Useless or Usefull feat?

[SethFahad]

Is Endurance useless or usefull? :smallconfused:

[AstralFire]

Is Endurance useless or usefull? :smallconfused:

Endurance is a simulationist, non-combat feat in the middle of a highly gamist, combat-focused system.

9 campaigns out of 10, it is completely useless.

1 campaign out of 10 (I'm probably being generous here), it is marginally useful.

And then a really small number out of 10, I'm sure it's awesome.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

It is a prerequisite for some good prestige classes and feats, but not very useful in and of itself.

[Kylarra]

It comes for free with Ranger3 and is a prereq for stuff, but in and of itself... nope.

edit: lol ninja'd

[Saph]

Want to know something really funny?

I'm DMing a core game for Pharaoh, STK, Giacomo, and Mostlyharmful on the forums.

They just ran into a bunch of monsters called Elementite Swarms, that attack by drowning you. No chance to hold your breath, Con check every round or drown.

Guess which feat gives a bonus to Con checks against drowning? :smalltongue:

Yep. They nearly all died because they didn't take Endurance. (One drowned, two saved through last-minute use of the Heal skill.)

- Saph

[AstralFire]

And now I'm glad I didn't go with my original planned answer of "AHAHAHAHAHAHA". My overly detailed answer now seems reasonable.

All goes according to plan. Mwahaha.

[SethFahad]

Well, sleeping in armor is pretty useful (doning an armor takes precious time), and the bonus that gives in life or death situations is considerable.

We tend to think that non-combat feat are useless, but I think that is wrong.

[jmbrown]

The non-combat feats like endurance are useful if your DM is the type that stresses non-combat encounters just as much as combat encounters.

The DM I play with is always hinting that we're racing against the clock and there have been encounters that were considerably tougher because reinforcements arrived before we did. There has yet to be a day where our party hasn't forced marched and let me tell you it's no fun fighting babau's while fatigued (it's no fun fighting them period but that's beyond the point).

If your DM doesn't track things like how long it takes to get from point A to point B and if underwater encounters are rare then endurance is best spent elsewhere.

[Kylarra]

The non-combat feats like endurance are useful if your DM is the type that stresses non-combat encounters just as much as combat encounters. And even then, you're so feat starved that specific noncombat feats taken on the off-chance you might need them is generally suboptimal. Whereas it's almost a given that you'll be in combat at some point.

[AstralFire]

The problem with feats like Endurance is that they require a feat slot and because of the average ratio of combat to non-combat in most D&D games, the DM's going to have to make it a driving goal to punish you if you don't take it to make it worth it most of the time - you simply cannot hope to take even a sizeable amount of the situationally useful non-combat feats and dingle-dangles all of the time. And if he does that, then you end up in a situation where it's pretty much a required feat anyway and it's no longer a choice.

These are very rare things. If it was a choice between Exotic Weapon Proficiency and Endurance, good chance I'd take Endurance. But it's not; it's much bigger than that.

[SethFahad]

Hmm... hack and slash campaigns are flavour-less.
I prefer a more balanced approach. Some times a game season ends with only a single combat or with no combat at all!

Hunting enemies or get hunted by them (and here comes Endurance), thinking your way out of problems or riddles is interesting too.

[Kylarra]

Hmm... hack and slash campaigns are flavour-less.
I prefer a more balanced approach. Some times a game season ends with only a single combat or with no combat at all!

Hunting enemies or get hunted by them, thinking your way out of problems or riddles is interesting too.Strawmen will get you nowhere.

[Frosty]

The problem with feats like Endurance is that they require a feat slot and because of the average ratio of combat to non-combat in most D&D games, the DM's going to have to make it a driving goal to punish you if you don't take it to make it worth it most of the time - you simply cannot hope to take even a sizeable amount of the situationally useful non-combat feats and dingle-dangles all of the time. And if he does that, then you end up in a situation where it's pretty much a required feat anyway and it's no longer a choice.

These are very rare things. If it was a choice between Exotic Weapon Proficiency and Endurance, good chance I'd take Endurance. But it's not; it's much bigger than that.

I agree unless the EWP is for Spiked Chain :smallwink:

[AstralFire]

Hmm... hack and slash campaigns are flavour-less.
I prefer a more balanced approach. Some times a game season ends with only a single combat or with no combat at all!

Hunting enemies or get hunted by them, thinking your way out of problems or riddles is interesting too.

Don't mistake me.

Tell me how the 'endurance' feat dramatically helps those situations. I have had my PCs hunted down. I generally go several sessions between combats. I rely a lot on roleplay... don't get me started on riddles, I hate riddles, but I do do a lot of investigations.

The thing of it is, since almost no one is going to take the feat, everyone's in it together anyway. So the DM's going to have to adjust the amount he stresses Con checks anyway unless he is the sort of DM who really doesn't mind putting his party on the verge of campaign ending TPKs all the time.


I agree unless the EWP is for Spiked Chain :smallwink:

Eeeeven then, because I never build trippers, so Spiked Chain's benefits are often not worth interfering with whatever roleplay aesthetic I have in mind. (I have a big thing for spears. Though my bard was a Spiked Chain user.)

[SethFahad]

Tell me how the 'endurance' feat dramatically helps those situations. I have had my PCs hunted down. I generally go several sessions between combats. I rely a lot on roleplay... don't get me started on riddles, I hate riddles, but I do do a lot of investigations.


I was refering to balanced game seasons.
But as for Pcs hunted dwon by bad guys, well endurance awards a +4 bonus on Constitution checks made to continue running or to avoid nonlethal damage from a forced march...

[AstralFire]

I was refering to balanced game seasons.
But as for Pcs hunted dwon by bad guys, well endurance awards a +4 bonus on Constitution checks made to continue running or to avoid nonlethal damage from a forced march...

