Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 31
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    With 3 new feats(Superb Talent, Rupture Magic, and Calculated Movement) and a new opposed roll system for Flash step, I think its time to give this 'brew another go at the PEACHing. Note that this has not yet taken epic play into consideration, so expect some wonkyness to happen at ECL 21+. Also note that to even begin taking these feats requires the investment of 6 levels, which means full-casters must sacrifice 8th level spells at a minimum to even begin the feat chain.

    Also, this system falls into little tiny pieces in gestalt, so don't use it there.

    Without further ado:

    Ascendant Feats
    The fool believes that magic is power. True warriors know that magic is merely a shortcut for the weak. The strong earn the right to wield it, an honor unmatched among the 'mages' of this land.
    -Allan, the first Ascendant.

    Rules
    Ascendant feats are a collection of related feats, each dealing with unlocking the potency of a person's body without the assistance of 'cheating'(read: magic). The abilities granted by an Ascendant feat is always extraordinary, unless specifically mentioned. Additionally, unlike most feats, Ascendant feats require dedicated training of the body without the use of magic, and thus, levels in any class that bypasses this training to obtain magical or psionic power cheaply is worthless and can't be used to qualify for these feats*. That means that if a feat has a BAB requirement of +3, a Fighter 1/Wizard 4 would not qualify. Finally, if a class may be used to qualify for Ascendant feats, he may choose an Ascendant feat instead of a class feat whenever he receives a bonus feat, even if it is from a restricted list.

    *This includes psionics, vancian, invocation, binding, essentia and initiators. This list is not exhaustive, so DM discretion is required for other classes, but those that definitely qualify are rogue, scout, fighter, barbarian, monk, and swashbuckler.

    The feats:

    True Potential [Ascendant]
    Steel sharpens steel, and like so does one man sharpen another. Only by facing death, delivered by a worthy foe, can we truly transcend our weaknesses and become truly powerful.
    Prerequisites:
    -Must have dueled an opponent of a CR at least equal to your ECL in deadly combat and won.
    -ECL 6
    Benefits: A player with this feat adds 1/4 of his HD to all skill checks. He is also now eligible to take Ascendant feats. This counts as a Ascendant feat for the purpose of determining the number of Ascendant feats a character has.

    Battle Stride [Ascendant]
    True warriors move across the battlefield with the grace and ferocity of lions.
    Prerequisites:
    -One [Ascendant] feat
    -ECL 8
    Benefits: You may move* up to your speed before any attack you make(including AoOs). You may do so a number of times per round equal to the number of your [Ascendant] feats. If you do so, you sacrifice a move action for this round.
    *Not 'take a move action', just simply 'move'.

    Eye of Tiger [Ascendant]
    With an enhanced awareness, you can take advantage of almost any opening
    Prerequisites:
    -Battle Stride
    -ECL 12
    Benefits: Your threatened area is determined by your reach + your speed.
    Normal: Your threatened area is determined by your reach with a melee weapon.

    Flash Step [Ascendant]
    You move at speeds so fast that even magic has to struggle to keep up.
    Prerequisites:
    -Any two [Ascendant] feats
    Benefits: Whenever you move, opponents must succeed on an opposed prowess check in order to react to your movement. Failure means that they can not react to your movement. Reactive magic(such as contingencies) uses its caster level as its prowess modifier. In this case, failure means that the magic will not trigger, unless you are still triggering the effect after making your movement. If you attack at the end of the movement, your first attack is treated as part of that movement for the purpose of determining if something can react to it.

    To determine a Character's prowess modifier:
    Spoiler
    Show
    A character's prowess modifier is determined in two steps. First, you add up all the pre-cap modifiers and penalties, and then you add on any post-cap modifiers or penalties. The 'cap' is +20 or the character's HD, whichever is lower.

    Pre-cap:
    -A character with class levels adds his full HD.
    -A character without class levels adds 3/4 HD.
    -A character that has abilities with multiple levels, or an ability with an effective spell level, power level, or similar, takes a penalty equal to the highest 'level' he's capable of using.
    -A character with more than 10 BAB adds (BAB-10).
    -A spell, power, or item adds its caster level.

    Post-cap:
    -A character adds half his total number of Ascendant feats, rounded up
    -A spell, power, or item adds its effective spell level.

    Examples:
    An antimagic field, cast by a L20 wizard has a prowess modifier of +26.
    The wizard has a prowess modifier of +11.
    His contingent dimension door(which was made at min prices) has a prowess of +11 as well.
    A L20 fighter, who has 12 Ascendant feats, has a prowess modifier of +26.
    A Solar has a prowess modifier of +19.
    An Old Black Dragon has a prowess modifier of +18.


