Is this really balanced? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Is this really balanced? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi
09-16-07, 08:25 PM The feats I'm referencing come from Shardsfall Quest, a DragonMech adventure published under Sword and Sorcery. The DragonMech campaign setting is created by Goodman Games. Anyway, the feats I'm looking at are Insightful Step and Prophetic Step. Insightful Step (among other things) requires WIS 13. Prophetic Step requires Insightful Step and Improved Feint (by extension - Combat Expertise and INT 13). For all this, you may (as a move action, thanks to improved feint) feint against a number of foes equal to your WIS modifier. And rather than normal feinting benefits, everyone you fool takes a penalty to attack and damage equal to your BAB until your next round begins. When you can rinse and repeat. Is it just me, or is this really good? Admittedly, you need 4 feats, and a 13 in two ability scores. Plus you need a good charisma modifier for the feint to succeed. Leaving STR, DEX, and CON as your dump stats - but wait! This is clearly a feat meant for warriors. So, is this feat balanced for all this? Btw, insightful step works like prophetic step, but one foe only.

This same book introduces two metamagic feats I'd like people's opinions of too. One is Cleaving Spell. For only +1 spell level, you gain the ability to effectively cleave with the spell - making it hit a second foe if it drops the first. Can we say Disintegrate? The second one basically gives any caster the benefits of Warmage Edge, but without introducing MAD. And it looks like, unlike other metamagic feats, it's automatically assumed to be applied, for no adjustment to spell level. I think that one's balanced. Though it does step on the warmage's toes.
EjoThims
09-16-07, 09:49 PM The only real problem I see with them is that if you were able to take an extra move action, you could then use whirlwind attack or a similar ability to sneak attack multiple targets in the same round, as well as giving them those penalties.

Cleaving spell for only +1 is a bit overpowered, especially if the second target could be any target the original spell could have been cast on.
NineInchNall
09-16-07, 10:20 PM Yeah, those are pretty nice feats compared to the crap feats one generally sees.

But that's because a character in D&D is supposed to be very powerful. The standard Orc Warrior is supposed to pose no meaningful threat to an 8th level character. Seriously, a character is supposed to be able to chop his way through essentially limitless armies of armed, low-morale humanoids before hitting 10th level. And the game is supposed to go to 20th - where characters are supposed to be able to wade through essentially limitless armies of the guys who could wade through essentially limitless armies of normals.

Really, if you want to play D&D and you don't want a crazy power curve, you're essentially stuck playing at levels 1-6. After that, things are supposed to go over-the-top, bat-poop crazy.

I'd say those feats are fine.
IdleAltruism
09-16-07, 11:27 PM Yeah, those are pretty nice feats compared to the crap feats one generally sees.

There are a few feats that are pretty bad. But in general the majority of them are useful. Some can be overpowering, natural spell anyone?

But that's because a character in D&D is supposed to be very powerful. The standard Orc Warrior is supposed to pose no meaningful threat to an 8th level character. Seriously, a character is supposed to be able to chop his way through essentially limitless armies of armed, low-morale humanoids before hitting 10th level. And the game is supposed to go to 20th - where characters are supposed to be able to wade through essentially limitless armies of the guys who could wade through essentially limitless armies of normals.

Idk what kind of munchkin games you play in, but you're talking about a 20th level that can cut a path through an army of low-morale humanoids. 10th level and under is a whole different ballpark then the high level games. Characters are supposed to be strong not gods. The game is designed to be challenging, not a walk in the park I can kill armies by ninth level.

Really, if you want to play D&D and you don't want a crazy power curve, you're essentially stuck playing at levels 1-6. After that, things are supposed to go over-the-top, bat-poop crazy.

This isn't true. If I remember correctly people find the game most enjoyable at levels 6-14. High level games are manageable and can be balanced it just takes more work then your lower level ones. More variables=more work. Epic level is when things go over-the-top bat poop crazy, but even that is manageable.

Depending on how cleaving spell actually works it could be over powered. If it just shoots off another spell after one opponent dies its to powerful. If a single adjacent foe is affected maybe not so powerful.