And if no one in the party has it? The average tendency of most DMs that I know will be - sometimes consciously, sometimes unconsciously - to pull back on the number of Con checks that they're requiring just so the players aren't screwed by the mechanic, compared to how many they would ask for if everyone had it. You're creating the same amount of drama. And if you go further than you would if everyone had the feat, you're just punishing the players for not optimizing the way you would like them to, because with or without the Endurance feat, you can do a fatigue fight.

[Farlion]

I encourage my players to take non-combat skills and I reward them for doing so. My players have found out, that making only combat oriented characters will leave them bored for the most time during my campaign.

At the moment I have two people with endurance. The ranger (naturally) and one of the fighters. How I make this useful in my campaign? Well, guess who are the only two people who can fight after running away from their followers one whole night?

On the other hand, one player took negotiator, another one self-sufficient. I also reward them for their choic.

But once again, the usefullness of non-combat feats largely depends on your current playstile and campaign setting.

Cheers,
Farlion

[Kaihaku]

Endurance is a simulationist, non-combat feat in the middle of a highly gamist, combat-focused system.

9 campaigns out of 10, it is completely useless.

1 campaign out of 10 (I'm probably being generous here), it is marginally useful.

And then a really small number out of 10, I'm sure it's awesome.

Exactly. It's similar to Balance; 98% of the time it's useless, 1.5% of the time it's mildly handy, and .5% of the time it's a lifesaver. Contributing greatly to its uselessness is the fact that most of the Dungeon Masters I know usually wave off CON checks and Balance checks when they know most of the players haven't invested their resources there. Even if one player has invested in Endurance or Balance, they generally aren't going to introduce mechanics that will screw everyone else.

[SethFahad]

Exactly. It's similar to Balance; 98% of the time it's useless, 1.5% of the time it's mildly handy, and .5% of the time it's a lifesaver. Contributing greatly to its uselessness is the fact that most of the Dungeon Masters I know usually wave off CON checks and Balance checks when they know most of the players haven't invested their resources there. Even if one player has invested in Endurance or Balance, they generally aren't going to introduce mechanics that will screw everyone else.

With that in mind, these DMs must wave off mind affecting spells just because the team is “fighter oriented” and their Will saves stink.... :smalltongue:

[AstralFire]

With that in mind, these DMs must wave off mind affecting spells just because the team is “fighter oriented” and their Will saves stink.... :smalltongue:

Number of mechanics relating to balance in the game.
Number of mechanics relating to Will Saves.

One can be excised at little detriment, the other is an integral part.

A level 1 Fighter's Balance: +3
A level 20 Fighter's Balance: +5

A level 1 Fighter's Will Save: +0
A level 20 Fighter's Will Save: +18 as a minimum

We're talking about a world of difference here.
An aside - I use Saga/4E skill mechanics even in 3E just so I can use Balance and other skills like it more often without turning the situation into an autopass for those with training and an autodie for those without.

And even then, considering the default assumption of D&D is that more times than not, the players win? Yeah, a DM with a party full of low Will Saves is more likely to pull the punches there. I mean, you don't send out Catwoman to take on a Dark God in hand to hand, you send Wonder Woman, you send Dr. Fate, you send a Green Lantern. Most adventures don't gain any fun from constant and largely disparate power levels.

[SethFahad]

Listen, just because you don't know how to swim (f.e), it doesn't mean that you won't end up in the sea at least once in your life.

I mean, heck, anything, and everything is posible. You can't simply rule out some situations from your game as a DM, for the sake of someone who is "bad" at handling them.

[kamikasei]

I mean, heck, anything, and everything is posible. You can't simply rule out some situations from your game as a DM, for the sake of someone who is "bad" at handling them.

Anything and everything is possible, but you've only got seven feat slots before class- or race-granted bonuses. Endurance is not worth one of them.

[Doc Roc]

I strongly recommenddon't recommend drowning your players more often as a way to encourage them to take endurance.

[Harperfan7]

So, what if no one in the party had good will saves? Would the DM just wave those too? Or would he risk every encounter being a TPK? I understand your point, but that kind of thinking just ruins it for me, and probably for others too.

I will say this though, how much use is endurance if only one member of the party has it? This is the one thing that damns it as a feat, or makes it a must-have. Generally, either everybody needs it, or no one does.

[AstralFire]

Listen, just because you don't know how to swim (f.e), it doesn't mean that you won't end up in the sea at least once in your life.

I mean, heck, anything, and everything is posible. You can't simply rule out some situations from your game as a DM, for the sake of someone who is "bad" at handling them.

If you're planning on making a habit out of throwing situations at your PCs that they are not designed to handle, you owe it to them to let them know beforehand.

Yeah, there'll be situations that arise incidentally where I call for Constitution checks or Balance or whatever else. They do not arise often enough to make it a generally good idea to take these things for anything other than roleplay satisfaction. Now, there's nothing wrong with that - but it doesn't make the feat useful enough to warrant taking on the whole, because the same logic that makes Endurance a useful feat is also saying that the Mounted Combat series of feats could be useful for a character where you have no plan to get them a mount because you're running a city campaign, but just in case you need to engage in horseback chase shenanigans, well, it's good to have.

[SethFahad]

Anything and everything is possible, but you've only got seven feat slots before class- or race-granted bonuses. Endurance is not worth one of them.

I don't disagree with that.

[Coidzor]

Well, if you're doing that, ostensibly, you don't want it to end the first time they encounter a level+2 or 3 BBEG wizard.


Listen, just because you don't know how to swim (f.e), it doesn't mean that you won't end up in the sea at least once in your life.

I mean, heck, anything, and everything is posible. You can't simply rule out some situations from your game as a DM, for the sake of someone who is "bad" at handling them.
:smallconfused:
Actually, you can, that's all part of the DM's job description. Should you? Maybe. Maybe not. Sometimes it's fitting to see if you can actually save the guy in heavy armor from drowning to death, other times you're just doing it to be a bastard.

