Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    So I was looking over the Epic feats in the SRD, and none of them seemed to warrant being separate from the normal game; a few of the options for casters maybe but even they aren't as powerful as actual spells are. Especially if you kept all of their pre-reqs other then being "epic/"

    So my question is: what would happen if you allowed epic feats in normal gameplay?
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    PairO'Dice Lost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Malsheem, Nessus
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    So my question is: what would happen if you allowed epic feats in normal gameplay?
    As long as you screened the good caster options out, not much. You might see a bit more variety in martial builds, but that's about it.
    Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
    You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.


    Spoiler: Sig of Holding
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by abadguy View Post
    Darn you PoDL for making me care about a bunch of NPC Commoners!
    Quote Originally Posted by Chambers View Post
    I'm pretty sure turning Waterdeep into a sheet of glass wasn't the best win condition for that fight. We lived though!
    Won a cookie for this, won everything for this

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Barring the obvious (Epic Spellcasting, Automatic Quicken...basically all the casting-related one ones, really), most epic feats don't really seem that overpowered for a lower-level game.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    I figured allowing Gargantuan Wildshape, Plant Wildshape, Vermind Wildshape, Master Staff, Master Wand, and pretty much all of the melee options then I'm safe. Maybe allow Intensify Spell with a ruling that it can't be mitigated.
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Emperor Ing's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ameritopia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    Maybe allow Intensify Spell with a ruling that it can't be mitigated.
    Considering one of it's prereqs involves getting a certain amount of skill ranks that's only possible at level 27, this won't be an issue.
    Last edited by Emperor Ing; 2011-05-15 at 01:06 AM.
    A Weapon to Surpass Metal Gear


    Sometimes I make avatars too. Shoot me a PM if interested.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by The Randomizer View Post
    Considering one of it's prereqs involves getting a certain amount of skill ranks that's only possible at level 27, this won't be an issue.
    True. Unless the person wishes for skill ranks to be maxed out. Though looking through Epic I can't see why they don't allow a lot of those abilities in normal play; Perfect Two Weapon Fighting is hardly broken.
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Thrice Dead Cat's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Since I rarely mess with epic, due, to, well, epic, I'm actually going to just run through the epic level feats to see what's what.

    Spoiler
    Show

    Additional Magic Item Space: Stupid good! Not because it should be epic, but by high level play, it would mean having more belts of battle or rings. I'd warrant that this should be limited to higher level play, but after about ~10th level, that's when it'd really start to get strong with just the various options of items per slots.

    Armor Skin: As a monster feat, save you need not have a natural armor bonus before hand. Like dodge, this is terribad.

    Augmented Alchemy: Save for the cost and DC increase, this would be a fairly solid basic feat. It would extend the use of some alchemical items, but it doesn't really do much.

    Automatic X Spell: Quicken is strong, the rest just emulate basic psionics. Save for either additional quicken spells (another appropriately "EPIC" epic feat) or RKV, Auto-quicken simply just allows a caster to do something with his full-round actions.

    Bane Of Enemies: Somewhat underwhelming, but useful for broader types, assuming they're frequent enough.

    Blinding Speed: An epic feat to emulate a third level spell is... underwhelming. Free haste is nice, but feats are just too rare.

    Bonus Domain: A solid feat. I could see it being as is with slightly different prereqs. As is, though, epic is just far too late.

    Bulwark Of Defense: Useful in that it's like reckless rage, useless in that you need to be a dwarven defender to get it.

    Chaotic Rage: Like Bane of Enemies, but broader. Still, rather underwhelming.

    [Sized] Wild Shape: Rather useful, but limited considering you're probably limited to just elementals or plants on the larger end, but there could be options of which I'm unaware. The smaller ones could at least be used to hide from foes.

    Combat Archery: As Spell Compendium and other sources have showed us, this is a 1st-2nd level spell! As such, this could easily just be a feat with no prereqs.

    Craft Epic Magic Gear X: Just considering what's available at epic, these should stay [Epic]. Although, some of the lower end +X to Stat or Weapon stuffs could be appropriate pre-epic, it is just easier to leave it [Epic].

    Damage Reduction: A barbarian gets this feat from levels 6 through 13. While I understand wanting to keep this out of the reaches of low level play due to its stacking nature, it would be fairly reasonable past level 6, since it really doesn't do anything. It would also be pretty amusing to take this feat as a first level human with flaws, though. Did you do less than 12 points of damage? Okay, I don't care.

    Deafening Song: This would actually be a fairly reasonable non-epic feat, maybe starting at about ~6th or 9th level. It's interesting in that while it screws with spellcasting, it can also save lives from the alignment word series of spells.

    Death Of Enemies: Fairly reasonable follow up from Bane of Enemies, but the save DC as written is tiny compared to how much damage you should be doing just due to a foe being a favored enemy and Bane of Enemies, in addition to the fact that this only works on a crit!

    Devastating Critical: This is how the save DC for Death of Enemies should be, but it is a pain that it works only on a critical hit. That said, this feat here is fine as is just due to the number of feats needed to get there. Not that lightning maces shenanigans needs any more fun.

