New Feat: Deafening Blow (Fighter) [Archive] - Wizards Community

New Feat: Deafening Blow (Fighter) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
tarkin
03-29-07, 11:58 AM Deafening Blow (Fighter)

Pre req: Strength 15+, Fighter level 5th.

Benefit: Before making any melee attack, you can willingly take a -2 penalty to hit for that roll, and aim for a creatures ears. Creatures that do not hear using ears are immune. If you do damage, the victim must make a Fort save, DC = 10 + strength bonus + Dex Bonus.

Failure means they are Deafened (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#deafened) for 10 minutes/point of damage done.

This can be healed normally (i.e. wait it out), or by use of spells such as Remove Blindness/Deafness.

Special: A Fighter may take Deafening blow as a fighter bonus feat
jaelis
03-29-07, 12:09 PM Would it be clearer (and in line with your intended meaning) to say something like:
"Before making an attack roll with any melee weapon, you can decide to take a -2 penalty on that roll. If you hit, ..."

That seems a little clearer about whether this is a special standard action or just an option for any attack. And I'm guessing you're thinking melee only... is that right?

Also, that save will be nearly impossible to make, which seems a little strong. Maybe the save DC could be something + your Str bonus?

And what do you mean by "healed normally"?
tarkin
03-29-07, 12:15 PM Ability changed, in response to your comment.
DarkRhystar
03-29-07, 02:02 PM Deafening Blow (Fighter)

Pre req: Strength 15+, Fighter level 5th.

Benefit: Before making any melee attack, you can willingly take a -2 penalty to hit for that roll, and aim for a creatures head. If you do damage, the victim must make a Fort save, DC equal to your strength (Strength of 18, DC = 18).

Failure means they are Deafened (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#deafened) for 10 minutes/point of damage done.

This can be healed normally (i.e. wait it out), or by use of spells such as Remove Blindness/Deafness.

Special: A Fighter may take Deafening blow as a fighter bonus feat

Problems:

"Fighter level 5th": What about this feat warrants it being Fighter-only?
"Aim for the head": D&D doesn't have called shots so this really doesn't fit in the system. Beyond that, if you're hitting the enemy in the head, why isn't it dying? HP represents many things in battle such as fatigue, equipment condition, and wounds. Striking the enemy in the head goes against the abstraction that is HP and raises other strange questions such as why would performing this maneuver with a dagger and a maul have the same effect? Make it flavor if you like, but get it out of the description, it has no place there.
"DC equal to your strength": You're hard pressed to find DCs based on raw ability scores (I can't even think of any off-hand). Scaling a DC by a raw ability score means that it scales twice as fast as all other DCs (+2 strength = +2 DC instead of +1). Assuming that those who take this feat are going to have a pretty hefty strength scores, this is bad for balance. Switch it to a static DC plus the user's Strength bonus.
"10 minutes/point of damage done": I dislike effects with extremely long lasting effects. While this seems fair compared to Blindness/Deafness which is permanent, it's still a long time. No real recommendation here, just an observation.

Aside from the poorly designed mechanical portion of this feat, do you actually believe this feat's effect to be worth a full feat? At best I could see it as part of a Tactical feat. Really, deafening doesn't matter to anyone other than a caster after a battle has begun and there are much better feats available to choose from if one is wanting to annoy casters.

The deaf status itself is more of a "To be used on PCs" status than vice versa. I see this feat being given to enemy Fighters who strike and run away more than to PCs. Is that how you see it being used as well?
tarkin
03-29-07, 02:58 PM Responses:

"Fighter level 5th": What about this feat warrants it being Fighter-only?

Fighters need some love, just like other classes do. I can see this feat as being something similar to Weapon Specialization, the kind of thing fighters learn to do, but not other people. It does not have the flavor of either barbarian or paladin. I could see an argument for letting monks take it, but that could be done seperately as a monk combat style.

"Aim for the head": (Changed to ears)

D&D has TONS of called shots. Trip, Sunder, Disarm are perfect examples. Power Attack, Sneak Attack, Assains' Seath attack, Hamstring Sneak attack variant are more. What WoTC does NOT have are one shot kill strikes, which is why I did not do what you asked about (having the blow to the head kill)

"DC equal to your strength":
You are right that the rarely if ever do DC's based on raw stat. But straight stength is a bit on the low side, and I wanted this to be something people actually TAKE and use as worthwhile for a feat. I will change it to something else. How about Strength and Dex both.