Endurance, in and of itself, is worthless due to its limited applicability and gimped utility. As a prerequisite, if you're going the Horizon Tripper route, for example, it can be quite handy.

[mistformsquirrl]

Sadly I have to agree that endurance is usually not worth it.

Yes - the off chance of it being handy is there; certainly. But the odds are that's not going to happen; and if it DOES happen; there's probably a spell or magic item someone in the party has that takes care of that problem one way or another.

This of course assumes an average campaign - roleplay heavy, combat heavy, or otherwise.

Now if you have a campaign with a specific terrain theme... say... Frostburn, Stormwrack or Sandstorm - then Endurance starts making some sense.

Deserts both hot and cold can and should tax the players endurance - that's part of the challenge of adventuring in those environments after all. Likewise if you're in a situation where there's a very good chance you could be dumped in the water and expected to survive for a good period of time; it might be worth it.

Outside of campaigns heavily biased toward those kind of situations though... yeah, not worth it.

I say this as someone who greatly enjoys non-combat challenges; but unfortunately this is an area where D&D falls down hard <_ _>;

[Person_Man]

As others have already opined, Endurance is generally useless except for in a small set of circumstances. If you believe that such feats add to the overall flavor and enjoyment of the game though, there are a couple of simple fixes.

The DM can simply hand out additional feats, which may only be used for fluffy non-combat feats, and maybe extra Skill points for Profession, Craft, and Knowledge (Architecture) or (Geography).

Or you can just convince everyone in the party to invest in such things. If everyone in the party is equally mediocre, then the DM can just lower the difficulty of combat and things will be just as fun (perhaps more so).

Or you can play a strong class with weak feat choices. It doesn't matter what a Druid takes, he's still a Druid.

[Kaiyanwang]

.

The DM can simply hand out additional feats, which may only be used for fluffy non-combat feats, and maybe extra Skill points for Profession, Craft, and Knowledge (Architecture) or (Geography).


Is not the case of Endurance, but Complete Scoundrel handles some quest to obtain "minor" feats like skill focus or a lucky feat (IIRC). You could expand this concept..

[Glimbur]

I strongly recommenddon't recommend drowning your players more often as a way to encourage them to take endurance.

Shouldn't you drown their characters instead?

[Project_Mayhem]

Shouldn't you drown their characters instead?

Go play my little pony you wuss :smallbiggrin:

[shadow_archmagi]

Endurance could be useful, but few games are of a style where it would be, and most DMs will not penalize characters because they didn't take endurance.

I think most of my PCs always sleep in armor just because they've never bothered to learn the rule about sleeping in armor giving you penalties, and because none of them ever took endurance I'm not really going to slap a -5 on the whole party. (Er, wait, that's a -5 on everyone BUT the casters. Because fighters really needed that nerf)

[Cieyrin]

Is not the case of Endurance, but Complete Scoundrel handles some quest to obtain "minor" feats like skill focus or a lucky feat (IIRC). You could expand this concept..

I had a DM who awarded minor feats for good character development. This was a city campaign and the adventures were typically done w/ several weeks of game time between them, so we needed livelihoods and we spent most of our time working on them, so people naturally picked up Skill Focus(Profession(Janitor)) or Skill Focus(Profession(Cook)) or whatever they did with their time, so we could show that we were actually improving at our jobs without necessarily investing precious skill ranks and feats. This also applied to special training from powerful NPCs, such as my character, who apprenticed himself to a psionically endowed monk and picked up Up the Walls from his time spent in tutelage.

With that kind of model, a character or party could earn feats like Endurance through in-game development, whether they get drafted into an army and gain it as a bonus feat for surviving basic training or join as caravan guards for a trade expedition to the next country and during their travels through the wastes that exist as a natural barrier between the two, pick up Sandskimmer, as they learn how to navigate the deceptive sands and figure out how to distribute their weight so as not to be bogged down.

In and of itself, Endurance probably wouldn't be a normal feat selection w/o being used as prereq to something else, kinda like its worse cousin, Toughness. There are more useful feats out there to take up your limited slots and again, unless you need it to qualify for something else, it'll remain in the province of bonus feats for the foreseeable future.

Them's my 2 coppers. Take as you will.

[FMArthur]

I would be willing to give Endurance for the same cost as a Skill Trick, but it's a waste as a feat. Alternatively you could bundle it with Diehard and it would be slightly more appealing.

[zarakstan]

I would say "Totally and Utterly Useless" but I know 1/100 times it could mean the difference, but it just isn't worth it when you could get something like power attack. . .

[Forbiddenwar]

my 2 cp

My barbarian died last week. Why? He didn't have endurance so wasn't sleeping in his armor, and was ambushed. He was hoosed with his naked 11 AC.

Diehard is a MUST for clerics, gives you time for healing instead of dying. I've saved my party repeatedly by having diehard, which requires endurance.

Yes, endurance is less useful in endless flat plain nothing but combat games. Games with depth, with a variety of encounters, more useful

SO: Kick in the door, kill all monsters less than a half a day walk to an inn style play, skip it, (unless your a cleric and agree that diehard is a good thing to have) Near a desert or an oceon or any body of water or facing an elemental invasion, might be a good thing to have.

I'd give endurance a 3/10 on usefullness, good to have, pick it up if unsure of what to get, or have an eye on other feats(like diehard) or PrC that require it (horizonwalker, I think, can someone name others?) In general, I think 1 or 2people out of the party should have it. (I like to call them the survivors :smallwink:)

[AstralFire]

I'm getting tired of hearing that Endurance is a good feat in games that do things beyond merely combat all the time, linked up immediately with "Endurance is great in games where you regularly get attacked at first light."

