Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TarlSS 12-24-06, 12:28 PM	Feats Pierce Enchantment Feat Prereq: Base Attack Bonus +7 Special: Characters with access to spell lists with 5th level spells may not take this feat. Once per encounter, as a standard action you can make a single melee attack or ranged against an opponent. If you damage this opponent, then he will be affected as if by a targeted Dispel Magic, with the exception that the CL is equal to your base attack bonus, up to a maximum of +20 Retain Magic Feat Prereq: BAB +7 Special: Characters with access to spell lists with 5th level spells may not take this feat. The DC to dispel items and active spells on your person is equal to 11+base attack bonus Interdicting Strike Prereq: Base Attack Bonus +7 Special: Characters with access to spell lists with 5th level spells may not take this feat. Once per encounter, as a standard action you can make a single melee attack or ranged against an opponent. If you damage this opponent, then he will be affected as if by a Dimensional Anchor, with the exception that the CL is equal to your base attack bonus, up to a maximum of +20 These feats probably have plenty of holes in them, and they're probably feats with the same names, but I'd like to know the particular ramifications of introducing feats that allow fighters direct solutions to magic: Namely, Dispelling, Countering Dispelling, and stopping Extradimensional travel Balance ideas: Add a prerequisites of Mage Slayer Feat? Restrict the feat to fighters only+Magekilling classes? (Fighter level 7, Occult Slayer, Suel Arcanamach, etc.)
True Cavalier 12-24-06, 12:39 PM	I only find the second one balanced, the Dimensional Anchor is one is a "heck no" for me, and the first can potentially be duplicated by magic weapons that dispel on hit. The good thing about them is they focus on a "It's you, not your items" deal which I like, on the other hand giving fighters easy access to a 4th level spell is too much imo. More prerequisites would be nice.
strenoth 12-24-06, 01:03 PM	other flaw I can see: You are making it so paladin and ranger can't get access to these feats, as both classes cast spells of third level or higher (they would temporarily be able to use them, but once they can cast third level spells, they wouldn't be able to any more, thus wasting the feat slot.)
Witch 12-24-06, 01:16 PM	These things are not fighter-feats. They are feats that belong to gish, if they would be balanced. They do not make sense as non-magical feats.
Kursk 12-24-06, 06:02 PM	These things are not fighter-feats. They are feats that belong to gish, if they would be balanced. They do not make sense as non-magical feats. Yeah, I go toward SR feats for non-caster fighter types.
TarlSS 12-24-06, 07:35 PM	Why would they be gish feats? You're essentially hitting something and it gets rid of the magic. I'm trying to make it so they -can't- be taken by gish. What sort of abilities would fighters get so they could compete with mages then, if not access to the same effects they use to fight themselves? How would you place SR into a feat chain? Why not dimensional anchor? How else would you stop the 'reset button' factor that is the very thing which allows mages to circumvent the limited spells per day mechanic?
True Cavalier 12-24-06, 08:43 PM	Why not dimensional anchor? How else would you stop the 'reset button' factor that is the very thing which allows mages to circumvent the limited spells per day mechanic? Magic items? Would be pretty silly if that half-orc brute with 6 int and 6 charisma can hit a level 20 mage and dispel him because of its high attack bonus, or disrupt his teleportation magic.
Keterys 12-25-06, 01:05 AM	Would be pretty silly if that half-orc brute with 6 int and 6 charisma can hit a level 20 mage and dispel him because of its high attack bonus, or disrupt his teleportation magic. Why? I mean, what makes a 20th level fighter so inept compared to a 20th mage, that he can't pull off pseudo-magical effects? I'm not a big fan of the proposed feats for my own reasons, but fighters should get better tricks than '+2 to a save' as they get higher level, in the same sense that mages get better spells. (ie, like whirlwind attack, elusive target, supreme cleave, etc are all good examples of things that you can think of as 'realistic', but are pretty fantastic and boosting)
mkill 12-25-06, 05:55 AM	Special: Characters with access to spell lists with 5th level spells may not take this feat. This is totally weird. So a Fighter/cleric can't take this feat, and a Duskblade is out, too, but a Paladin has access? Just delete that and make the feat work for all class combinations. Also, I don't like "once per encounter" abilities for feats. What is keeping the char from just doing it every round? And I don't want to hear "game balance", I want an in-game explanation. Third, I'd like to see appropriate prerequisites. At least "Knowledge (arcana) 4 ranks" if you can't come up with anything better.
strenoth 12-25-06, 01:53 PM	Also, I don't like "once per encounter" abilities for feats. What is keeping the char from just doing it every round? And I don't want to hear "game balance", I want an in-game explanation. because the next round is still the same encounter. Until there is a solid break between enemies, it's not a new encounter. other than that, you and I are in agreement however.
Witch 12-25-06, 03:21 PM	Why would they be gish feats? Because metal doesn't remove magic. Magic removes magic.