    Improved Flash Step [Ascendant]
    Your speed improves even farther.
    Prerequisites:
    -Flash Step
    Benefits: Whenever an opponent fails a level check against your flash step, they are treated as flat footed against your next attack.

    Superb Talent [Ascendant]
    Your natural talent is apparent in everything you do. Nothing is too complicated or unfamiliar.
    Prerequisites:
    -True Potential
    -100 skill points
    Benefits: You may add a 1/2 HD bonus to any skill check you make, instead of using your rank in that skill. This stacks with the bonus gained from True Potential, gaining a total 3/4 HD bonus on skills where both apply.

    Calculated Movement [Ascendant] [Tactical]
    Your keen awareness allows you to react to your opponent's movement as it is happening.
    Prerequisites:
    -Flash Step
    -Battle Stride
    Benefits: Calculated Movement enables the use of two tactical options.
    Side Step: Whenever an opponent provokes an AoO from you due to movement, you may choose to forgo the AoO and instead move up to half your speed. Doing so counts against your limit of AoOs and Battle Strides for the round.
    Timing: Whenever an opponent provokes an AoO for movement, you may choose not to take the AoO. If you do, and the same movement would later cause him to leave a square you threaten, it provokes a new AoO.

    Rupture Magic [Ascendant]
    Your training has become so refined that you can bend the magic of others.
    Prerequisites:
    -Flash Step
    -Battle Stride
    Benefits: Whenever you make a battle stride, roll an opposed prowess check against any magical effect that would impose a penalty on your battle stride(either the attack or movement). If you succeed, you ignore that effect. This does not enable you to attack an opponent you otherwise would not be able to, such as an ethereal creature, but it might negate the miss chance associated with the blink spell. This also does not enable you to locate a creature you'd otherwise be unable to locate, such as a wizard inside a fog cloud(without proper senses), but if you start outside the fog cloud, it might negate the miss chance associated with attacking him. Additionally, any effect that is already affecting you can not be negated in this way, such as an antimagic field you're already inside of. Any effect negated this way immediately re-takes effect after your attack.
    Last edited by Godskook; 2010-04-12 at 06:52 PM.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    drakir_nosslin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Uppsala, Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    I'm not very good at homebrewing,but here's what I think: These feats are much more powerful (useful, perhaps?) than the normal ones. I really like the idea, and it would be interesting to try these out some time. Combining Eye of the Tiger with a trip build would make an awesome battle controller, but it doesn't help the fact that most non-magic user characters are one-trick ponies.

    The Superb Talent and True Potential are interesting, though ST can be hard to qualify for. Not gamebreaking, but the skillmonkey will love them.

    Keep up the good work!
    The sky's the sky wherever you go. People are people.
    Cogito ergo cogito
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandstorm, pg 140
    An ashworm can be an asset in the dessert
    More ashworm recipes coming next week!
    Crazy Awesome Avatar by Balford!

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by drakir_nosslin View Post
    I'm not very good at homebrewing,but here's what I think: These feats are much more powerful (useful, perhaps?) than the normal ones. I really like the idea, and it would be interesting to try these out some time. Combining Eye of the Tiger with a trip build would make an awesome battle controller, but it doesn't help the fact that most non-magic user characters are one-trick ponies.
    My original goal with this brew is to make a L20 fighter option that could actually stand a chance toe-to-toe against a L20 wizard. With rupture magic and flash step, I think I've given him at least a shot of negating a wizard's spells, and utterly ruined the 'cheap' defenses.

    Quote Originally Posted by drakir_nosslin View Post
    The Superb Talent and True Potential are interesting, though ST can be hard to qualify for. Not gamebreaking, but the skillmonkey will love them.
    Not really. A human fighter with a int score of 14 qualifies by default at L20, while any rogue with at least a 14 int score qualifies by L10. Considering the feat chain doesn't start until level 6, that looks pretty good, since that was among the more skill-monkey oriented feats in the set.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    How can this go 113+ views without more than a single comment???
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    How can this go 113+ views without more than a single comment???
    Dude. I had a thread with a brand new casting base class once. It went for almost 2k views and no commentary. It just means that they don't have much to add.

    I don't either, since my head is in a totally other place right now. I'll try and come back for another look later, sorry.

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Temotei's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    How can this go 113+ views without more than a single comment???
    Cue signature phrase: I've had worse.
    Base Class Contest XXIV - Will Breed for Class
    Chat Thread

    Homebrew
    Please feel free to PM me any thoughts on my homebrew (or comment in the thread if it's not too old).