- If you're not running combat all the time, then depending on how your campaign is run, it has a number of situations where it won't come up.
- If you are running combat all the time, then putting the party regularly into situations where it is necessary is not much different from adjusting the Challenge Rating up specifically to hurt a party full of people with Endurance, Toughness, Exotic Weapon (Kama), and Run. If they like that, fine, but merely having the Endurance feat is not actually opening up the variety of encounters you can engage in.

[Ninetail]

When I ran 3.5, I bundled Endurance, Diehard, and Toughness into one feat.

It still wasn't taken all that often, but at least it had some general utility.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Throw in Great Fortitude and Iron Will and you might have a deal...

[Deepblue706]

Endurance can be solid low-level feat.

In extremely hot and cold environments, and when a Wizard cannot cast many first-level spells, a character with Endurance will not drain that Wizard's power because he needs Endure Elements to get by.

In semi- or fully-aquatic environments, a character with Endurance has a better chance of survival if armored and bull-rushed into a body of water.

In environments filled with poisonous gasses (but not Cloudkill...dammit...), you'll make use of the bonus Fort saves made to resist suffocating because of holding your breath. Also useful when holding your breath to defend yourself against Smoke Effects, which cause non-lethal damage.

In any environment where you might be ambushed, you can sleep in your light or medium armor at no penalty. If the alarm is raised, then you can fight reliably.

I'd say those are all neat perks, and together they make the worth of a feat. If I were a Fighter with an exceptional STR score, I'd sooner pick this than Weapon Focus. I would hesitate with some other classes, though, as fewer feats means there's less chance of finding synergy with it and others you might get (Fighters might grab Endurance and eventually Steadfast Determination, and still can get plenty of combative abilities with their Fighter feats).

[Otodetu]

The real power of endurance is to sleep in medium armour at no penalty, many materials make heavy armour into medium.

There are countless times my duskblade and cleric characters have been unable to wear heavy armour because of sleep needs, and had i just had endurance i would have been saved... then again my build would have been severely hampered by the lack of the feat i guess...

Endurance is good in certain campaigns under certain dm's. Most of the time it is a waste, and a potion of water breathing is cheaper than a feat.

[Thespianus]

When I ran 3.5, I bundled Endurance, Diehard, and Toughness into one feat.

It still wasn't taken all that often, but at least it had some general utility.

Throw in Great Fortitude and Iron Will and you might have a deal...
+1

I was just going through the feats in the PHB that ought to be bundled, and these feats were the ones I came up with. Maybe skip Iron Will, but apart from that, yes.

[Deepblue706]

I was just going through the feats in the PHB that ought to be bundled, and these feats were the ones I came up with. Maybe skip Iron Will, but apart from that, yes.

What would we call this One Feat, then? Ultimate Badass?

[Kylarra]

What would we call this One Feat, then? Ultimate Badass?Taking a level in Badass (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TookALevelInBadass).

[HansSprungfeld]

Wait, do most DMs really never put their players in scenarios they aren't prepared for?

No narrow, slippery bridges, unless everyone can fly or has maxed balance? No Aboleths unless everyone has good will saves? What if the party needs to cross a desert, but has lousy con/fort saves against hot climates?

These are all my favorite scenarios as a DM and a player- that is, something I wouldn't normally be prepared to deal with.

Not to say that Endurance is a worthwhile feat, but there should be scenarios where it would be useful, regardless of whether or not the wizard might get heatstroke and be unable to participate in a battle, or the fighter misses a battle where he slips into a river and has to get fished out.

[Doc Roc]

Wizards.... getting... heatstroke:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

[AstralFire]

Wait, do most DMs really never put their players in scenarios they aren't prepared for?

There is a distinct difference between "avoid ever putting the PCs in such a situation" and "avoid penalizing PCs for not building characters the way you think they should unless you make this clear beforehand."

[Thespianus]

What would we call this One Feat, then? Ultimate Badass?
How about "Endurance", or "Toughness"? It's all endurance-related stuff, you can stand more physical abuse, you're a bit tougher, etc, but you don't really get a whole lot of Badass from it all.

Then again, I second the idea that someone wrote about earlier, about allowing a few of these relatively sucky PHB feats to be taken with the skill trick rules, ie they cost 2 skill points, and you can only take one of them per level.

That way, someone could actually take Athletic AND Deceitful without completely killing his character's development.

[Cieyrin]

We see water all the time in games, despite the fact that many characters don't have ranks in Swim. The danger of drowning is very real to many people and having to consider that possibility of having to deal with that sort of thing creates drama, which is good for a game. Fighting against the monstrosities of the deep and against the burn in your lungs as you try to hold your breath long enough to get back to the surface is a great scene for roleplaying. Eliminating such just because not everybody was raised in a coastal community is just silly.

The same goes for limiting other situations for what characters aren't prepared for. If you survive anyways, it makes for a great story and interesting tactical situations for those hack n' slashers you have to deal with in your party, too.

EDIT:
How about "Endurance", or "Toughness"? It's all endurance-related stuff, you can stand more physical abuse, you're a bit tougher, etc, but you doing really get a whole lot of Badass from it all.

Then again, I second the idea that someone wrote about earlier, about allowing a few of these relatively sucky PHB feats to be taken with the skill trick rules, ie they cost 2 skill points, and you can only take one of them per level.

That way, someone could actually take Athletic AND Deceitful without completely killing his character's development.

Taking skill tricks to give yourself flat skill bonuses is CHEESY and you know it. While Endurance could fill as such, I wouldn't put feats like Alertness and such as skill tricks, as why do the skill trick if you can just put those ranks into THE SKILL?!?

[Jair Barik]

Diehard can be alright and Endurance is a prerequisite for it

Think of endurance as being like Eschew materials. If your DM is into roleplaying and stuff as well as combat its going to come in handy, if not it will be less handy.