    Dexterous X: Honestly, considering that slippery mind means that the earliest this feat can be taken is 12 barring the [Epic] rule and how generally weak slippery mind is compared to the other rogue options, this is a fairly reasonable feat. The fact later design allows for concentration checks in place of saves at least once per encounter, I'd say this is worth a feat and a class feature.

    Dire Charge: Like Catfolk pounce, except instead of "Catfolk" it has "improved initiative. Really, this should just be "pounce: as the ability" with prereqs that put it more in the realm of 9th-12th level rather than 1-6th, but I digress.

    Distant Shot: Just with the prereq feats, this feat seems fine as is. Maybe something else or spot related.

    Efficient Item Creation: This is a cost just to prevent [Epic] item creation from taking forever. That said, I'd be okay with this as a non-[Epic] feat.

    Energy Resistance: Feats should do more than just stopping one of any number of possible attack types. So, yeah, perfectly fine being non-[Epic].

    Enhance Spell: Seems underwhelming, but outside of Mailman-style blasting, I'm not a fan of blasting spells. Suitably non-epic, though.

    Epic Dodge: Stops that one shock trooper attack, but then again, so does elusive target.

    Epic Endurance: Another suitably non-epic feat.

    Epic Expanded Knowledge: Certainly better than Expanded Knowledge, but probably not [Epic].

    Epic [Save]: As the non-epic versions of these feats, a static bonus to saves is just NOT worth a feat slot.

    Epic Inspiration: Throw on different prereqs, and this is basically Song of the Heart. As such, I'd love to this feat available at lower levels.

    Epic Leadership: Leadership is easily epic without the tag, but this is easily epic while being [Epic].

    Epic Prowess: Pretty much just weapon focus (everything).

    Epic Psionic Focus: Throw on some random and related prereqs, and this would be a rather fun feat for psionic blasters.

    Epic Reputation: Like the various skill boosters, this is far from being a feat, let alone an [epic] one.

    Epic Skill Focus: Pretty much just an alternative to Item Familiar for truenamers!

    Epic Speed: Another feat slot burnt, epic or otherwise.

    Epic Spell Focus: While another +1 to save DCs, it is a tight +1 to squeeze in and is honestly more of an opportunity cost considering what could be done with an 18th level feat slot.

    Epic Spell Penetration: Suitably non-epic considering Assay Spell Resistance exists.

    Epic Spellcasting: [Epic] in every sense of the word.

    Epic Toughness: Better than toughness, but about as useful as improved toughness for a 20th level character. Before then, this is better, after that, improved toughness is better... which is odd, but whatever.

    Epic Trapfinding: Could have easily been a welll-rounded mid-level feat for non-elves or a low-level feat for elves.

    Epic Weapon Focus/Epic Weapon Specialization: Like their non-epic prereqs, just underwhelming.

    Exceptional Deflection: A solid feat for mid to high levels, in my opinion.

    Extended Life Span: A really fun feat from a fluff perspective, but it doesn't do anything with such a serious investment, crunch wise. That said, it'd be fun to have on a 1st level elf.

    Familiar Spell: A useful feat, but it's honestly more useful as a ~6th level spell. Certainly non-epic, though.

    Fast Healing: With the con requirement, I'd call this one good for non-epic play.

    Great [Stat]: I'm unsure if these should be worth a feat slot or should see play pre-epic, just because what they do is so odd for a feat. Probably wouldn't be game-breaking, but it could be a problem for certain characters that don't really want anything else from their feats and just stack them, though.

    Great Smiting: Seems fine in a non-epic environ.

    Group Inspiration: Seems fine as feat without prereqs, honestly.

    Hindering Song: I find it amusing that, for the level that this feat was intended, a spellcaster would probably more likely fail to cast a spell due to being deaf rather than due to this feat. That said, as is, I'd like to see this feat available in a non-epic setting alongside deafening song.

    Holy Strike: Pretty much as Chaotic Rage.

    Ignore Material Components: Barring some way to prevent free castings of overly expensive spells (which is honestly a rather nebulous area), I'd keep this one as [epic].


    TL;DR: Basically, the vast majority of feats are suitably non-epic. I made it up to the "I"s and most of what I've seen with some noticeable exceptions are easily suitable for even low or mid level play.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Wings of Peace View Post
    "See these cookies? Note how while good they taste sort of bland. Now try these, they're the same cookies but with chocolate chips added. Notice how with the second batch we expended slightly more ingredients but dramatically enhanced the flavor? That's metamagic."
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Roc View Post
    Seriously, can we kill this misconception now? A wizard is never late, nor is he early. He shops for precisely what he means to.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    That was essentially the way I looked at it, glad other people agree with me!

