Reduce Damage [D&D 3.5, Feat]

[Ziegander]

Reduce Damage
Prerequisites: Con 13, Heavy Armor Proficiency
Benefit: As a free action, when you are attacked for the first time in a round, you may subtract a number from your AC to gain an equal amount of Damage Reduction. This penalty cannot exceed your base attack bonus or your AC minus 10. You may use this feat even when it isn't your turn, but not if you are flat-footed. The penalty to AC and gained DR apply until the start of your next turn. DR gained by this feat isn't overcome by any sort of physical attack and does not stack with other sources of DR.
Special: If you wear Heavy Armor, you instead gain twice the number subtracted from your AC as DR. A fighter may select Reduce Damage as one of his fighter bonus feats.

[NeoSeraphi]

What does "on your action" mean? Clearly you're supposed to be able to use this during someone else's turn, right? Or...huh.

Please clarify what action, if any, using this feat requires.

Otherwise, it's an interesting version of the Stone Power feat, though not quite as useful. (Doesn't count as Power Attack, doesn't help a crusader, and it penalizes your AC instead of your attack rolls)

It's pretty useful for a raging barbarian or a Karmic Strike build though. And of course, you can combine it with Stone Power, and the combination would really be deadly. (Or rather, not deadly)

[Ziegander]

What does "on your action" mean? Clearly you're supposed to be able to use this during someone else's turn, right? Or...huh.

I used the wording of Power Attack as the template here, including the "on your action" phrase. That's meant to mean on your turn I assume, but since it's not very clear I'll change my version. Make it a bit more usable too.

Otherwise, it's an interesting version of the Stone Power feat, though not quite as useful. (Doesn't count as Power Attack, doesn't help a crusader, and it penalizes your AC instead of your attack rolls)

I would argue that in a lot of instances it's much, more useful than Stone Power. No, it doesn't count as PA, but penalizing AC rather than attack rolls is usually a plus, and DR 10/-- for 1 round is heads and shoulders better than 10 temp hp for 1 round. Not to mention that this feat can grant you up to DR 40/-- for 1 round, whereas Stone Power is capped at 10 temp hp.

[NeoSeraphi]

I would argue that in a lot of instances it's much, more useful than Stone Power. No, it doesn't count as PA, but penalizing AC rather than attack rolls is usually a plus, and DR 10/-- for 1 round is heads and shoulders better than 10 temp hp for 1 round. Not to mention that this feat can grant you up to DR 40/-- for 1 round, whereas Stone Power is capped at 10 temp hp.

It can only grant you DR 40 if you have at least 20 AC to give up, but I can see your point. Very Black Knight-ish.

Though temporary hit points have their advantages over DR as well (particularly when you're fighting a mage, though admittedly 10 isn't the greatest number in that scenario)

That said, this feat, unlike most, requires monetary optimization rather than feat or skill optimization to work (you get AC through WBL, primarily). I don't know how I feel about that, but I suppose it's not really a problem, just different.

That said, with this, no gish need ever pay the high material cost for stoneskin again. (especially druids, since they get free natural armor to give up). Frees up both spell slots and actions, which is a good point for a gish, though it means that casters can unfortunately utilize this feat almost as well as any warrior. (Typical gish builds end up with around 18 BAB, but if you're having issues, just cast divine power or transformation and boom, full BAB to use with this feat)

[NeoSeraphi]

You may use this feat even when it isn't your turn.

This isn't necessary for you to state. Free actions can be used at any time. Free actions that can only be used on your turn need the specific-trumps-general text, but the same isn't true for the other way around.

Also, can you use this feat while flat-footed?

[Ziegander]

This isn't necessary for you to state. Free actions can be used at any time. Free actions that can only be used on your turn need the specific-trumps-general text, but the same isn't true for the other way around.

I prefer to have reminder text for such things. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't automatically assume that you can use free actions if it's not their turn.

Also, can you use this feat while flat-footed?

I'm inclined to say, no (and will edit the OP to clarify).