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    drakir_nosslin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Uppsala, Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    My original goal with this brew is to make a L20 fighter option that could actually stand a chance toe-to-toe against a L20 wizard. With rupture magic and flash step, I think I've given him at least a shot of negating a wizard's spells, and utterly ruined the 'cheap' defenses.
    If that's your goal, I think that it would be easier to nerf the wizard instead of trying to pump up the fighter, or at least have them meet in the middle. The increased threat range makes it harder for the wizard to get off his first spell, but once he does the fighter is pretty much screwed so far. But, as I said, I like the idea. Keep 'em coming!


    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    Not really. A human fighter with a int score of 14 qualifies by default at L20, while any rogue with at least a 14 int score qualifies by L10. Considering the feat chain doesn't start until level 6, that looks pretty good, since that was among the more skill-monkey oriented feats in the set.
    Yea, but would you really take this feat at L20 as a fighter? That's right before spellcasters start to go nuts, either with epic casting or strange metamagic and too high spellslots.
    But, oth, for rogues I agree, L10 is good.
    The sky's the sky wherever you go. People are people.
    Cogito ergo cogito
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandstorm, pg 140
    An ashworm can be an asset in the dessert
    More ashworm recipes coming next week!
    Crazy Awesome Avatar by Balford!

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by drakir_nosslin View Post
    If that's your goal, I think that it would be easier to nerf the wizard instead of trying to pump up the fighter, or at least have them meet in the middle. The increased threat range makes it harder for the wizard to get off his first spell, but once he does the fighter is pretty much screwed so far. But, as I said, I like the idea. Keep 'em coming!
    Also, with the increased threat-range, Mage Slayer makes it difficult to cast anywhere near the fighter.

    Quote Originally Posted by drakir_nosslin View Post
    Yea, but would you really take this feat at L20 as a fighter? That's right before spellcasters start to go nuts, either with epic casting or strange metamagic and too high spellslots.
    But, oth, for rogues I agree, L10 is good.
    As said, its a rogue feat moreso than a fighter feat. Also, I was 3 levels too high on that estimate. A fighter with 5 skill points per level gets it at 17. Fighter is also the worst-case for that feat, and he can still do it pre-epic.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Bump, and lets see if I can get some comments.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Ok, sorry for the crazy delay. Been stupidly busy.

    Several things:
    1. I personally don't like them, not because they're bad (much the opposite), but because they have no feel, no flavor, nothing to give me an anchor so I can say "oh, that's how that might happen, ok". Not bad, not good, just my feeling.

    2. Calculated Movement is a Tactical feat. Why doesn't it have the [Tactical] tag?

    3. Calculated Movement can be acquired sans Battle Stride, yet references it directly in the text. Fix that somehow.

    4. Why does Battle Stride use a word that literally has no meaning in D&D outside of "move speed" or "move action", and specifically calls out that it is NOT a move action? Just make it a move action and say it doesn't provoke, which seems to be the intent. Also, does using Battle Stride consume your move action for the turn, or make it so you cannot TAKE a move action? The wording is unclear.

    Otherwise, things look fine mechanically. Granted, this isn't my area of expertise, but it seems ok generally.

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    Several things:
    1. I personally don't like them, not because they're bad (much the opposite), but because they have no feel, no flavor, nothing to give me an anchor so I can say "oh, that's how that might happen, ok". Not bad, not good, just my feeling.
    Could you expand on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    2. Calculated Movement is a Tactical feat. Why doesn't it have the [Tactical] tag?
    Because I didn't think to put that tag on it. Fixing.

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    3. Calculated Movement can be acquired sans Battle Stride, yet references it directly in the text. Fix that somehow.
    Fixing.

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    4. Why does Battle Stride use a word that literally has no meaning in D&D outside of "move speed" or "move action", and specifically calls out that it is NOT a move action? Just make it a move action and say it doesn't provoke, which seems to be the intent. Also, does using Battle Stride consume your move action for the turn, or make it so you cannot TAKE a move action? The wording is unclear.
    1.The wording is almost identical to Travel Devotion's, and is part of your 'attack action'.

    2.Its specifically not a move action for several reasons, including the inability to take move actions as a part of AoOs.

    3.Making it a move action means that you'd be limited to only two of them per turn unless you got more move actions somehow. Making them a part of an attack action enables you to do use it as many times as you can take attack actions(hence the additional limit, since one can get quite a few attacks).

    4.You sacrifice a move action to activate the option. If you battlestride, you get one less move action on your turn. Characters that can get additional move actions can still use them.

    For instance, a L9 fighter, who has True Potential, Battle Stride, Flash Step, Combat Reflexes and Dex 13 can use battle stride 3 times, as many as two as AoOs. If he uses a battle stride, he only gets one move/standard action on his turn(Which can be one of his battle strides if he wants).