Most of this feat is fairly well designed. You said it was too weak, but then complained that the DC was too high. You really can't have it both ways. It is an effective means to combat wizards, well worth it, particularly as the DC's I am giving it are higher than the low ones you suggest. If I wanted to give it a wimpy DC, then yes, it would be part of a tactical feat. But the DC is high, so it is worth while.

It is a lower level feat, great for 5th level fighters, but still useable even at higher levels. I understand that you personally don't like the feat, but I think others will.
DarkRhystar
03-29-07, 04:17 PM D&D has TONS of called shots. Trip, Sunder, Disarm are perfect examples. Power Attack, Sneak Attack, Assains' Seath attack, Hamstring Sneak attack variant are more. What WoTC does NOT have are one shot kill strikes, which is why I did not do what you asked about (having the blow to the head kill)

Well if it isn't this argument regurgitated into yet another form. Mechanics first, rationalization second; most of those are easily separated (flavor from mechanics). That's a discussion for another topic however.

It is a nitpick, but a fair one.

"DC equal to your strength":
You are right that the rarely if ever do DC's based on raw stat. But straight stength is a bit on the low side, and I wanted this to be something people actually TAKE and use as worthwhile for a feat. I will change it to something else. How about Strength and Dex both.

A high DC won't make someone select a feat, valuable effects will. You can have a high DC by simply upping the base DC of the effect; no need to write a new DC formula. A static DC modified by both Strength and Dexterity would be an improvement over the current implementation.

Something else to consider would be a user decided DC:

10 + Strength modifier + (2 times the penalty to AB the user takes)

Make the AB penalty variable limited to the user's BAB.

Most of this feat is fairly well designed. You said it was too weak, but then complained that the DC was too high. You really can't have it both ways. It is an effective means to combat wizards, well worth it, particularly as the DC's I am giving it are higher than the low ones you suggest. If I wanted to give it a wimpy DC, then yes, it would be part of a tactical feat. But the DC is high, so it is worth while.

A high DC with a weak effect doesn't make a strong feat.
Tim4488
03-29-07, 04:42 PM I like it. Just wondering if perhaps it should be restricted to bludgeoning weapons... I'm having trouble imagining the boxing-the-ears effect with a sword or spear.