[TuggyNE]

Reduce Damage
Prerequisites: Con 13
Benefit: As a free action, when you are attacked for the first time in a round, you may subtract a number from your AC to gain an equal amount of Damage Reduction. This penalty cannot exceed your base attack bonus or your AC minus 10. You may use this feat even when it isn't your turn, but not if you are flat-footed. The penalty to AC and gained DR apply until the start of your next turn. DR gained by this feat isn't overcome by any special materials or weapons.
Special: If you wear Heavy Armor, you instead gain twice the number subtracted from your AC as DR.

Does this stack with other sources of DR/-?
You should probably put in a note about alignment and magic/epic weapons not overcoming it, just in case. Or borrow from e.g. the Barbarian's text.

[Cieyrin]

This isn't necessary for you to state. Free actions can be used at any time. Free actions that can only be used on your turn need the specific-trumps-general text, but the same isn't true for the other way around.

Also, can you use this feat while flat-footed?

Free actions != immediate actions. They have no such language. You can't drop an item or drop prone when it isn't your action. Technically you shouldn't be able to speak, either, but most people overlook that particular bit of RAW.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

The special clause concerns me: I can *already* gain more DR from heavy armor, because I have more to sacrifice. Now I also double it?

It doesn't really work well, I think.

[NeoSeraphi]

Free actions != immediate actions. They have no such language. You can't drop an item or drop prone when it isn't your action. Technically you shouldn't be able to speak, either, but most people overlook that particular bit of RAW.

Free actions require no time consumed. You have infinite free actions. Why would you be restricted to using them on your turn? Instantaneous Rage, for instance, allows you to rage at any time, but it doesn't change your rage's activation to an immediate action, it just removes the feature-specific restriction on your free action.

[Cieyrin]

Free actions require no time consumed. You have infinite free actions. Why would you be restricted to using them on your turn? Instantaneous Rage, for instance, allows you to rage at any time, but it doesn't change your rage's activation to an immediate action, it just removes the feature-specific restriction on your free action.

Immediate actions didn't exist at the time of Instantaneous Rage's writing, so no, it couldn't have. It is effectively an immediate action, though.

[silver spectre]

Reduce Damage
Prerequisites: Con 13
Benefit: As a free action, when you are attacked for the first time in a round, you may subtract a number from your AC to gain an equal amount of Damage Reduction. This penalty cannot exceed your base attack bonus or your AC minus 10. You may use this feat even when it isn't your turn, but not if you are flat-footed. The penalty to AC and gained DR apply until the start of your next turn. DR gained by this feat isn't overcome by any special materials or weapons.
Special: If you wear Heavy Armor, you instead gain twice the number subtracted from your AC as DR.

I like this. As a player, I can't imagine not taking this feat.

Any high HD baddy with a lot of natural armor would be horrifying with this, and the average elf just became tougher than the average dwarf.

[Zeta Kai]

As a player, I can't imagine not taking this feat.

Which is a big red flag for broken, unbalancing options. I'm not sure about this feat. It feels unbalanced & overpowered, but I do like melee to have nice things, & this is a very nice thing. I'd have to see the math on this before I'd allow it at my table.

[NeoSeraphi]

I like this. As a player, I can't imagine not taking this feat.

Any high HD baddy with a lot of natural armor would be horrifying with this, and the average elf just became tougher than the average dwarf.

There are a few builds you probably wouldn't see this in. For example, a dread necromancer probably wouldn't want to take this feat. They have DR anyway, and their capstone causes them to lose their Constitution score, rendering this feat completely unusable. If a dread necro was bowing out of the class, though, that'd be another story.

Also, if you were a wizard 3/master specialist 2/incantatrix 10/other wizard prestige 5, etc. You know, your typical arcane spellcaster build. Your BAB in there is going to be awful. The total BAB for the build I just listed is +9. Spending a feat to get DR 9/- at level 20 when you can just cast stoneskin instead isn't exactly optimization.

Edit: Still, I agree with them, Zie. This feat may be a bit too useful across the board.

[Ursus the Grim]

This isn't horribly overpowered, but it's pretty close. Take a level 2 Fighter with Full Plate, Heavy Shield, and Dex 12. AC 21. He uses this feat and gets to reduce 22 Damage from the next attack.

A CR 5 Werebear deals an average damage of 19.5 damage with his Greataxe, That greataxe otherwise has a 50/50 chance of hitting the Fighter. Now it has a 100% chance of hitting, but a >50% chance of doing damage, and a 0% chance of doing real damage.