    I'll try to clean up the wording.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    Could you expand on this?
    Not really. It boils down to "this doesn't FEEL right to me". The "why" is difficult to define, it's just a feeling. I mean, mechanically, they're fine pieces (even if I still dislike the wording on Battle Stride, it's at least functional and does what you want). I can't explain any further than "well, it just doesn't work for me". Sorry.

    As for the rest of it, well, ok then. Sounds good.

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    Not really. It boils down to "this doesn't FEEL right to me". The "why" is difficult to define, it's just a feeling. I mean, mechanically, they're fine pieces (even if I still dislike the wording on Battle Stride, it's at least functional and does what you want). I can't explain any further than "well, it just doesn't work for me". Sorry.
    Well, let's try this. Which path would most likely help:
    -Getting a different homebrewer to reword them so that they read better.
    -Add more and better fluff.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Pie Guy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    center of earth

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    More fluff, and perhaps a prestige class?

    Edit: Based around these feats that gets a few extra cool abilities.
    Last edited by Pie Guy; 2010-04-12 at 07:40 PM.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    Well, let's try this. Which path would most likely help:
    -Getting a different homebrewer to reword them so that they read better.
    -Add more and better fluff.
    Yes and yes? Both are always improvements to anything. But I think you're missing the point. I, personally, do not like the feel, and that's not gonna change. It's not a tangible thing. Same reason I don't personally use ToB, even when permitted: I don't like the feel of it, even though I understand it's a great mechanical system and all that jazz. The feel is just... off.

    Same reason they say that first impressions are the most important: because you make a decision about the person within 10 seconds of meeting them for the first time. If it's a bad one, it's not gonna change.

    *shrugs* Your feats are excellently done, but I personally don't like them. Can't explain any better why.

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    *shrugs* Your feats are excellently done, but I personally don't like them. Can't explain any better why.
    Darn.

    (Said just as Malcom did towards the end of Train Job)
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    Darn.

    (Said just as Malcom did towards the end of Train Job)
    Excellent reference. Though... I'd appreciate not being kicked into a turbine, thanks.

    Sorry about me and your feats. Not everything appeals to everyone, you know? I don't expect everyone (or that many folks really) to like my work.

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    Excellent reference. Though... I'd appreciate not being kicked into a turbine, thanks.
    Don't worry, I don't kick people into turbines(usually....but I do call her Vera).

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    Sorry about me and your feats. Not everything appeals to everyone, you know? I don't expect everyone (or that many folks really) to like my work.
    Agent Gibb's rule: Don't apologize.

    Seriously, you've at least given me a point of reference for how 'balanced' other 'brewers think these are, and coming from you, that alone means something pretty good.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    Don't worry, I don't kick people into turbines(usually....but I do call her Vera).
    Again, good man.

    Agent Gibb's rule: Don't apologize.

    Seriously, you've at least given me a point of reference for how 'balanced' other 'brewers think these are, and coming from you, that alone means something pretty good.
    Coming from me? Whazzat mean? I some kinda punk or somethin'? WHAT'CHU LOOKIN' AT, BOY?!

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Temotei's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    These are rather cool. They're well made and they help out the fighter, rogue, barbarian, etc. Not bad.

    My favorite is Battle Stride.

    I don't really have much to offer aside from what's been said already.
    Base Class Contest XXIV - Will Breed for Class
    Chat Thread

    Homebrew
    Please feel free to PM me any thoughts on my homebrew (or comment in the thread if it's not too old).

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Ok, these both need a bit of work, but if I didn't write them down, I wouldn't have a chance to clean them up:

    Exceptional Aim [Ascendant]
    Your extensive training has proven that to find your target, it is important to aim, not just at the target, but somewhere specific on your target.
    Prerequisites:
    -True Potential
    Benefits: Whenever you make an attack, describe your attack in greater detail and roll 1d6. On a 1, you gain no benefit from this feat. On anything else, add the result to your attack and damage roll for this attack. On a 6, your opponent must save or be inflicted with a status effect dependent on your description.

    (Need details, status effects and a save DC)

    Geppou [Ascendant]
    Great warriors surpass any limitation, and in a world of magical flight, a ground-bound warrior dies fast. By kicking the air quickly enough, you are able to propel yourself great distances into the air.
    Prerequisites:
    -Flash Step
    Benefits: All jump check DCs are treated as long jumps, and you're always treated as running. You may only move through the air(Jump) a distance indicated by your jump check. If you start your turn mid-air, you may make a jump check equal to 10 times the # of rounds you've been in the air. Success means you can continue moving, failure by ten or less indicates that you're unable to maintain, and must descend, and failure by more than ten indicates that you fall. Every round you remain on the ground reduces the number of rounds you've been in the air. If you ever fail by more than ten, you must stay aground for twice as many rounds as you had remained in the air. This ability requires use of all your legs.