[Thespianus]

Wizards.... getting... heatstroke:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

That's what you get for preparing Read Magic instead of Prestidigitation ;)

[AslanCross]

I'm currently running Red Hand of Doom, which is a fairly combat-heavy game. Not to say it's mindless hack-and-slash, as there's a pressing time limit, complex, overarching social encounters that have a huge bearing on the outcome, and treacherous environments (a sunken city, a large swamp, etc.).

On top of that I've been rolling for random weather, which has resulted in a heat wave twice already.

I would still discourage my players from picking Endurance. The combat threats are the biggest part of the game, and frankly make for a more iconic and memorable story than "It's a hot summer day. Roll 8 Fort saves. That's it for the day."

Besides, even with the heat waves, only a single character failed the Fort save---and that was the high Fort, high Con Warblade. The softest character (the psion; the warforged rogue is immune), didn't even blink in the heat. <_<

[Narmoth]

Hmm... hack and slash campaigns are flavour-less.
I prefer a more balanced approach. Some times a game season ends with only a single combat or with no combat at all!

Hunting enemies or get hunted by them (and here comes Endurance), thinking your way out of problems or riddles is interesting too.

Meh, my armourless fighter that spends one feat on defence is still is better than your fullplated fighter with endurance.
Iron Will is another feat that gives all to little for a feat slot. If you make the difference bigger, say double the bonus, or lvl-increase the bonus from the feat, it suddenly becomes attractive


My barbarian died last week. Why? He didn't have endurance so wasn't sleeping in his armor, and was ambushed. He was hoosed with his naked 11 AC.

A vow of poverty would aid him more (of course, he have to be good)
Well, you actually blast an additional feat to attain it, but it's worth it compared to endurance

[ColdSepp]

Restful Crystal and Crystal of Adaption made Endurance useless. Both are cheap, can be changed as needed (Move Action), and work for any armor.

500 GP each.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

A vow of poverty would aid him more (of course, he have to be good)
Well, you actually blast an additional feat to attain it, but it's worth it compared to endurance

Steadfast Determination + Endurance is a better investment of feats for a barbarian than VoP.

[VirOath]

More often than not, I've found Endurance to be useful for the ability to sleep in heavy armor. The bonus to fort saves, not so much.

But that is assuming you are playing a build with a truck-load of feats. On a Cleric, a second suit of light armor to sleep in is better. On something with Fighter levels, Endurance isn't that big of a hit to take. This is also assuming you rely on heavy armor.

[Draz74]

Restful Crystal and Crystal of Adaption made Endurance useless. Both are cheap, can be changed as needed (Move Action), and work for any armor.

500 GP each.

Your optimization-fu is out of date. :smalltongue: For that same 500, you can just add the Restful property to your magic armor (from Dungeonscape) instead of buying the Restful Crystal. Not only does it solve the sleeping problem without using up your Armor Crystal slot, but it also gives you a +5 bonus to your Listen check to wake up if you get ambushed during the night.

Crystal of Adaptation can be useful. There are other ways to get constant endure elements effects, too, like having a Dragonfire Adept in the party.

[Deepblue706]

Steadfast Determination + Endurance is a better investment of feats for a barbarian than VoP.

Why, because that gives him a +16 Will save (+20 vs enchantments) in a Rage at level 20, before considering anything beyond a base 14 CON? :smallbiggrin:

[Deepblue706]

How about "Endurance", or "Toughness"? It's all endurance-related stuff, you can stand more physical abuse, you're a bit tougher, etc, but you don't really get a whole lot of Badass from it all.

Diehard is pretty Badass. Not a great feat, but c'mon. You're bleeding out, but you can still fight. Like, a friggin ice-pick could be lodged in your skull, and you could still kick ass. That, added to the environmental bonuses, bonus hp and +2 to Fort saves says more than "I'm Slightly Tougher than most people." Might not have all much mechanical benefit, but the imagery is still there.

[Thurbane]

Kinda offtopic, but Diehard saved my life once. My 6th level Cleric was brought to exactly -9 hp by a lightning bolt. I healed myself next round - if I didn't have Diehard, none of my party would have reached me in time (I was also the only healer in the party). This was in one of my first 3.5 games - I blew three feats on Endurance, Diehard and Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword). Coincidentally, the first magic weapon we came accross was a +1 Frost Bastard Sword! :smalltongue:

One of those "one in a million" circumstances. :smallwink:

[AstralFire]

I've taken Diehard and I would take a combined Diehard/Endurance feat. Diehard is also not very useful in most fights, but it's better, and more importantly it's cooler. I mean, I took Spell Thematics almost every time for my sorcerers before I got fed up entirely with Vancian casting and that has basically no mechanical benefit.

[SethFahad]

There is a distinct difference between "avoid ever putting the PCs in such a situation" and "avoid penalizing PCs for not building characters the way you think they should unless you make this clear beforehand."

Excuse me, You keep saying things about "penalizing" and "penalizing"... I know what I'm reading here...can you?
Who talked about penalizing?!?!? We are talking about circumstances that may happen.

So when you are starting a campaign, you must inform your players:
"Dear Pcs, I must inform you that in our campaign, nasty things may happen, and unfortunate situations may come at hand such as the following:
Deserts, dangerous mountain and cliff-hangers, stormy seas, bullrushes into deep ponds, mental assaults, running for your life situations, gorgeous half-naked girls, monstrous humanoids with class-levels, unfair prosecutions and imprisonments, tavern fist fights, hot weather, stormy weather, muddy ground, swamps, blah-blah-blah-blah….”

Give me a break...

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Kinda offtopic, but Diehard saved my life once. My 6th level Cleric was brought to exactly -9 hp by a lightning bolt. I healed myself next round - if I didn't have Diehard, none of my party would have reached me in time (I was also the only healer in the party). This was in one of my first 3.5 games - I blew three feats on Endurance, Diehard and Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword). Coincidentally, the first magic weapon we came accross was a +1 Frost Bastard Sword! :smalltongue:

One of those "one in a million" circumstances. :smallwink:

Don't you take 1 damage for casting the healing spell? That would have prevented you from healing because you'd be dead at the time of casting...

[AstralFire]

If you'd care to reread - my consistent stance has been that for Endurance to be a feat that is actually worth taking, you're going to have basically require a con check of some importance or having your armor on when you wake up basically every other session or so. If this was what you had in mind from the start, then yeah, you owe it to the players to give them some general idea of what to expect. The game's a mutual experience, and within a certain degree, DMs and PCs should try to accommodate one another. If you've been playing a D&D game for six months and you'd designed a diplomat only to have spent the entire time on the run from zombies... well, maybe you enjoy that. Could be fun with the right group; but it would have been more expedient and fair for the DM to give the player the idea that a diplomat with no combat skill wasn't going to rock in the campaign he had in mind.

I don't run construct heavy campaigns (note: campaign here, as in not a session or an arc) without hinting at my rogues to consider picking up alternate class features and feats that will let their sneak attack function in a wider variety of situations, for example.

[JonestheSpy]

I think Endurance could be buffed up a bit but is basically a good concept.

I also think that adventures should involve all kinds of hazards, some the characters are prepared for, some not. And if only one player has the Endurance feat when the heat wave hits, then hey, it's that player's turn to be in the spotlight.

BTW, I'd just like to say that this exact topic appeared awhile ago, and this thread is much better. Last one was all about the feat being useless because batman wizards and certain magic items could duplicate all of it's benefits (e.g no party ever ever has to force march because the wizard will summon a bunch of phantom steeds).

[AstralFire]

I've never said otherwise. :) A game that perfectly adheres to the party's strength is about as interesting combat-wise as Final Fantasy random encounters. I strongly advocate doing things that are unexpected, no less, and this is why I spend so much time planning. I just believe I owe it to my players to tell them when something is going to dramatically shift the tone or mechanics of the campaign for the long-term, or if they are making a character type that may be thematically or mechanically struggling through my initial plans.

And I like to pretend batman wizards don't exist. I don't like them in any regard, so I primarily acknowledge them when they're already brought up.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

The point of having an arcane caster is to take care of such problems, though.

[AstralFire]

The point of having an arcane caster is to take care of such problems, though.

The point of an arcane caster is to get back in the box of ysalamiri and continue shining my shoes or it gets the stick again.

[arguskos]

The point of an arcane caster is to get back in the box of ysalamiri and continue shining my shoes or it gets the stick again.
Uh, ysalamiri won't affect the caster at all, unless they suddenly are magic-draining along with force prevention. :smallconfused:

However, your point is understood (and amusing).

[Ungvar]

Is Endurance useless or usefull? :smallconfused:

Useful. "Useless" implies that is never, or at least almost never, of use to the PC. That's not really true, and you don't have to be traversing hostile climates to benefit from the feat. As several people have posted, the ability to wear medium or lighter armor during sleep and not be fatigued comes in handy. If your group is observing that rule, then Endurance can potentially come in handy every time you lay your head down to rest.

Still, while I would say it has it's uses, I would also say it generally isn't useful enough to justify taking, unless it's a prereq for a PrC (For example, it and Alertness are prereqs for Master of Many Forms). There are too many other better choices, mechanically speaking.

[WeeFreeMen]

Well. Its a pre-req for Steadfast Determination

Which my Fighter or Barbarian never leaves home without. So I say good :D

(But power-gamers will probably disagree)

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Steadfast Determination is good as far as I can tell.

[Kaiyanwang]

Well. Its a pre-req for Steadfast Determination

Which my Fighter or Barbarian never leaves home without. So I say good :D

(But power-gamers will probably disagree)



Steadfast Determination is good as far as I can tell.

P's F, This is an automatic declaration of being a powergamer :smallwink:

[Thespianus]

Taking skill tricks to give yourself flat skill bonuses is CHEESY and you know it. While Endurance could fill as such, I wouldn't put feats like Alertness and such as skill tricks, as why do the skill trick if you can just put those ranks into THE SKILL?!?

Uhm..You sacrify 2 actual ranks in order to gain +2 on two skills? That means that you can get some use from skills that you don't invest heavily in, or skills that are not class skills for you, which could help a skill point deprived character like a fighter to gain some help in social settings.

If a Fighter would want to boost his Diplomacy and Bluff with 2 ranks each, it costs him 8 skill points. It makes some kind of sense to me to allow some bonuses as skill tricks, but maybe it is cheese. low grade cheese, imho, though, compared to almost all other cheese ever.

[Thespianus]

Diehard is pretty Badass. Not a great feat, but c'mon. You're bleeding out, but you can still fight. Like, a friggin ice-pick could be lodged in your skull, and you could still kick ass. That, added to the environmental bonuses, bonus hp and +2 to Fort saves says more than "I'm Slightly Tougher than most people." Might not have all much mechanical benefit, but the imagery is still there.

Yeah, the imagery is worth some. Bundle Endurance and Diehard into the feat "Diehard Endurance" and I'm happy. ;)

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Yeah, the imagery is worth some. Bundle Endurance and Diehard into the feat "Diehard Endurance" and I'm happy. ;)

Starring Bruce Willis.

[Cieyrin]

Uhm..You sacrify 2 actual ranks in order to gain +2 on two skills? That means that you can get some use from skills that you don't invest heavily in, or skills that are not class skills for you, which could help a skill point deprived character like a fighter to gain some help in social settings.

If a Fighter would want to boost his Diplomacy and Bluff with 2 ranks each, it costs him 8 skill points. It makes some kind of sense to me to allow some bonuses as skill tricks, but maybe it is cheese. low grade cheese, imho, though, compared to almost all other cheese ever.