Ditto Rhystar's idea about variable attack bonus. Perhaps have the duration have something to do with how much of your AB you drop, perhaps not.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
tarkin 03-29-07, 11:58 AM	Deafening Blow (Fighter) Pre req: Strength 15+, Fighter level 5th. Benefit: Before making any melee attack, you can willingly take a -2 penalty to hit for that roll, and aim for a creatures ears. Creatures that do not hear using ears are immune. If you do damage, the victim must make a Fort save, DC = 10 + strength bonus + Dex Bonus. Failure means they are Deafened (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#deafened) for 10 minutes/point of damage done. This can be healed normally (i.e. wait it out), or by use of spells such as Remove Blindness/Deafness. Special: A Fighter may take Deafening blow as a fighter bonus feat
jaelis 03-29-07, 12:09 PM	Would it be clearer (and in line with your intended meaning) to say something like: "Before making an attack roll with any melee weapon, you can decide to take a -2 penalty on that roll. If you hit, ..." That seems a little clearer about whether this is a special standard action or just an option for any attack. And I'm guessing you're thinking melee only... is that right? Also, that save will be nearly impossible to make, which seems a little strong. Maybe the save DC could be something + your Str bonus? And what do you mean by "healed normally"?
tarkin 03-29-07, 12:15 PM	Ability changed, in response to your comment.
DarkRhystar 03-29-07, 02:02 PM	Deafening Blow (Fighter) Pre req: Strength 15+, Fighter level 5th. Benefit: Before making any melee attack, you can willingly take a -2 penalty to hit for that roll, and aim for a creatures head. If you do damage, the victim must make a Fort save, DC equal to your strength (Strength of 18, DC = 18). Failure means they are Deafened (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#deafened) for 10 minutes/point of damage done. This can be healed normally (i.e. wait it out), or by use of spells such as Remove Blindness/Deafness. Special: A Fighter may take Deafening blow as a fighter bonus feat Problems: "Fighter level 5th": What about this feat warrants it being Fighter-only? "Aim for the head": D&D doesn't have called shots so this really doesn't fit in the system. Beyond that, if you're hitting the enemy in the head, why isn't it dying? HP represents many things in battle such as fatigue, equipment condition, and wounds. Striking the enemy in the head goes against the abstraction that is HP and raises other strange questions such as why would performing this maneuver with a dagger and a maul have the same effect? Make it flavor if you like, but get it out of the description, it has no place there. "DC equal to your strength": You're hard pressed to find DCs based on raw ability scores (I can't even think of any off-hand). Scaling a DC by a raw ability score means that it scales twice as fast as all other DCs (+2 strength = +2 DC instead of +1). Assuming that those who take this feat are going to have a pretty hefty strength scores, this is bad for balance. Switch it to a static DC plus the user's Strength bonus. "10 minutes/point of damage done": I dislike effects with extremely long lasting effects. While this seems fair compared to Blindness/Deafness which is permanent, it's still a long time. No real recommendation here, just an observation. Aside from the poorly designed mechanical portion of this feat, do you actually believe this feat's effect to be worth a full feat? At best I could see it as part of a Tactical feat. Really, deafening doesn't matter to anyone other than a caster after a battle has begun and there are much better feats available to choose from if one is wanting to annoy casters. The deaf status itself is more of a "To be used on PCs" status than vice versa. I see this feat being given to enemy Fighters who strike and run away more than to PCs. Is that how you see it being used as well?
tarkin 03-29-07, 02:58 PM	Responses: "Fighter level 5th": What about this feat warrants it being Fighter-only? Fighters need some love, just like other classes do. I can see this feat as being something similar to Weapon Specialization, the kind of thing fighters learn to do, but not other people. It does not have the flavor of either barbarian or paladin. I could see an argument for letting monks take it, but that could be done seperately as a monk combat style. "Aim for the head": (Changed to ears) D&D has TONS of called shots. Trip, Sunder, Disarm are perfect examples. Power Attack, Sneak Attack, Assains' Seath attack, Hamstring Sneak attack variant are more. What WoTC does NOT have are one shot kill strikes, which is why I did not do what you asked about (having the blow to the head kill) "DC equal to your strength": You are right that the rarely if ever do DC's based on raw stat. But straight stength is a bit on the low side, and I wanted this to be something people actually TAKE and use as worthwhile for a feat. I will change it to something else. How about Strength and Dex both. Most of this feat is fairly well designed. You said it was too weak, but then complained that the DC was too high. You really can't have it both ways. It is an effective means to combat wizards, well worth it, particularly as the DC's I am giving it are higher than the low ones you suggest. If I wanted to give it a wimpy DC, then yes, it would be part of a tactical feat. But the DC is high, so it is worth while. It is a lower level feat, great for 5th level fighters, but still useable even at higher levels. I understand that you personally don't like the feat, but I think others will.
DarkRhystar 03-29-07, 04:17 PM	D&D has TONS of called shots. Trip, Sunder, Disarm are perfect examples. Power Attack, Sneak Attack, Assains' Seath attack, Hamstring Sneak attack variant are more. What WoTC does NOT have are one shot kill strikes, which is why I did not do what you asked about (having the blow to the head kill) Well if it isn't this argument regurgitated into yet another form. Mechanics first, rationalization second; most of those are easily separated (flavor from mechanics). That's a discussion for another topic however. It is a nitpick, but a fair one. "DC equal to your strength": You are right that the rarely if ever do DC's based on raw stat. But straight stength is a bit on the low side, and I wanted this to be something people actually TAKE and use as worthwhile for a feat. I will change it to something else. How about Strength and Dex both. A high DC won't make someone select a feat, valuable effects will. You can have a high DC by simply upping the base DC of the effect; no need to write a new DC formula. A static DC modified by both Strength and Dexterity would be an improvement over the current implementation. Something else to consider would be a user decided DC: 10 + Strength modifier + (2 times the penalty to AB the user takes) Make the AB penalty variable limited to the user's BAB. Most of this feat is fairly well designed. You said it was too weak, but then complained that the DC was too high. You really can't have it both ways. It is an effective means to combat wizards, well worth it, particularly as the DC's I am giving it are higher than the low ones you suggest. If I wanted to give it a wimpy DC, then yes, it would be part of a tactical feat. But the DC is high, so it is worth while. A high DC with a weak effect doesn't make a strong feat.
Tim4488 03-29-07, 04:42 PM	I like it. Just wondering if perhaps it should be restricted to bludgeoning weapons... I'm having trouble imagining the boxing-the-ears effect with a sword or spear. Ditto Rhystar's idea about variable attack bonus. Perhaps have the duration have something to do with how much of your AB you drop, perhaps not.