    Example: You remain aloft for 4 rounds, then land, remaining aground for 2 before jumping off again. The next round, you must make a DC 30 jump check to stay aloft.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    The Rabbler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    the 64th layer
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Exceptional Aim [Ascendant]
    Your extensive training has proven that to find your target, it is important to aim, not just at the target, but somewhere specific on your target.
    Prerequisites:
    -True Potential
    Benefits: Whenever you make an attack, describe your attack in greater detail and roll 1d6. On a 1, you gain no benefit from this feat. On anything else, add the result to your attack and damage roll for this attack. On a 6, your opponent must save or be inflicted with a status effect dependent on your description.

    (Need details, status effects and a save DC)
    I hope this is still relevant...

    Spoiler
    Show

    arm/attack based limb: the attacked area is rendered useless for 1d%-(fast healing, regeneration (assuming the attack does not meet the regeneration requirements (I wasn't sure how to word that...)), and DR (assuming it does not penetrate the DR)) rounds. Save DC 10 + 1/2 damage targeted at Fort.

    leg/movement based limb: the limb is crippled and the enemy's applicable movement speed is reduced by damage/2 (round to the nearest increment of 5) ft. Save DC 10 + 1/2 damage targeted at Fort.

    Body: the target is struck with a devastating blow and takes 1/10*damage-(fast healing + regeneration + DR) con damage and all fast healing, regeneration, and DR are suppressed for a number of rounds equal to the amount of ability damage taken. Save DC 10 + 1/2 damage targeted at Fort.

    Head: the target is hit squarely on the forehead (or the most appropriate equivalent) and is stunned for 1/10*damage-(fast healing + regeneration + DR) rounds. During this time, the target takes 1d4 temporary ability damage to all mental ability scores. This damage lasts only as long as the target remains stunned. Save DC 10 + 1/2 damage targeted at Fort


    I hope some of that was good; it's my first attempt at homebrew. I tried to make it appropriate to use on monsters as well and factor in the monsters' natural regenerative qualities.
    *note: not all advice by this poster is meant to be taken seriously.

    Warlock/Swordsage avatar by yldenfrei

    optimization is like salt. a pinch here and there can't hurt, but too much will spoil everything.

    I have salty tastes.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rabbler View Post
    I hope some of that was good; it's my first attempt at homebrew. I tried to make it appropriate to use on monsters as well and factor in the monsters' natural regenerative qualities.
    Interesting thoughts, but there's a few problems with it in terms of D&D, and a few more in terms of my feat-set specifically:

    D&D:
    -Melee damage is incredibly variable based on build, making it nigh-impossible to balance a DC against, especially one that targets saves. The first playtest used skirmish to push damage, and has hit twice so far, for 9 and 36 damage(So, +4 and +18 to the DCs you suggested). A more damage optimized character could deal a consistent 100 damage per swing. This gets nasty far too fast for a 'balanced' feat unless the inflicted conditions are rather minor.
    -Basing everything on so many variables gets very messy, very fast, especially since there's no in-game control on how much of these features monsters or players will have.
    -You're 'double-dipping' on the DR, which may be a good idea for something like what you posted, but is confusing, and should definitely be done differently to avoid said confusion.

    These feats:
    -An Ascendant feat has value beyond what's printed on it, due to at least 3 current feats keying off the number of Ascendant feats you possess. If I cribbed Touch of Golden Ice, removed the evil-only limitation and gave it the [Ascendant] tag, it might just be too powerful, and Golden Ice has a low, static DC. I suppose this is the reason why I've had a hard time coming back to this feat. I'm glad I originally put the "only triggers save 1 in 6 times" part, cause that's a helper.
    -The 'classic' Ascendant modifier is (1/2 ascendant feats), and design-wise, it makes a good stand-in for spell level in formulas that target saves.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    The Rabbler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    the 64th layer
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Godskook View Post
    Interesting thoughts, but there's a few problems with it in terms of D&D, and a few more in terms of my feat-set specifically:

    D&D:
    -Melee damage is incredibly variable based on build, making it nigh-impossible to balance a DC against, especially one that targets saves. The first playtest used skirmish to push damage, and has hit twice so far, for 9 and 36 damage(So, +4 and +18 to the DCs you suggested). A more damage optimized character could deal a consistent 100 damage per swing. This gets nasty far too fast for a 'balanced' feat unless the inflicted conditions are rather minor.
    -Basing everything on so many variables gets very messy, very fast, especially since there's no in-game control on how much of these features monsters or players will have.
    -You're 'double-dipping' on the DR, which may be a good idea for something like what you posted, but is confusing, and should definitely be done differently to avoid said confusion.

    These feats:
    -An Ascendant feat has value beyond what's printed on it, due to at least 3 current feats keying off the number of Ascendant feats you possess. If I cribbed Touch of Golden Ice, removed the evil-only limitation and gave it the [Ascendant] tag, it might just be too powerful, and Golden Ice has a low, static DC. I suppose this is the reason why I've had a hard time coming back to this feat. I'm glad I originally put the "only triggers save 1 in 6 times" part, cause that's a helper.
    -The 'classic' Ascendant modifier is (1/2 ascendant feats), and design-wise, it makes a good stand-in for spell level in formulas that target saves.
    I thought it would be better to key it off damage because of damage's variability. if you don't hurt the creature very much, it shouldn't be very hard to shrug off the damage; conversely, if you hit really hard, it should be very difficult to ignore it. And I was trying to make it a threat to monsters at higher levels. 10 + 1/2 ascendant feats is a very easy save for most monsters and shouldn't even be that much of a challenge against wizards unless the fighter has ignored all feats other than ascendant feats (and even then it'd be only slightly harder). and a fighter without power attack isn't going to hit all that hard.

    This way, the feat doesn't depend on the fighter having gotten all of the ascendant feats (even though it isn't a bad idea) to make the feat viable.

    EDIT: though I do agree that + 1/2 damage is a bit much. maybe something like + 1/4 damage.

    IDEA! maybe the number of rounds/number of ability damage taken should be keyed off ascendant feats? so instead of a static 2d6, it'll progress as more feats are picked up.
    Last edited by The Rabbler; 2010-05-17 at 03:37 PM.
    *note: not all advice by this poster is meant to be taken seriously.

    Warlock/Swordsage avatar by yldenfrei

    optimization is like salt. a pinch here and there can't hurt, but too much will spoil everything.

    I have salty tastes.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rabbler View Post
    I thought it would be better to key it off damage because of damage's variability.
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rabbler View Post
    10 + 1/2 ascendant feats is a very easy save for most monsters and shouldn't even be that much of a challenge against wizards unless the fighter has ignored all feats other than ascendant feats (and even then it'd be only slightly harder).
    1.The 'standard' save equation is:

    10 + spell level + ability modifier, and if its ok for wizards, its not horrible for fighters. It'll need a little adjusting, since there's no 'obvious' ability mod to use in it, and I really don't want to use strength since that one is too easily boosted.

    2.When you say 'easy', does that mean you missed my comment on Touch of Golden Ice? That's DC 14.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rabbler View Post
    and a fighter without power attack isn't going to hit all that hard.
    Le sigh.

    Ascendant feats don't prevent you from taking power attack. Not only that, but if I did this right, Fighter 20 is a viable build, which means that spare feats for a feat-chain isn't a big issue, especially at early levels when you haven't yet opened the [Ascendant] chain yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Rabbler View Post
    This way, the feat doesn't depend on the fighter having gotten all of the ascendant feats (even though it isn't a bad idea) to make the feat viable.
    The feat I wrote already gives a bonus on attacks and damage comparable to Knowledge Devotion. I'm not really worried about it needing more viability than that for the dip-minded player.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Ok, after having built a character and started my first pvp playtest(ongoing), I want to post some thoughts:

    -Spring Attack, surprisingly, is far more synergistic than Flyby Attack, since action type is not specified. This allows me to make spring attacks of opportunities, a combo I did not consider until after my first build was complete. Probably worth the feat chain. Next build is going to try to utilize HiPS with this.

    -Its possible to squeeze all 8 of the 1st post's feats into a L13 build, surprisingly, but it requires high intelligence, a stat that's not incredibly useful to the feat-chain otherwise, and only mildly so to qualify for combat expertise based feats if desired, and even then, dips can get them anyway.

    Revisions(Will update original post once current fight is over):
    -Flash Step - Change "If you attack at the end of the movement" to "If you attack as part of the movement" - The original wording produces a 'dumb' situation when combined with spring attack, where attacking mid-movement denies you the benefits of Flash Step, and there's no logical reason for that. Considering the 3-feat investment required to get spring attack, I see no problem in cleaning this wording up. Without this change, you wind up with a 'dumb' scenario, where you can attack an opponent as part of a flash-stepped battle stride, but still not get the prowess check you should be entitled to, since you're also spring attacking, and thus, not attacking at the end of the charge.

    -Battle Stride - Clarify that in order to move, you must be able to make the attack that qualified you to move, as caveated as this sentence is. I.e., the feat as written allows a player to move in such a way that prevents him from taking the AoO that allowed the movement in the first place. Its dumb that I missed this in the original wording, and important that I allow the ability to move away from an opponent to exist as a separate feat.