The thing you forget is that Skill Tricks have requirements to be met to qualify for them, which for those feats would probably be at least those 2 skills for with a rank a piece, at minimum, which kinda defeats your purpose, anyways.

Plus, why would you want your fighter doing face duty? Sure, some Fighters may have an actual charisma bonus but they don't have the skill points to actually afford the skill trick involved. I suppose the Human Fighter investing in the Combat Expertise tree may have the skill points to but that's getting a little too MAD already. I just don't think skill tricks are the right venue for blanket skill bonuses. That's what you're supposed to be using your skill points for if you want to improve said skills. Plus, I don't think feats like Alertness are on Endurance's level of useful, as those perception bonuses can be the difference in keeping you from being shanked in some back alley and are pretty valuable skills to have a good bonuses in, to boot.

Them's my 2 coppers. Take as you will.

[Thrawn183]

Endurance is soooooooo worth it for Steadfast Determination.

[Indon]

Very, very few feats are useless. Those that are are generally so because of poor wording or very, very poor design.

Endurance, however, is not particularly useful in and of itself.

A good measure is, "How does this feat compare with five skill points?" the benefit of Open Minded, a feat that grants 5 skill points and can be taken repeatedly.

Instead of Endurance, a Fighter could take Open-minded, invest in Swim, and have a much lower chance of ever, say, needing to make con checks to avoid drowning. Or, he could invest in Survival and be able to avoid needing to make con checks to take damage in hot or cold environments.

Also, PRC's, other feat qualifications, attacked by dire alligators in the middle of the night, etc.

[Kallisti]

Is Endurance useless or usefull? :smallconfused:

On its own, Endurance is basically useless. It lets you sleep in your medium armor without penalties in the morning, which can come in handy for some games, but see also: Steadfast Determination (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Steadfast_Determination,all), Indomitable Soul (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Indomitable_Soul,all), and, of course, Diehard.

[Thespianus]

The thing you forget is that Skill Tricks have requirements to be met to qualify for them, which for those feats would probably be at least those 2 skills for with a rank a piece, at minimum, which kinda defeats your purpose, anyways.
That's a good point, and I don't have anything to say about that. It slipped my mind.


Plus, why would you want your fighter doing face duty?
Well, because in plenty of scenarios (at least in my book) you don't have a complete party interacting as an individual with everyone the party-unit meets. Sometimes, the fighter have to interact with the court bard, sometimes the wizard have to interact with the king's advisor, etc.

I've never read a fantasy book where only the "face" uses social skills, and I've never seen a real life group of people act that way either.

My two cents.

[Eldariel]

That's a good point, and I don't have anything to say about that. It slipped my mind.


Well, because in plenty of scenarios (at least in my book) you don't have a complete party interacting as an individual with everyone the party-unit meets. Sometimes, the fighter have to interact with the court bard, sometimes the wizard have to interact with the king's advisor, etc.

I've never read a fantasy book where only the "face" uses social skills, and I've never seen a real life group of people act that way either.

My two cents.

Yeah, this is one of the big reasons I give everyone 6-8 extra skillpoints. Characters shouldn't be forced to be blind or socially inept or such just because their class says so and party shouldn't be forced to only have one character capable of different things to cover them all.

And they shouldn't be forced to miss out on things like Appraise and Forgery just 'cause the Rogue had to spend his skillpoints on movement- and trap disarming and such and the Wizard was busy taking a variety of Knowledges.


Hell, I rarely see people taking ranks in physical skills just because they don't have the points for that. And I usually play with people who put at least 14 to Int just for skillpoints.

[quick_comment]

I've never read a fantasy book where only the "face" uses social skills, and I've never seen a real life group of people act that way either.


How about every country in the world?

[Cieyrin]

I'm not saying that no one else can fill in for someone else or do what some else does better by any means. Who am I to quash good roleplaying when it's called for but your typical fighter isn't gonna out persuade the court fop unless he punches him in the face and makes use of his strengths. Fighters are trained to trade blows, not make nicey nice but that by no means prevents them from doing so and if you want to invest a feat like Persuasive for RP purposes to show he has a bit of a silver tongue, I hope your DM awards you for it.

[Thurbane]

Don't you take 1 damage for casting the healing spell? That would have prevented you from healing because you'd be dead at the time of casting...

DISABLED (0 HIT POINTS)
When your current hit points drop to exactly 0, you’re disabled. You can only take a single move or standard action each turn (but not both, nor can you take full-round actions). You can take move actions without further injuring yourself, but if you perform any standard action (or any other strenuous action) you take 1 point of damage after the completing the act. Unless your activity increased your hit points, you are now at –1 hit points, and you’re dying.
Healing that raises your hit points above 0 makes you fully functional again, just as if you’d never been reduced to 0 or fewer hit points.
You can also become disabled when recovering from dying. In this case, it’s a step toward recovery, and you can have fewer than 0 hit points (see Stable Characters and Recovery, below).

The Diehard feat allows you to act as if disabled when a negative hit points, so I was OK after the curing. :smallsmile:

[Leewei]

I'm in the Endurance is sucky camp.

A character gets seven feats by level 20, excluding race and class bonuses. Endurance, similar to other feats and skills, is overshadowed by even low-level magic.

Water breathing is a 2nd level spell that easily stays up whole day, even in the middle levels. Items that confer this ability are quite affordable.

Fatigued after sleeping in your armor or exertion? Lesser restoration, another 2nd level spell, allows you to shrug it off just fine.

Feats and classes that require Endurance may be worthwhile, but that just shows that the game designers also consider this feat to be a relatively worthless barnacle.

Rolling Die Hard and Endurance together into a single feat sounds about right.

[Thurbane]

The ToEE computer games uses Great Fortitude instead of Endurance as the prereq for Diehard...

[Forbiddenwar]

The ToEE computer games uses Great Fortitude instead of Endurance as the prereq for Diehard...

so perhaps endurance and great fortitude should be combined

[Thurbane]

so perhaps endurance and great fortitude should be combined
That would make sense. And maybe Lighnting Reflexes could be rolled in with Dodge.

[Kallisti]

The ToEE computer games uses Great Fortitude instead of Endurance as the prereq for Diehard...

You know, I really like that fix. There's really no good reason to make people take endurance. On its, it's utterly useless. A game without Endurance sounds good...

[Forbiddenwar]

That would make sense. And maybe Lighnting Reflexes could be rolled in with Dodge.

That sounds good as well. Though for Dodge, I tend to just ignore the "select target" portion and have it as just a flat +1 stackable with everything to AC. even then, it still seems weak.

[Gnaeus]

A good measure is, "How does this feat compare with five skill points?" the benefit of Open Minded, a feat that grants 5 skill points and can be taken repeatedly.

That isn't bad, but added to it needs to be "how easy is this feat to duplicate with low cost methods"?

For example, Improved Critical is clearly useful, and way better than 5 skill points, but optimizers don't often take it, because the cost of getting a keen weapon is less than the cost of a feat.

Endurance is worth less than some mithril armor and a wand of resist elements (maybe an eternal wand of RE, if you know you are going to spend a lot of time in bad terrain). The armor is worth getting anyway, and the wand is cheap even at low levels. That is a bad deal.

The two exceptions I can think of are as a prerequisite for something else, in which case endurance isn't useful, it is a step in a build, or as a level 1 feat in a game with liberal retraining rules. "We are starting in the desert, so I will take endurance, but by level 3 it is gone!".

[Indon]

That isn't bad, but added to it needs to be "how easy is this feat to duplicate with low cost methods"?

For example, Improved Critical is clearly useful, and way better than 5 skill points, but optimizers don't often take it, because the cost of getting a keen weapon is less than the cost of a feat.

Endurance is worth less than some mithril armor and a wand of resist elements (maybe an eternal wand of RE, if you know you are going to spend a lot of time in bad terrain). The armor is worth getting anyway, and the wand is cheap even at low levels. That is a bad deal.
That one's also a good measurement, though it can get tricky - for instance, with Keen, well, a +1 weapon enhancement is pretty valuable, since it effectively becomes more valuable as your character level increases. A scabbard of keen edges, however, is a better comparison, and a fairly good deal compared to the feat.

As for mithril armor, Endurance actually works quite well with it - since Endurance allows you to sleep in mithril Full Plate and other otherwise heavy armors.


The two exceptions I can think of are as a prerequisite for something else, in which case endurance isn't useful, it is a step in a build, or as a level 1 feat in a game with liberal retraining rules. "We are starting in the desert, so I will take endurance, but by level 3 it is gone!".

Also, games with additional houseruled feats (such as the E6 ruleset).

[Kylarra]

The main thing that people seem to be toting is the ability to sleep in med/heavy armor without penalty, but dungeonscape's "Restful" property which costs only 500g allows for that too, so it sort of puts a damper on Endurance's value when its main feature is replicated for 500g.

[Cieyrin]

Let's just stick a fork in it and call it an RP feat and be done with it. You take it as a prereq for something else and that's about it.

[ericgrau]

Is Endurance useless or usefull? :smallconfused:
Yes.
It is extremely useful under the right circumstances if your DM pays attention to things involving its many different advantages in his campaign, and useless if not. It only seems useless since a lot of DMs handwave travel, environmental hazards and sleep. These are things every adventurer does, but not something every gamer pays the slightest attention to.

[Thespianus]

How about every country in the world?

Well, if you treat "countries" as only having one "face", then yes. But normally you have 20 cabinet members, you have one president, you have some kind of senate and some kind of house of representatives.

There's more than one person who uses social skills in a country. You may rely on this. ;)

[Thespianus]

Yeah, this is one of the big reasons I give everyone 6-8 extra skillpoints. Characters shouldn't be forced to be blind or socially inept or such just because their class says so and party shouldn't be forced to only have one character capable of different things to cover them all.
Yeah, I agree. My current DM gave everyone 2 more skill points/level, and the Able Learner feat for free, just to encourage us to branch off into more than the bare essentials.

It's very good, imho, at least if the characters are treated as social individuals in the campaign, and you don't see the party as a fighting unit only.

[Cieyrin]

Well, if you treat "countries" as only having one "face", then yes. But normally you have 20 cabinet members, you have one president, you have some kind of senate and some kind of house of representatives.

There's more than one person who uses social skills in a country. You may rely on this. ;)

Aww, but I love the Planet of Hats explanation, though. :smalltongue:

[Eldariel]

Yeah, I agree. My current DM gave everyone 2 more skill points/level, and the Able Learner feat for free, just to encourage us to branch off into more than the bare essentials.

It's very good, imho, at least if the characters are treated as social individuals in the campaign, and you don't see the party as a fighting unit only.

Yeah. Not sure if it's clear, but I give everyone 6-8 extra points per level, so Fighter has 8 base points per level and Rogue has 16. It works really well. Like I've already mentioned, we've had everything from Appraise to Decipher Script used! Also, a 2-player game is very doable when both guys are perfectly capable of maxing out a good half of their skills.

[AstralFire]

Yeah. Not sure if it's clear, but I give everyone 6-8 extra points per level, so Fighter has 8 base points per level and Rogue has 16. It works really well. Like I've already mentioned, we've had everything from Appraise to Decipher Script used! Also, a 2-player game is very doable when both guys are perfectly capable of maxing out a good half of their skills.

I will never forget the Campaign when I used Forgery to single handedly win an entire military battle. :smallbiggrin: