PDA

View Full Version : House Rule: Epic Feat Exchange (3.5, PEACH)



TabletopNuke
2009-12-13, 08:52 PM
House Rule: Epic Feat Exchange:
When a character has the opportunity to select a new epic feat that isn't from a restricted list (such as the epic wizard bonus feats), they can instead select any two non-epic feats for which they meet the prerequisites.

For this house rule to take effect, the character must have a character level of 21 or higher. This rule does not take effect if the character's eligibility to take epic feats comes from a class feature, feat, or other special ability.

deuxhero
2009-12-13, 10:15 PM
Wouldn't making an [epic] feat that gives you two non-epic feats be easier than a rule?


That said, 2 non-epic feats>>>>>most epic feats. (infact, the same could be said for 1 non-epic feat).

TabletopNuke
2009-12-13, 11:12 PM
Wouldn't making an [epic] feat that gives you two non-epic feats be easier than a rule?


That said, 2 non-epic feats>>>>>most epic feats. (infact, the same could be said for 1 non-epic feat).

1 non-epic feat>epic feat? What is this?

Comparing PH and ELH feats, I found:

Epic Will/Ref/Fort (+4 Bonus) vs. Lightning Reflexes/Great Fortitude/Iron Will (+2 Bonus)

Armor Skin (+2 Natural Armor) vs. Improved Natural Armor (+1 Natural Armor)

Comparisons like these are how I came to the exchange rate.

Boci
2009-12-13, 11:34 PM
1 non-epic feat>epic feat? What is this?

Comparing PH and ELH feats, I found:

Epic Will/Ref/Fort (+4 Bonus) vs. Lightning Reflexes/Great Fortitude/Iron Will (+2 Bonus)

Armor Skin (+2 Natural Armor) vs. Improved Natural Armor (+1 Natural Armor)

Comparisons like these are how I came to the exchange rate.

There are several epic feats which are pretty weak, to the point that a non-epic feat will benefit most builds better.

Random_person
2009-12-13, 11:36 PM
And furthermore, I would say that this is a slight power boost anyway, since you are giving the option of getting more options (if that makes sense). Also, all venerable dragonwrought kobolds everywhere just fell in love with you.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-13, 11:54 PM
Also, all venerable dragonwrought kobolds everywhere just fell in love with you.

And why is that? I've never played with dragonwrought builds.

Milskidasith
2009-12-14, 12:35 AM
It has to be loredrake... and they can take epic feats at level 1, meaning they now get double feats.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-14, 01:10 AM
It has to be loredrake... and they can take epic feats at level 1, meaning they now get double feats.

What's "loredrake"?

If this problem came up, the obvious solution would be to rule that the character has to actually be at epic level to gain the benefit of the house rule.

deuxhero
2009-12-14, 09:22 AM
1 non-epic feat>epic feat? What is this?

Comparing PH and ELH feats, I found:

Epic Will/Ref/Fort (+4 Bonus) vs. Lightning Reflexes/Great Fortitude/Iron Will (+2 Bonus)

Armor Skin (+2 Natural Armor) vs. Improved Natural Armor (+1 Natural Armor)

Comparisons like these are how I came to the exchange rate.

Exactly. Most epic feats (except the broken spell casting ones) are just that, linear increases to an attribute. There is a TON of stuff you can get with a feat, with an epic feat you get a (at that point, very small) bonus to an ability (just go look up some character builds and see how many use "boost" feats like that for anything but qualifications).

Loredrake is a LA +0 template for dragons that boosts casting ability by 2 levels (in exchange for d10 hit dice and not having cleric spells on it's list). It's intended for gold, silver, red, blue ect. "true dragons" (and is decently balanced if you are using them) but RAW a DW Kobold qualifies as a true dragon and loses nothing to take it. (DW Kobold, as an "adult" "True Dragon" also qualifys for epic feats, they only use "great *casting stats*" for the most part IIRC)

TabletopNuke
2009-12-14, 03:24 PM
Exactly. Most epic feats (except the broken spell casting ones) are just that, linear increases to an attribute. There is a TON of stuff you can get with a feat, with an epic feat you get a (at that point, very small) bonus to an ability (just go look up some character builds and see how many use "boost" feats like that for anything but qualifications).

What would you suggest, then? Should I just dump the rule? I still find the idea that regular feats are often better than epic feats hard to swallow.


Loredrake is a LA +0 template for dragons that boosts casting ability by 2 levels (in exchange for d10 hit dice and not having cleric spells on it's list). It's intended for gold, silver, red, blue ect. "true dragons" (and is decently balanced if you are using them) but RAW a DW Kobold qualifies as a true dragon and loses nothing to take it. (DW Kobold, as an "adult" "True Dragon" also qualifys for epic feats, they only use "great *casting stats*" for the most part IIRC)

What sourcebook is this from? Wouldn't it be fair to rule that the kobold gets 1 less HP at each level, like the true dragons would?

Milskidasith
2009-12-14, 03:38 PM
What would you suggest, then? Should I just dump the rule? I still find the idea that regular feats are often better than epic feats hard to swallow.