    -Superb Talent - Change bonus to a 'rank' bonus, thus making all skill checks count as trained, even if not.

    -Eye of the Tiger - reminder text to specify that this only improves your threatened area, not your reach, and thus, if you want to hit an opponent who is outside your reach but in your threatened area, you need to move to do so.
    Last edited by Godskook; 2010-05-19 at 01:04 AM.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Hyooz's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    I have to agree with Arguskos. I'm not a fan. It's not that they're necessarily bad or overpowered (though, an argument could be made that some of them are) but they just feel... artificial, if that makes sense. And yes, I know they are artificial, and so is everything else DnD, but they lack any kind of non-mechanical explanation for why you can do all of these things, and they're just too... perfect. I dunno. Especially with the entirely nonsensical 'magical classes don't count for this' clause. It just seems like there was a list somewhere of things fighters can't do so these feats exist to let them do those things. It's not necessarily a bad thing, like I said. I just don't like the feel.
    Last edited by Hyooz; 2010-05-19 at 02:10 AM.

    Current Contest Entries:

    Prestige Class Contest: In the Shadows -The Ghost Wyrm

    Base Class Contest: Altar of Naught - The Nihilist

    Monster Competition: Beings of Legend - The Omni Template

    Spoiler
    Show


  28. - Top - End - #28
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2010

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    For those of you who are having trouble with the flavor: this is extreme wuxia. Bleach flavor, in fact. So Shounen(?) Anime (Dragonball Z, Naruto, etc).

    -Battle Stride definitely needs that revision. If I'm to understand it right, it really doesn't give any benefit on your turn (not a bad thing). So by saying "I give up my next turn's move action", you can start moving your speed to catch AoEs. So it's just a stepping stone to the more-encompassing Eye of Tiger (if I'm not missing anything...)

    -True Potential: Since its benefit is only increased out-of-combat-ability, perhaps adding a prereq of "2 ranks in any 2 cross-class skills" would be nice to give the idea of the warrior who's tried to push himself to the edge in every way? Has an odd effect of making it impossible for pure factotums to get in, I suppose.

    -I'm not seeing the caster exemption in the reqs. So I'm assuming the ECL reqs are following that rule? So a Fighter 6/wizard 6, while ECL 12, would only be considered ECL 6 and thus, ineligible for Battle Stride? I think that could be made a bit more clear in the prereqs themselves (e.g. "Martial ECL 6").

    -Would you consider re-working the (anti-) spellcasting entry requirements? Something I was thinking about would be something like: if you have 7-9th level spells, you lose the use of all Ascendant feats. If you can cast 6th level spells, you lose the benefit of all Ascendant feats but one (True Potential). If you can cast 5th level spells, you may have up to 2 Ascendant feats (True Potential plus 1 other). 4th level spells: 3 feats, 3rd level: 4 feats, 2nd level: 5 feats, 1st level or less: unaffected.

    Yeah, something like that. Use your own growth if you want. But with something like that, Paladins and Rangers could get a healthy chunk of Ascendant feats, but they're still hindered by the fact they DO have casting (it hurts their prowess, for one) and thus, can't take as many feats. It would give Duskblades 2 feats, and Bards would only be able to take True Potential, which is humorously fitting.

    A simpler growth could be: 7-9th: none. 5-6th: 1. 1-4th: 2. No casting: unlimited.

    The other reason I was thinking it'd be nice to change it: the idea of calculating how many of my prereqs "don't count" could get really ugly. "Wait, this Ascendant feat requires Combat Expertise, which I grabbed at level 6. But my 6th level was Sorcerer 2. So I need to re-pick up Combat Expertise?"

    -Also, would love to see some of these for more flavors. Some ultimate tank stuff always sits well with me. Some serene/wisdom type combatant feats would be neat, too. Though one design I'd avoid: +damage. Melee have enough of that. I think I'm preaching to the choir with this, but melee need tricks to enable their schticks, whatever they may be, in more scenarios and against a wider variety of targets.
    Last edited by Pechvarry; 2010-05-19 at 03:43 AM.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Orc in the Playground
     
    blueblade's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    TC, this seems to have gotten you a little bogged down. I just wanted to come in and say that I like these feats, and I don't think there's anything wrong with at least the core set from a mechanical PoV.