The first feat tree doesn't look bad. Actually I find most it kind of weak for general D&D. A human rogue might have it by 6th level? A non-human(or one of those halfings with bonus feats) 9th level. Feinting can be nice but really SA is best paired with flanking and multiple attacks. Lowering damage by level would be nice for weak monsters, but your stronger foes its not going to do anything really(alot of them cast spells, have breath weapons, do massive amounts of damage etc etc). A bard might be able to use this to sort of debuff enemies, kinda sort of not really. The only part about it thats bad is the -attack of enemies. That is way overpowered. Its to big a penalty and doesn't give a save or anything. Compare it to a hexblades curse and you should see what I mean. Maybe if the enemy got the minuses against only you. If it was just a flat negative like -2 to hit it would be ok. But potentially -15 based on a skillcheck is probably a bad idea. To balance the feat out I'd make it a flat negative -2 to foes attack and damage rolls.

The minus damage might not be so bad if thats all the feat did. But combined with everything else its to much.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi
09-17-07, 08:22 AM Ok, a few clarifications. That feat tree gives you a new option with feinting. It replaces the normal benefit. So if you impose this penalty (which does have a "save" - it's called sense motive), you don't get any offensive advantage, so no sneak attack. And yeah, the penalty already is only against you.

And as for Spell Cleave, it only works on spells that do damage. So for example, a cleaving disintegrate only works if the first target makes the save but is killed by the damage. It only affects single target spells. The second target must still be an eligible one. In the text it also clarifies that a single magic missile can cleave (but not all the missiles produced), and that the regular cleave feat can apply to charges of touch spells (or channeled spells).
EjoThims
09-17-07, 01:01 PM Ok, a few clarifications. That feat tree gives you a new option with feinting. It replaces the normal benefit. So if you impose this penalty (which does have a "save" - it's called sense motive), you don't get any offensive advantage, so no sneak attack. And yeah, the penalty already is only against you.

And as for Spell Cleave, it only works on spells that do damage. So for example, a cleaving disintegrate only works if the first target makes the save but is killed by the damage. It only affects single target spells. The second target must still be an eligible one. In the text it also clarifies that a single magic missile can cleave (but not all the missiles produced), and that the regular cleave feat can apply to charges of touch spells (or channeled spells).

Without SA the feint variant isn't overpowered.

And for Cleaving Spell, again, if any eligible target of the original spell (including full range) is a target for the second hit, it's overpowered.

As is allowing normal Cleave on touch spells, as it's essentially granting extra spells per day at no cost.
NineInchNall
09-22-07, 03:39 PM Idk what kind of munchkin games you play in, but you're talking about a 20th level that can cut a path through an army of low-morale humanoids. 10th level and under is a whole different ballpark then the high level games. Characters are supposed to be strong not gods. The game is designed to be challenging, not a walk in the park I can kill armies by ninth level.

Have you ever looked at the CR system and the math it uses? Let's say we have an 8th level character. What sort of experience do you expect him to get for defeating 20 orcs? Yup, he gets none, because an orc represents no sort of meaningful challenge to a single 8th level character. In fact, no matter how many orc warriors you add to that encounter, the amount of XP our character gets is still zero.

What about a 16th level character taking on a group of 8th level characters? Again, zero experience.

You might want to crack open the DMG and look at power curve implied by the CR system. Parties are supposed to become so powerful that at 8th level they can chop through entire armies of orcs without gaining XP. At 16th level, that party is expected to be able to do the same against armies of 8th level characters.
InkBlot
09-22-07, 04:58 PM Anyway, the feats I'm looking at are Insightful Step and Prophetic Step. Insightful Step (among other things) requires WIS 13. Prophetic Step requires Insightful Step and Improved Feint (by extension - Combat Expertise and INT 13). For all this, you may (as a move action, thanks to improved feint) feint against a number of foes equal to your WIS modifier. And rather than normal feinting benefits, everyone you fool takes a penalty to attack and damage equal to your BAB until your next round begins. When you can rinse and repeat. Is it just me, or is this really good?
It is good. Way too good. This feat is not within earshot of balanced. For any 3/4 BAB class that's a sickeningly large defensive boost for naught but your move action and an opposed skill check (don't forget about +10 rings of bluffing, cloaks of charisma, skill focus, skill mastery, etc).

There are plenty of classes with 3/4 BAB who never need to make a full attack and most of them are Wis or Cha based; Bards, Warlocks, Clerics, Swordsages, Binders, Druids, Wilders, and Ardents just to name a few. There are also a handful of full BAB classes of similar design; Crusaders for example. These classes can all continue to dish out punishment just as strong as before, but now they also have the equivalent of at least +11 AC and DR 11/-- at 15th level for just a couple feats.

There are other buffs that are this nice, but they all come with heavy strings attached. Boosts, counters, and strikes can approach it, but they can only be used once per encounter until recovering - once every other round at most. And those are the high level ones that are out of reach for a non-martial-adept class.
NineInchNall
09-22-07, 05:05 PM There are plenty of classes with 3/4 BAB who never need to make a full attack and most of them are Wis or Cha based; Bards, Warlocks, Clerics, Swordsages, Binders, Druids, Wilders, and Ardents just to name a few. There are also a handful of full BAB classes of similar design; Crusaders for example. These classes can all continue to dish out punishment just as strong as before, but now they also have the equivalent of at least +11 AC and DR 11/-- at 15th level for just a couple feats.

Someone has to set four feats on fire and his move action and invest heavily in Bluff and put points in Int and Cha/Wis rather than in a combat stat? Pfft.
InkBlot
09-22-07, 05:35 PM Those classes don't need combat stats to be awesome in combat, they weren't doing anything important with their move action anyway, and no other set of four feats give bonuses that large. That was kind of the point of my entire post.
NineInchNall
09-22-07, 05:46 PM Sure they do. Look at Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Leap Attack, and Shock Trooper.

The point is that the classes you mention don't get much in the way of bonus feats. So if you're not a human, then four of your 7 feats over the course of 18 levels are devoted to this one trick. So you're looking at being able to do something useful in combat at what, 9th level? 12th as a Druid? And the opportunity cost! Ack!
NoldorForce
09-22-07, 06:40 PM @ InkBlot: It's fine considering that the penalty apparently only applies against you.
IdleAltruism
09-22-07, 08:27 PM @ InkBlot: It's fine considering that the penalty apparently only applies against you.

Thats not fine considering a balor only has 30+ to hit. A standard player should have their level+20 in AC. That would give a balor a 50/50 to hit a decently armored 20th level character. With this they would have a 5% chance, only on a 20 would they hit and it works on multiple foes. Thats why it isn't fine. The basic monster has a 50-75% chance to miss already, this makes it basically impossible to hit that character. And they probably will never succeed in an opposed check against a PC.
NineInchNall
09-22-07, 09:08 PM A standard player ...

Let's say a Fighter 20, since we're talking about a balor.

10 (base)
13 (full plate +5)
7 (heavy shield +5)
5 (ring of protection +5)
5 (amulet of natural armor +5 or barkskin)
1 (Dexterity)
1 (Dodge)
12 (natural, PAO into firbolg)
-1 (size)
----
=53 AC

Note that the firbolg bit can be skipped with PHB2's armor/shield spec or a defending weapon.

Or maybe a Druid 18.

10 (base)
13 (full plate +5)
7 (heavy shield +5)
5 (ring of protection or halo of sand)
5 (barkskin)
1 (Dex)
23 (natural, shapechange to pit fiend)
-1 (size)
--------
=63 AC

I'm just not seeing it, somehow.
IdleAltruism
09-22-07, 09:17 PM If memory serves all the polymorph spells absorb your gear. They are broken spells, but thats besides the point(and you are abusing them with PAO). Without gear or without polymorphs they come out to about 40 ac.....And I was just saying your average character not AC mongers(you could actually jack their AC alot higher if you wanted). Your examples actually aid my argument, um thx?
NineInchNall
09-22-07, 09:59 PM Wait, so your argument is that a character who isn't doing anything except the absolute bare minimum (armor, shield, amulet, ring) should be hit 50% of the time, and that someone doing more should be ... hit ... the same ...

:uh-huh:

A balor isn't even supposed to be a melee beasty. It's dangerous because of its spell-likes and whatnot. Dragons are melee threats.
IdleAltruism
09-22-07, 10:57 PM Dragons at the same CR have about a 30-35+ to hit......the balor actually has a 33+ to hit on its highest. A better example would be the tarrasque at 57+ to hit same CR.

Like I said your standard character will likely have around their level+20 for average AC. This works fairly well at around 50% against your average CR=to your own level. Your higher AC characters(frontline with fullplate) will probably have a bit more then that if they're trying. Thats why this feat can be overpowering. A character with this feat doesn't need to really optimize their AC against an average CR they aren't hittable. If they do optimize their AC they aren't hittable by creatures that are supposed to be heavy hitter physical threats.
Cthulhu_Dreams
09-24-07, 04:18 AM Dragons at the same CR have about a 30-35+ to hit......the balor actually has a 33+ to hit on its highest. A better example would be the tarrasque at 57+ to hit same CR.

Like I said your standard character will likely have around their level+20 for average AC. This works fairly well at around 50% against your average CR=to your own level. Your higher AC characters(frontline with fullplate) will probably have a bit more then that if they're trying. Thats why this feat can be overpowering. A character with this feat doesn't need to really optimize their AC against an average CR they aren't hittable. If they do optimize their AC they aren't hittable by creatures that are supposed to be heavy hitter physical threats.

Balors to hit is completely irrelevant. Balors are tough because they cast blasphemy at will. Which means (as you get no save) he can pretty much juggle you forever. While his mate from summon demon kills you.

So the fight really goes like this "Balor 1 summons balor 2. Both balors teleport next to you. You fail to kill balor 1 in one round of combat. Balor 1 dazes you so you can take no actions. Balor 1 repeats this until balor 2 rolls enough 20s to kill you." Your AC is not even useful because it doesn't stop you from being permadazed. A pit fiend does the same thing

I'm not even sure any of the CR20 monsters in any way rely on hitting you in melee combat.

# Old Red Dragon CR 20
# Balor CR 20
# Pit Fiend CR 20
# Ancient Brass Dragon CR 20
# Very Old Bronze Dragon CR 20
# Very Old Copper Dragon CR 20
# Old Silver Dragon CR 20
# Tarrasque CR 20

Lets see: Balor and Pit fiend perma daze you and own you.

The tarrasque has +57 to hit which is a lot, but you can kill that at like level 12 with a Fly Spell, so unless you meet him in a place where you cannot fly away he is pathetic.

Dragons.. are high level spell casters. They are going to fly around out of reach and cast save or dies until mister high armour class falls over, and if they DO have to melee, they are going to grapple then direct natural attacks and rip him to shreads. Worrying about a high armour class at high level is.. completely pointless!
IdleAltruism
09-24-07, 04:36 PM I'm not even sure any of the CR20 monsters in any way rely on hitting you in melee combat.

CR 20 does not just= regular CR 20 monsters. Advanced monsters/NPC/Several weaker monsters and these can rely on physical damage. I don't agree with you on your point about 20th lvl CR not doing physical damage but thats really a difference in DM styles.

The tarrasque has +57 to hit which is a lot, but you can kill that at like level 12 with a Fly Spell, so unless you meet him in a place where you cannot fly away he is pathetic.

In a wide open plain yes this is true, but to really make a tarrasque a CR 20 you have to give him the right surroundings(there have been many many examples of this all throughout the boards).

Dragons.. are high level spell casters. They are going to fly around out of reach and cast save or dies until mister high armour class falls over, and if they DO have to melee, they are going to grapple then direct natural attacks and rip him to shreads. Worrying about a high armour class at high level is.. completely pointless!

I completely disagree. Dragons spells are generally buff spells not attack spells. They have weak DCs and low CL, they don't make effective offensive caster enemies at this level. The best they have is their breath weapon for offensive "spells". This is generally why dragons can be difficult to run, if you use them as primary spellcasters they are weak at their listed CR, in melee they basically kill one party member a round.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 09-16-07, 08:25 PM	The feats I'm referencing come from Shardsfall Quest, a DragonMech adventure published under Sword and Sorcery. The DragonMech campaign setting is created by Goodman Games. Anyway, the feats I'm looking at are Insightful Step and Prophetic Step. Insightful Step (among other things) requires WIS 13. Prophetic Step requires Insightful Step and Improved Feint (by extension - Combat Expertise and INT 13). For all this, you may (as a move action, thanks to improved feint) feint against a number of foes equal to your WIS modifier. And rather than normal feinting benefits, everyone you fool takes a penalty to attack and damage equal to your BAB until your next round begins. When you can rinse and repeat. Is it just me, or is this really good? Admittedly, you need 4 feats, and a 13 in two ability scores. Plus you need a good charisma modifier for the feint to succeed. Leaving STR, DEX, and CON as your dump stats - but wait! This is clearly a feat meant for warriors. So, is this feat balanced for all this? Btw, insightful step works like prophetic step, but one foe only. This same book introduces two metamagic feats I'd like people's opinions of too. One is Cleaving Spell. For only +1 spell level, you gain the ability to effectively cleave with the spell - making it hit a second foe if it drops the first. Can we say Disintegrate? The second one basically gives any caster the benefits of Warmage Edge, but without introducing MAD. And it looks like, unlike other metamagic feats, it's automatically assumed to be applied, for no adjustment to spell level. I think that one's balanced. Though it does step on the warmage's toes.
EjoThims 09-16-07, 09:49 PM	The only real problem I see with them is that if you were able to take an extra move action, you could then use whirlwind attack or a similar ability to sneak attack multiple targets in the same round, as well as giving them those penalties. Cleaving spell for only +1 is a bit overpowered, especially if the second target could be any target the original spell could have been cast on.
NineInchNall 09-16-07, 10:20 PM	Yeah, those are pretty nice feats compared to the crap feats one generally sees. But that's because a character in D&D is supposed to be very powerful. The standard Orc Warrior is supposed to pose no meaningful threat to an 8th level character. Seriously, a character is supposed to be able to chop his way through essentially limitless armies of armed, low-morale humanoids before hitting 10th level. And the game is supposed to go to 20th - where characters are supposed to be able to wade through essentially limitless armies of the guys who could wade through essentially limitless armies of normals. Really, if you want to play D&D and you don't want a crazy power curve, you're essentially stuck playing at levels 1-6. After that, things are supposed to go over-the-top, bat-poop crazy. I'd say those feats are fine.
IdleAltruism 09-16-07, 11:27 PM	Yeah, those are pretty nice feats compared to the crap feats one generally sees. There are a few feats that are pretty bad. But in general the majority of them are useful. Some can be overpowering, natural spell anyone? But that's because a character in D&D is supposed to be very powerful. The standard Orc Warrior is supposed to pose no meaningful threat to an 8th level character. Seriously, a character is supposed to be able to chop his way through essentially limitless armies of armed, low-morale humanoids before hitting 10th level. And the game is supposed to go to 20th - where characters are supposed to be able to wade through essentially limitless armies of the guys who could wade through essentially limitless armies of normals. Idk what kind of munchkin games you play in, but you're talking about a 20th level that can cut a path through an army of low-morale humanoids. 10th level and under is a whole different ballpark then the high level games. Characters are supposed to be strong not gods. The game is designed to be challenging, not a walk in the park I can kill armies by ninth level. Really, if you want to play D&D and you don't want a crazy power curve, you're essentially stuck playing at levels 1-6. After that, things are supposed to go over-the-top, bat-poop crazy. This isn't true. If I remember correctly people find the game most enjoyable at levels 6-14. High level games are manageable and can be balanced it just takes more work then your lower level ones. More variables=more work. Epic level is when things go over-the-top bat poop crazy, but even that is manageable. Depending on how cleaving spell actually works it could be over powered. If it just shoots off another spell after one opponent dies its to powerful. If a single adjacent foe is affected maybe not so powerful. The first feat tree doesn't look bad. Actually I find most it kind of weak for general D&D. A human rogue might have it by 6th level? A non-human(or one of those halfings with bonus feats) 9th level. Feinting can be nice but really SA is best paired with flanking and multiple attacks. Lowering damage by level would be nice for weak monsters, but your stronger foes its not going to do anything really(alot of them cast spells, have breath weapons, do massive amounts of damage etc etc). A bard might be able to use this to sort of debuff enemies, kinda sort of not really. The only part about it thats bad is the -attack of enemies. That is way overpowered. Its to big a penalty and doesn't give a save or anything. Compare it to a hexblades curse and you should see what I mean. Maybe if the enemy got the minuses against only you. If it was just a flat negative like -2 to hit it would be ok. But potentially -15 based on a skillcheck is probably a bad idea. To balance the feat out I'd make it a flat negative -2 to foes attack and damage rolls. The minus damage might not be so bad if thats all the feat did. But combined with everything else its to much.
Omnirahk, half-Rahkshi 09-17-07, 08:22 AM	Ok, a few clarifications. That feat tree gives you a new option with feinting. It replaces the normal benefit. So if you impose this penalty (which does have a "save" - it's called sense motive), you don't get any offensive advantage, so no sneak attack. And yeah, the penalty already is only against you. And as for Spell Cleave, it only works on spells that do damage. So for example, a cleaving disintegrate only works if the first target makes the save but is killed by the damage. It only affects single target spells. The second target must still be an eligible one. In the text it also clarifies that a single magic missile can cleave (but not all the missiles produced), and that the regular cleave feat can apply to charges of touch spells (or channeled spells).
EjoThims 09-17-07, 01:01 PM	Ok, a few clarifications. That feat tree gives you a new option with feinting. It replaces the normal benefit. So if you impose this penalty (which does have a "save" - it's called sense motive), you don't get any offensive advantage, so no sneak attack. And yeah, the penalty already is only against you. And as for Spell Cleave, it only works on spells that do damage. So for example, a cleaving disintegrate only works if the first target makes the save but is killed by the damage. It only affects single target spells. The second target must still be an eligible one. In the text it also clarifies that a single magic missile can cleave (but not all the missiles produced), and that the regular cleave feat can apply to charges of touch spells (or channeled spells). Without SA the feint variant isn't overpowered. And for Cleaving Spell, again, if any eligible target of the original spell (including full range) is a target for the second hit, it's overpowered. As is allowing normal Cleave on touch spells, as it's essentially granting extra spells per day at no cost.
NineInchNall 09-22-07, 03:39 PM	Idk what kind of munchkin games you play in, but you're talking about a 20th level that can cut a path through an army of low-morale humanoids. 10th level and under is a whole different ballpark then the high level games. Characters are supposed to be strong not gods. The game is designed to be challenging, not a walk in the park I can kill armies by ninth level. Have you ever looked at the CR system and the math it uses? Let's say we have an 8th level character. What sort of experience do you expect him to get for defeating 20 orcs? Yup, he gets none, because an orc represents no sort of meaningful challenge to a single 8th level character. In fact, no matter how many orc warriors you add to that encounter, the amount of XP our character gets is still zero. What about a 16th level character taking on a group of 8th level characters? Again, zero experience. You might want to crack open the DMG and look at power curve implied by the CR system. Parties are supposed to become so powerful that at 8th level they can chop through entire armies of orcs without gaining XP. At 16th level, that party is expected to be able to do the same against armies of 8th level characters.
InkBlot 09-22-07, 04:58 PM	Anyway, the feats I'm looking at are Insightful Step and Prophetic Step. Insightful Step (among other things) requires WIS 13. Prophetic Step requires Insightful Step and Improved Feint (by extension - Combat Expertise and INT 13). For all this, you may (as a move action, thanks to improved feint) feint against a number of foes equal to your WIS modifier. And rather than normal feinting benefits, everyone you fool takes a penalty to attack and damage equal to your BAB until your next round begins. When you can rinse and repeat. Is it just me, or is this really good? It is good. Way too good. This feat is not within earshot of balanced. For any 3/4 BAB class that's a sickeningly large defensive boost for naught but your move action and an opposed skill check (don't forget about +10 rings of bluffing, cloaks of charisma, skill focus, skill mastery, etc). There are plenty of classes with 3/4 BAB who never need to make a full attack and most of them are Wis or Cha based; Bards, Warlocks, Clerics, Swordsages, Binders, Druids, Wilders, and Ardents just to name a few. There are also a handful of full BAB classes of similar design; Crusaders for example. These classes can all continue to dish out punishment just as strong as before, but now they also have the equivalent of at least +11 AC and DR 11/-- at 15th level for just a couple feats. There are other buffs that are this nice, but they all come with heavy strings attached. Boosts, counters, and strikes can approach it, but they can only be used once per encounter until recovering - once every other round at most. And those are the high level ones that are out of reach for a non-martial-adept class.
NineInchNall 09-22-07, 05:05 PM	There are plenty of classes with 3/4 BAB who never need to make a full attack and most of them are Wis or Cha based; Bards, Warlocks, Clerics, Swordsages, Binders, Druids, Wilders, and Ardents just to name a few. There are also a handful of full BAB classes of similar design; Crusaders for example. These classes can all continue to dish out punishment just as strong as before, but now they also have the equivalent of at least +11 AC and DR 11/-- at 15th level for just a couple feats. Someone has to set four feats on fire and his move action and invest heavily in Bluff and put points in Int and Cha/Wis rather than in a combat stat? Pfft.
InkBlot 09-22-07, 05:35 PM	Those classes don't need combat stats to be awesome in combat, they weren't doing anything important with their move action anyway, and no other set of four feats give bonuses that large. That was kind of the point of my entire post.
NineInchNall 09-22-07, 05:46 PM	Sure they do. Look at Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Leap Attack, and Shock Trooper. The point is that the classes you mention don't get much in the way of bonus feats. So if you're not a human, then four of your 7 feats over the course of 18 levels are devoted to this one trick. So you're looking at being able to do something useful in combat at what, 9th level? 12th as a Druid? And the opportunity cost! Ack!
NoldorForce 09-22-07, 06:40 PM	@ InkBlot: It's fine considering that the penalty apparently only applies against you.
IdleAltruism 09-22-07, 08:27 PM	@ InkBlot: It's fine considering that the penalty apparently only applies against you. Thats not fine considering a balor only has 30+ to hit. A standard player should have their level+20 in AC. That would give a balor a 50/50 to hit a decently armored 20th level character. With this they would have a 5% chance, only on a 20 would they hit and it works on multiple foes. Thats why it isn't fine. The basic monster has a 50-75% chance to miss already, this makes it basically impossible to hit that character. And they probably will never succeed in an opposed check against a PC.
NineInchNall 09-22-07, 09:08 PM	A standard player ... Let's say a Fighter 20, since we're talking about a balor. 10 (base) 13 (full plate +5) 7 (heavy shield +5) 5 (ring of protection +5) 5 (amulet of natural armor +5 or barkskin) 1 (Dexterity) 1 (Dodge) 12 (natural, PAO into firbolg) -1 (size) ---- =53 AC Note that the firbolg bit can be skipped with PHB2's armor/shield spec or a defending weapon. Or maybe a Druid 18. 10 (base) 13 (full plate +5) 7 (heavy shield +5) 5 (ring of protection or halo of sand) 5 (barkskin) 1 (Dex) 23 (natural, shapechange to pit fiend) -1 (size) -------- =63 AC I'm just not seeing it, somehow.
IdleAltruism 09-22-07, 09:17 PM	If memory serves all the polymorph spells absorb your gear. They are broken spells, but thats besides the point(and you are abusing them with PAO). Without gear or without polymorphs they come out to about 40 ac.....And I was just saying your average character not AC mongers(you could actually jack their AC alot higher if you wanted). Your examples actually aid my argument, um thx?
NineInchNall 09-22-07, 09:59 PM	Wait, so your argument is that a character who isn't doing anything except the absolute bare minimum (armor, shield, amulet, ring) should be hit 50% of the time, and that someone doing more should be ... hit ... the same ... :uh-huh: A balor isn't even supposed to be a melee beasty. It's dangerous because of its spell-likes and whatnot. Dragons are melee threats.
IdleAltruism 09-22-07, 10:57 PM	Dragons at the same CR have about a 30-35+ to hit......the balor actually has a 33+ to hit on its highest. A better example would be the tarrasque at 57+ to hit same CR. Like I said your standard character will likely have around their level+20 for average AC. This works fairly well at around 50% against your average CR=to your own level. Your higher AC characters(frontline with fullplate) will probably have a bit more then that if they're trying. Thats why this feat can be overpowering. A character with this feat doesn't need to really optimize their AC against an average CR they aren't hittable. If they do optimize their AC they aren't hittable by creatures that are supposed to be heavy hitter physical threats.
Cthulhu_Dreams 09-24-07, 04:18 AM	Dragons at the same CR have about a 30-35+ to hit......the balor actually has a 33+ to hit on its highest. A better example would be the tarrasque at 57+ to hit same CR. Like I said your standard character will likely have around their level+20 for average AC. This works fairly well at around 50% against your average CR=to your own level. Your higher AC characters(frontline with fullplate) will probably have a bit more then that if they're trying. Thats why this feat can be overpowering. A character with this feat doesn't need to really optimize their AC against an average CR they aren't hittable. If they do optimize their AC they aren't hittable by creatures that are supposed to be heavy hitter physical threats. Balors to hit is completely irrelevant. Balors are tough because they cast blasphemy at will. Which means (as you get no save) he can pretty much juggle you forever. While his mate from summon demon kills you. So the fight really goes like this "Balor 1 summons balor 2. Both balors teleport next to you. You fail to kill balor 1 in one round of combat. Balor 1 dazes you so you can take no actions. Balor 1 repeats this until balor 2 rolls enough 20s to kill you." Your AC is not even useful because it doesn't stop you from being permadazed. A pit fiend does the same thing I'm not even sure any of the CR20 monsters in any way rely on hitting you in melee combat. # Old Red Dragon CR 20 # Balor CR 20 # Pit Fiend CR 20 # Ancient Brass Dragon CR 20 # Very Old Bronze Dragon CR 20 # Very Old Copper Dragon CR 20 # Old Silver Dragon CR 20 # Tarrasque CR 20 Lets see: Balor and Pit fiend perma daze you and own you. The tarrasque has +57 to hit which is a lot, but you can kill that at like level 12 with a Fly Spell, so unless you meet him in a place where you cannot fly away he is pathetic. Dragons.. are high level spell casters. They are going to fly around out of reach and cast save or dies until mister high armour class falls over, and if they DO have to melee, they are going to grapple then direct natural attacks and rip him to shreads. Worrying about a high armour class at high level is.. completely pointless!
IdleAltruism 09-24-07, 04:36 PM	I'm not even sure any of the CR20 monsters in any way rely on hitting you in melee combat. CR 20 does not just= regular CR 20 monsters. Advanced monsters/NPC/Several weaker monsters and these can rely on physical damage. I don't agree with you on your point about 20th lvl CR not doing physical damage but thats really a difference in DM styles. The tarrasque has +57 to hit which is a lot, but you can kill that at like level 12 with a Fly Spell, so unless you meet him in a place where you cannot fly away he is pathetic. In a wide open plain yes this is true, but to really make a tarrasque a CR 20 you have to give him the right surroundings(there have been many many examples of this all throughout the boards). Dragons.. are high level spell casters. They are going to fly around out of reach and cast save or dies until mister high armour class falls over, and if they DO have to melee, they are going to grapple then direct natural attacks and rip him to shreads. Worrying about a high armour class at high level is.. completely pointless! I completely disagree. Dragons spells are generally buff spells not attack spells. They have weak DCs and low CL, they don't make effective offensive caster enemies at this level. The best they have is their breath weapon for offensive "spells". This is generally why dragons can be difficult to run, if you use them as primary spellcasters they are weak at their listed CR, in melee they basically kill one party member a round.