That's because epic feats are supposed to be epic... but they're crappy. There are a few cool ones, but nothing really epic besides the spellcasting ones. It does, however, help martial characters out, because they can at least kill things with HP damage in 3 different ways instead of one.




What sourcebook is this from? Wouldn't it be fair to rule that the kobold gets 1 less HP at each level, like the true dragons would?

Rule 0 is not RAW. Plus, a dragon with class levels doesn't have it's class levels HD lowered. As it stands, only your RHD are lowered, and a DW kobold, lacking in RHD, is still a True Dragon.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-14, 03:42 PM
So I should dump the house rule?

What does RAW stand for?

Milskidasith
2009-12-14, 03:44 PM
So I should dump the house rule?

It's not a bad one, just relatively pointless. It helps out melee and spellcasters stay the same, which means optimization-wise, it almost helps (not really, since casters still win), but if your group doesn't optimize, then it might unfairly help melee, not that they would know the best feats at that level.


What does RAW stand for?

Rules As Written. Basically, people agree to discuss based on RAW because you can't have a reasonable discussion about balance when people start saying "As a DM, I change X so it's balanced (simplified to 'Rule 0')"

dsmiles
2009-12-14, 03:46 PM
*looks left and right*
"Whew! I thought I saw a Pun-Pun run through here!
*jumps out of thread into threadspace*

TabletopNuke
2009-12-14, 03:53 PM
It's not a bad one, just relatively pointless. It helps out melee and spellcasters stay the same, which means optimization-wise, it almost helps (not really, since casters still win), but if your group doesn't optimize, then it might unfairly help melee, not that they would know the best feats at that level.

So should it stay or go? Or should it be used on a case by case basis?


*looks left and right*
"Whew! I thought I saw a Pun-Pun run through here!
*jumps out of thread into threadspace*

Does anyone else appreciate the irony in the fact that kobolds, one of the most openly mocked and "useless" races, are the best ones for game-breaking?

jokey665
2009-12-14, 03:54 PM
Does anyone else appreciate the irony in the fact that kobolds, one of the most openly mocked and "useless" races, are the best ones for game-breaking?

Of course. Kobolds always do it better, even if most people don't know about it.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-14, 03:56 PM
Of course. Kobolds always do it better, even if most people don't know about it.
It's totally in-character for kobolds as presented in Races of Dragon!

DracoDei
2009-12-14, 06:19 PM
I would keep it. It is Lore-drake that is broken, not that rule. Probably ditto for other things that people might bring up about getting Epic feats at pre-Epic levels or whatever... the idea about requiring them to actually BE Epic is probably a good start if you actually need to write down some better rules for it.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-14, 08:20 PM
Alright, I added that as a note.

Barbarian MD
2009-12-15, 01:12 PM
Epic feats really are poor. But then again, I suppose everything in the SRD is fairly underpowered, compared with the supplements...

Are you allowing supplements in your game? If you're only using the SRD, then I think your rule is fine.

If you're using supplements, you might think about allowing characters to homebrew their own epic feats, and then either try to keep them all balanced yourself, or run them by the board to see if they're balanced or abuse-able. This lets you impose some balance on the players, and prevents things from being game breaking while still letting them really personalize what should truly be epic abilities.

Eldan
2009-12-15, 01:26 PM
Yes, epic feats are poor. Think about it: what's in there for a frontline fighter?
You take dire charge. Maybe, as a tripper, one or two combat reflex feats, okay. Maybe, maybe, you find one other feat. And then? As a fighter, you still get tons of feats.
You can take epic prowess, for +1 to attack. Hahahaha.
Or you take, I don't know...
Martial Stance? Expeditious Dodge? Elusive Target? Heck, I'd rather take Improved Toughness thank +4 to a save at these levels! There are probably dozens of good non-epic feats for most builds, but only two or three good epic ones worth taking. After that, the fighter still gets tons of teats, but no epic feats to take.

On the other hand, I can almost see the point in this now: the only people with good epic feats are spellcasters. They get improved metamagic, multispell and automatic quicken for the umpteenth time and epic spellcasting. Fighters get twice the number of nonepics. Makes it slightly fairer.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-15, 05:38 PM
Yeah, I play with just about every 3.5 supplement out there.

I'd definitely allow (balanced) homebrew epic feats. And there's always those epic warlock feats. <3

Any ideas for homebrew epic feats with nonspellcasters in mind that would help out this house rule?

What about Epic Improved Toughness, which would grant 2 HP per HD?

Eldan
2009-12-15, 05:47 PM
The problem is that feats which provide fixed numerical benefits are rarely worth it: every really good feat, which few exceptions, gives you a new mechanic, or at least the ability to add a variable to something, i.e. a stat, such as charisma to armour.
It's much more work, but technically, you would have to homebrew feats which give non-casters new abilities. Casters get to cast more spells per turn, or they get automatic metamagic, or epic spells. No matter how large the numerical benefits of a feat, the casters will outperform that at some level with enough stacking of spells.

DracoDei
2009-12-15, 06:00 PM
"per HD" makes it variable... although linearly so. "Linear fighters, Quadradatic wizards"... Although I don't know if stat bonuses tend to scale quadratically with level either.

TabletopNuke
2009-12-15, 06:17 PM
What do you guys recommend, then?