    Adding this to my list of things for permanent houserules!
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Jallorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrice Dead Cat View Post
    Additional Magic Item Space: Stupid good! Not because it should be epic, but by high level play, it would mean having more belts of battle or rings. I'd warrant that this should be limited to higher level play, but after about ~10th level, that's when it'd really start to get strong with just the various options of items per slots.
    Erm, actually, not anymore. MIC has rendered this obsolete, mostly, since magic items can be stacked at no extra cost now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ertier View Post
    A good background is like a skirt. Short enough to keep my interest, but long enough to cover the important bits.
    Quote Originally Posted by FistsFullofDice View Post
    Derailed in the best way, thank you good sir.
    Spoiler: Homebrew Links
    Show

    Avatar by Dogmantra

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Jallorn View Post
    Erm, actually, not anymore. MIC has rendered this obsolete, mostly, since magic items can be stacked at no extra cost now.
    Only some can. Pretty much just the basic +x boosts.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Jallorn View Post
    Erm, actually, not anymore. MIC has rendered this obsolete, mostly, since magic items can be stacked at no extra cost now.
    Wouldn't this pretty much make Ioun Stones useless?
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sunnydale

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    Wouldn't this pretty much make Ioun Stones useless?
    No, it just makes some of them overpriced. Many Ioun Stones offer different types of bonuses (luck, insight, competence) that aren't on the "Common Item Effects" list.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Prime32's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    Though looking through Epic I can't see why they don't allow a lot of those abilities in normal play; Perfect Two Weapon Fighting is hardly broken.
    Heck, a lot of people just replace Two Weapon Fighting with Perfect Two Weapon Fighting. And throw in Twin Strike while they're at it.
    Art - Homebrew - Avatar adoptions
    Spirit Artist in the Playground

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
    No, it just makes some of them overpriced. Many Ioun Stones offer different types of bonuses (luck, insight, competence) that aren't on the "Common Item Effects" list.
    Why the bold? I spelled it correctly....

    How much cost cutting would be fair in comparison? Ioun Stones can be sundered afterall.
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    FMArthur's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    You can use Distant Shot to literally throw an opponent into the sun. Maybe that isn't amazingly broken at 17th level when you could acquire it, being effectively a SoD that requires a set-up round of grappling. Still... that move would be just a little over the top thematically.
    • Chameleon Base Class [3.5]/[PF]: A versatile, morphic class that mimics one basic party role (warrior, caster, sneak, etc) at a time. If you find yourself getting bored of any class you play too long, the Chameleon is for you!
    • Warlock Power Sources [3.5]: Making Hellfire Warlock part of the base class and providing other similar options for Warlocks whose powers don't come from devils.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sunnydale

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    Why the bold? I spelled it correctly....
    It's just consistent formatting for me. I bold magic item and domain names, italicize spells and feats, capitalize names of classes and ACFs, & c.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Troll in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ponyville
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    You may want to ADD requirements to some of them if you remove the "epic"-ness. For the most part most are OK pre-epic, but some of the fairly 'weak' ones can still be game breaking at lower levels.

    A good example is Epic Toughness. It's virtually worthless to a 20+ level char, but it has no requirements. A 1st level Char could conceivably take this twice (human) or more than twice (cheez).
    In this case, maybe add a minimum HD or minimum Con requirement.
    [currently semi-retired from the forums

    Things I did:
    PF Dipping Guide
    PF PrC Mini-Guide
    Oradin Guide
    Things I like:
    PF Off List Spells
    Critical Hits
    [PF] Opti-Guides Compendium
    X Stat to Y Bonus Now with Pathfinder!

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

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by Jallorn View Post
    Erm, actually, not anymore. MIC has rendered this obsolete, mostly, since magic items can be stacked at no extra cost now.
    Only a *very* short list of magic items got that benefit, and it only accounts for 1 'type' of Ioun stone(the +stat ones), even if they are written as 6 different stones. That leaves the other 10 stones being just as useful now as they were before MIC.
    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
    Troll in the Playground
     
    herrhauptmann's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by grarrrg View Post
    You may want to ADD requirements to some of them if you remove the "epic"-ness. For the most part most are OK pre-epic, but some of the fairly 'weak' ones can still be game breaking at lower levels.

    A good example is Epic Toughness. It's virtually worthless to a 20+ level char, but it has no requirements. A 1st level Char could conceivably take this twice (human) or more than twice (cheez).
    In this case, maybe add a minimum HD or minimum Con requirement.
    Just take the Toughness feats out of Races of the Wild. Dwarf/Giant/Dragon etc. Never been updated, so technically still valid in 3.5.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    I ran an E6 game where I allowed the party to each take one epic feat as one of their E6 feats. It seemed to be alright - no one did anything particularly broken.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Ramifications of Allowing Epic Feats

    Quote Originally Posted by FMArthur View Post
    You can use Distant Shot to literally throw an opponent into the sun. Maybe that isn't amazingly broken at 17th level when you could acquire it, being effectively a SoD that requires a set-up round of grappling. Still... that move would be just a little over the top thematically.
    Don't they get gate at level 17? I think I am okay with this, TBH.
    I speak AD&D to my fluff, 3.5 to my crunch and 5E to my players.

Posting Permissions

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