    However, I kind of get the point about the feats not quite sitting right. Some of them are too powerful to be mere feats. There's nothing wrong with beefing up Fighter/Martial class 20, but you kind of make it so these feats are vastly better than most standard fighter feats, which can rub some people the wrong way. I think it might work a little better as a 3/5 level PrC with some good fluff on it, but maybe that's just me.
    Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

    Fantastic avatar created by artist extraordinaire, Kwarkpudding

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ascendant Feats [3.5]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyooz View Post
    but they lack any kind of non-mechanical explanation for why you can do all of these things,
    Strangely, so does almost all the fighter oriented feats in the PHB. Power Attack simply says "You can make exceptionally strong melee attacks". It gives no idea of how.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    -Battle Stride definitely needs that revision. If I'm to understand it right, it really doesn't give any benefit on your turn (not a bad thing). So by saying "I give up my next turn's move action", you can start moving your speed to catch AoEs. So it's just a stepping stone to the more-encompassing Eye of Tiger (if I'm not missing anything...)
    Battle Stride still has uses pre-EotT. (Thinks for a minute) Consider this, Batte Stride allows you to move before an AoO, so that charging warrior about to attack you, despite your superior reach? Move behind him and smack him in the back. You've now negated his charge, as concerns you. And then you can charge him with a partial charge on your turn.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    -True Potential: Since its benefit is only increased out-of-combat-ability, perhaps adding a prereq of "2 ranks in any 2 cross-class skills" would be nice to give the idea of the warrior who's tried to push himself to the edge in every way? Has an odd effect of making it impossible for pure factotums to get in, I suppose.
    True Potential is supposed to be a feat-tax, honestly. And considering that I know this stuff hits tier 3 Test of Spite, I'm not easing the entry costs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    -I'm not seeing the caster exemption in the reqs. So I'm assuming the ECL reqs are following that rule?
    You saw it, right here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    So a Fighter 6/wizard 6, while ECL 12, would only be considered ECL 6 and thus, ineligible for Battle Stride?
    --------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    I think that could be made a bit more clear in the prereqs themselves (e.g. "Martial ECL 6").
    I suppose.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    -Would you consider re-working the (anti-) spellcasting entry requirements? Something I was thinking about would be something like: if you have 7-9th level spells, you lose the use of all Ascendant feats. If you can cast 6th level spells, you lose the benefit of all Ascendant feats but one (True Potential). If you can cast 5th level spells, you may have up to 2 Ascendant feats (True Potential plus 1 other). 4th level spells: 3 feats, 3rd level: 4 feats, 2nd level: 5 feats, 1st level or less: unaffected.
    Not to that, no, nor could I adjust the curve to make it work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    Yeah, something like that. Use your own growth if you want. But with something like that, Paladins and Rangers could get a healthy chunk of Ascendant feats, but they're still hindered by the fact they DO have casting (it hurts their prowess, for one) and thus, can't take as many feats. It would give Duskblades 2 feats, and Bards would only be able to take True Potential, which is humorously fitting.
    There's spell-less rangers and paladins, fyi. The 'brew already grants them full access, if they use the right ACF(s).

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    The other reason I was thinking it'd be nice to change it: the idea of calculating how many of my prereqs "don't count" could get really ugly. "Wait, this Ascendant feat requires Combat Expertise, which I grabbed at level 6. But my 6th level was Sorcerer 2. So I need to re-pick up Combat Expertise?"
    Uh, no [Ascendant] feat has a non [Ascendant] feat as a pre-requisite, and there probably won't be. Admittedly, the skill-point one will be a pain, but mostly if a player puts his 1 every 4th level point in Int.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pechvarry View Post
    -Also, would love to see some of these for more flavors. Some ultimate tank stuff always sits well with me. Some serene/wisdom type combatant feats would be neat, too. Though one design I'd avoid: +damage. Melee have enough of that. I think I'm preaching to the choir with this, but melee need tricks to enable their schticks, whatever they may be, in more scenarios and against a wider variety of targets.
    I'm willing to take suggestions, but I don't see how to widen the flavor all that much, personally. So far, I'm going with a George Carlin's Flamethrower approach in designing these.

    Also, as far as +damage goes, yeah, I'm the choir. ToB is hailed as a great improvement over standard warriors, but ToB did little, if anything, for +damage. I took that as a starting point.

    Quote Originally Posted by blueblade View Post
    TC, this seems to have gotten you a little bogged down.
    Who're you talking to?

    Quote Originally Posted by blueblade View Post
    However, I kind of get the point about the feats not quite sitting right. Some of them are too powerful to be mere feats. There's nothing wrong with beefing up Fighter/Martial class 20, but you kind of make it so these feats are vastly better than most standard fighter feats, which can rub some people the wrong way. I think it might work a little better as a 3/5 level PrC with some good fluff on it, but maybe that's just me.
    That's the point, though. I recognize that 3.5 has failed Fighter 20, by first making it wholly feat dependent, and then second, refusing to give it powerful feats. I'm trying to give him powerful feats. Enough of them that going Fighter 20 is viable. 11 fighter feats should give you about the same viability as 9th level spells do.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •