Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FriendlyBiscuit 11-14-05, 04:21 AM	What are your thoughts on allowing players to take Improved Toughness as a substitute for Toughness for the purpose of qualifying for a PrC?
ShadowCub 11-14-05, 10:12 AM	What are your thoughts on allowing players to take Improved Toughness as a substitute for Toughness for the purpose of qualifying for a PrC? Personally, I see it as logical. You're still spending a feat to qualify for the PrC, and instead of one any character can take at 1st level, it's one that some characters can't take until 6th level, delaying entry (potentially) to the PrC until 7th level. But then, I'm a player not a DM currently, so I'm looking at if more from the viewpoint of what's better for my character and trying to support it with logic. Not looking at it from game balance and trying to support that position with RAW which do not say anywhere that Improved Toughness can substitute for Toughness as a prequisite for anything.
MJ the Prophet 11-14-05, 10:38 AM	The problem with allowing the substitution is that Improved Toughness is a much better feat. It's +1 hp per level, something normally available only by increasing your Con by 2. The whole point of making someone take Toughness in order to enter a PrC is to make it an actual decision; should I take the weak feat in order to get into the good PrC, or do I take a good feat and forego the PrC? I mean, the Master of Many forms requires Alertness and Endurance. What does that have to do with getting better at wildshaping? Nothing at all, but it is supposed to help balance with the abilities of the class. (Granted, this is a bad example, since the PrC is weak for a shapeshifting class, but it serves well enough.)
Mac Awol 11-14-05, 10:57 AM	one of my game group's house rules is that Improved Toughness and Toughness count as the same feat in regard to prerequisite for everything, as both feats gives almost the same, but that Improved Toughness would be a better choice of feat compare to Toughness, in the long run, no matter when you take it, but Toughness would be the best feat to take if you need extra hitpoints at the first 2 levels. Thou the requirements for the two feats are different: Nothing Vs. Base fortitude save +2, this makes it perfectly fine for us to regard them as the same.
starfire311 11-14-05, 12:25 PM	I dont allow it to, for the simple reason that Toughness is a bad feat, and it is a pre-requiste for a lot of PrCs based ont the fact it is a bad feat. By making toughness better IE Improved toughness, it removes one of the drawbacks of the PrC, that drawback ebing that it basically cost you a feat to get into it... If improved toughness had a different name such as Hardy or durable, and it gave the exact same benefits, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Does anyone let any of the other feats that grants bonus HP count instead of toughness(I know there is a psionic one(psionic body) and an incarnum one(dotn remember name), plus others.), I know a few of them actually say they can be used instead of toughness, but most don't.
Mac Awol 11-14-05, 01:27 PM	I dont allow it to, for the simple reason that Toughness is a bad feat, and it is a pre-requiste for a lot of PrCs based ont the fact it is a bad feat. By making toughness better IE Improved toughness, it removes one of the drawbacks of the PrC, that drawback ebing that it basically cost you a feat to get into it... If improved toughness had a different name such as Hardy or durable, and it gave the exact same benefits, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Why would you validate the existance of a "bad" feat based on the existance of Prestige Classes? Why should a player that wants a certain concept as presented via a Prestige Class be punished, when a player that has other ideas for his character doesn't get the same punishment? Does anyone let any of the other feats that grants bonus HP count instead of toughness(I know there is a psionic one(psionic body) and an incarnum one(dotn remember name), plus others.), I know a few of them actually say they can be used instead of toughness, but most don't. A valid point, but a load of nonsense, as the reason why you get these extra hit point is tied to a character concept (in the case of psionic body you only benefit when playing a character with a psionic concept) whereas Toughness and Improved Toughness can be taken by any character. excuse me, but your point make you come across as a typical rule-rider, which I find is a sure way to kill the fun of the game, and after all in the famous words of Captain Barbossa: "The Code is more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner."
starfire311 11-14-05, 02:28 PM	Why would you validate the existance of a "bad" feat based on the existance of Prestige Classes? Why should a player that wants a certain concept as presented via a Prestige Class be punished, when a player that has other ideas for his character doesn't get the same punishment? A valid point, but a load of nonsense, as the reason why you get these extra hit point is tied to a character concept (in the case of psionic body you only benefit when playing a character with a psionic concept) whereas Toughness and Improved Toughness can be taken by any character. I am gonna ignore the flames. I try really hard to run a balanced game, I really dont care how powerful the PCs are as long as they are balanced with each other, and on a "level playing field"... most of the PrCs do a good job of balancing and part of the balancing is done in the selection of the prerequisites. Many times toughness will be a pre-requisite as part of the balancing of making a more powerful than average PrC. If you remove this drawback and allow it to be replaced with improved toughness, you may be significantly increasing the power of the PrC. And as to why you get the extra HP from the other feat, doesnt really matter, the net result is that the feat made you tougher. Heck, mostlikely you are getting more HP from Psionic body than you do from toughness, otherwise it would be silly to take it.
Jerks 11-14-05, 02:35 PM	I've also never really been impressed by the "Sucky feats are good" argument. It just doesn't hold water because there are a lot of beginner feats which are good (Power Attack & Combat Expertise) which are prerequisites for other feats and prestige classes that actually add value to the character. There are examples of less than great feats having substitutes already. Expeditious Dodge can both be substituted for Dodge. I'd have no problem with Improved Toughnesss subbing in or Toughness.
lostone 11-15-05, 11:22 AM	I allow it, because I always thought the feat Toughness was pointless anyway. Improved Toughness is actually worth spending a feat on to meet a PrC prereq. Besides, most of the prestige classes that call for Toughness were written before Improved Toughness was an option. Having 3 more hit points does not make someone tough, and all the PrCs that require it make it a requirement to symbolize that the character is a tough/macho character. Improved Toughness is more tough/macho. :D