get racial abilities is like buying those abilities with a racial adjustment. You are paying for them with precious character levels AND it's a PrC that's generally controlled by the race in question. That's a far cry from mixing and matching racial abilities with a feat. Funny thing though, I have never seen that PrC used, and people still continue to make builds using the Dwarf, Gnome, and Goliath races. That's because buying something via a PrC is significantly different than using a feat to do so. PS. I'd bring up something from Unearthed Arcana, since it's OGL thus "core" by Polaris' definition, but I'm sure Polaris considers the bulk of that book a wretched hive of cheese and brokity-broke-brokeness, so it would probably be counter-productive. Yep because Unearthed Arcana in it's very introduction admits that it is an EXPERIMENTAL BOOK full of houserules which strongly implies that balance is not guaranteed. -Polaris
DragonDan 06-22-07, 01:47 PM	Sounds to me like someone wants to break the skill system using this proposed feat along with other non-core material. What is your fascination with Core? Most of your posts always come back to referencing Core. Do you believe that Core is balanced simply because it's Core? I have to say, most Core feats are weak (ie. not balanced, as in not worthy of a feat slot; being weak is not balanced, any more than being overpowered is balanced) and even in a Core only game I would never take any of the Core +skill feats. Never. Dan.
Polaris 06-22-07, 03:49 PM	What is your fascination with Core? Most of your posts always come back to referencing Core. Do you believe that Core is balanced simply because it's Core? SRD/Core is what the game is built around. It is the only common thread of reference available to all groups and all players....and thus SRD/Core sets the standard. Is it a perfect standard? No, but that's no excuse to ignore it or dismiss it. I have to say, most Core feats are weak (ie. not balanced, as in not worthy of a feat slot; being weak is not balanced, any more than being overpowered is balanced) and even in a Core only game I would never take any of the Core +skill feats. Never. Dan. And that's precisely WHY we should balance things around Core/SRD...to prevent RIFTS style powercreep just as you seem to want (given your attitude that most core feats are weak). -Polaris
NoldorForce 06-22-07, 04:33 PM	SRD/Core is what the game is built around. It is the only common thread of reference available to all groups and all players....and thus SRD/Core sets the standard. Is it a perfect standard? No, but that's no excuse to ignore it or dismiss it.That's no excuse to ignore or dismiss it...but at the same time, there is no excuse to ignore or dismiss noncore material when making balance discussions. And noncore material is often used for balance discussions, even by WotC. SRD/Core should not be used as the sole standard of balance unless it is the majority of available material. And it's instead the vast minority.And that's precisely WHY we should balance things around Core/SRD...to prevent RIFTS style powercreep just as you seem to want (given your attitude that most core feats are weak).You're putting words in the poster's mouth. Remember that Monte Cook article (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mc_los_142)? It practically admits that many options in core are weak, and intended to be so in a manner similar to "Timmy cards".Magic also has a concept of "Timmy cards." These are cards that look cool, but aren't actually that great in the game. The purpose of such cards is to reward people for really mastering the game, and making players feel smart when they've figured out that one card is better than the other. While D&D doesn't exactly do that, it is true that certain game choices are deliberately better than others. Toughness, for example, has its uses, but in most cases it's not the best choice of feat. If you can use martial weapons, a longsword is better than many other one-handed weapons. And so on -- there are many other, far more intricate examples. (Arguably, this kind of thing has always existed in D&D. Mostly, we just made sure that we didn't design it away -- we wanted to reward mastery of the game.)This isn't RIFTS-style power creep. Power creep does exist, but it's inevitable unless everything is weaker compared to the core ruleset. Such is not a viable business model, as you might guess, considering that the supplements simply won't sell. And most of the power creep is not the sort that's complained about in RIFTS, that being the vertical sort. We don't have characters made with more material being that much objectively powerful than their predecessors, excepting stuff like Pun-Pun.* Instead, we simply have more good options to choose from - horizontal power creep, if you will. Just because character options should not aspire to CoDzilla/wizard levels of craziness (achievable even in core), does not mean that they should be as bad as Toughness. *Pun-Pun was originally a 17th-level wizard who cast Shapechange. Then he became a 12th-level egoist with Overchannel and Metamorphic Transfer. And after that was the Divine Minion/Sorcerer 1/Master of Many Forms 3 with Assume Supernatural Ability. And with the Pazuzu method...Pun-Pun is now a 1st-level character of any class and any race that does not carry an Intelligence penalty. THAT'S vertical power creep for you, if an extreme example.
Nelyo 06-22-07, 07:19 PM	No it's not the same thing at all. Using a PrC to get racial abilities is like buying those abilities with a racial adjustment. It's similar to buying the abilities with a racial adjustment, but not exactly the same, as the class is still giving you BAB, hit points, skill points, improving your saves, and making you less vulnerable to effects that check HD. You are paying for them with precious character levels AND it's a PrC that's generally controlled by the race in question. As opposed to paying for them with your precious feats? As many have pointed out, most characters only get 7 of those, whereas for some classes 3 levels in a PrC isn't a bad investment. How much does a Fighter lose for taking the Stoneblessed class? A couple feats at most. How much does a Barbarian lose? A point of Trap Sense and DR, and 2 points of strength on a rage. Besides, I was under the impression that it's a bad idea to base game balance on flavor considerations. Then again, maybe flavor considerations are why the Stoneblessed PrC isn't marginalizing races. Occasionally, I suppose, the decision on whether to play a Human, Dwarf, or any other race may be based on what you want to roleplay, rather than a consideration of what abilities can be gained where. Let's face it, maybe racial traits like Low-Light Vision, Darkvision, skill bonuses, save bonuses, stat adjustments, and even weapon proficiencies, are available fairly cheaply through magic (though not all of them in core/SRD). Heck, about the only thing magic can't give you is free bonus feats *remembers heroics* oh, wait, nevermind.