Granted, an "and then" creature, ie multiple attacks, could get around this, but any half-clever Fighter would know better than to use this feat. In which case we get the following.

CR 5 Wyrmling Gold dragon. 50% chance of hitting with primary attack and 40% with the others. Average damage of 7.5/4.5/4.5/3.5/3.5. So the fighter can either laugh off the powerful, primary attack and take the hits or just sit in his full plate. Something like 11 damage dealt if he relies on his armor, still only 16 if he blocks the hit. Really not a huge difference, even if he does the less clever thing.

Remember, this is a Level 2 Fighter versus a CR 5.

Even if you nerf the Heavy Armor clause, its still pretty potent. You basically give a first level Wizard DR 4+, thanks to spells like Shield and Mage Armor. I can't really see a class that couldn't use this.

[NeoSeraphi]

This isn't horribly overpowered, but it's pretty close. Take a level 2 Fighter with Full Plate, Heavy Shield, and Dex 12. AC 21. He uses this feat and gets to reduce 22 Damage from the next attack.

Not true. The amount is limited by both your Base Attack Bonus AND your AC-10. He would get DR 4/-.

[Ursus the Grim]

Not true. The amount is limited by both your Base Attack Bonus AND your AC-10. He would get DR 4/-.

My apologies for the mistaken math, but I won't change my stance. I missed the clause there, and I won't delete my prior statement so the context is known. That being said, I will point out that the easiest way for a Fighter to get DR/- is to get Adamantine heavy armor, which by RAW is worth 15k over and above the normal price of the armor for only DR 3/-. If you think its appropriate for a 2nd level character to get something worth more than 15k and equivalent to a 16th level barbarian's class ability for the price of one of his three to four feats, by all means.

It basically boils down to "is 1 point of AC worth 2 point of DR/-?" Most extrapolation would suggest it isn't. The biggest drawback is pretty easily countered by simply not activating it when not helpful.

Of course, the above quote brings to mind the question, What's it look like at Level 20? Its a pretty safe bet that the BaB will be the limiting reagent, and this would be the point that he gets his DR 20/-. Which is a not inconsiderable amount, even at that level.

Edit: Note that the given rectified example still has a not-inconsiderable AC of 19, and has lost only 2 points of AC to prevent 4 damage from an attack.

[Cieyrin]

the average elf just became tougher than the average dwarf.

I kinda doubt it, as said elf has to invest more in their Con to qualify for said feat and then put points into Dex to apply it, plus the fact that unless you're going Champion of Corellon Larethian, Dex and Heavy Armor go together as easy as stapling Jell-o to a tree. Whereas our dwarf pays less for getting a good Con and Dex and can invest in most what the else can, plus getting access to some racial armors that give a better payoff Armor to Dex ratio.

Now, if you'd said Halfling, then I'd concur, as their stat distribution and small size mean they pay less for a higher AC to invest into DR. Hell, a Gnome could do it better than a Dwarf can, b/c of that Size boost.

[Ziegander]

That being said, I will point out that the easiest way for a Fighter to get DR/- is to get Adamantine heavy armor, which by RAW is worth 15k over and above the normal price of the armor for only DR 3/-. If you think its appropriate for a 2nd level character to get something worth more than 15k and equivalent to a 16th level barbarian's class ability for the price of one of his three to four feats, by all means.

1) Adamantine Armor is not worth the price at all, ever. 2) A Barbarian doesn't lose AC to get his DR. 3) Yes, a Barbarian's DR is fairly insignificant.

It basically boils down to "is 1 point of AC worth 2 point of DR/-?" Most extrapolation would suggest it isn't.

It's actually quite a bit more involved than that. Without heavy armor, the question is whether 1 point of AC is worth DR 1/--. One point of AC is, theoretically, a 5% decrease in an attacker's accuracy, which translates to a 5% chance to take 0 damage from an attack. So, the math is that you trade a 5% chance to take no damage for a guaranteed reduction by 1 of the damage you do take. It's not very cut and dry, it requires a lot of numbers to be ran. Of course, since it costs you feat, the benefit should be better than what you're giving up, because if the DR you get is only preventing as much damage as the AC you already had then why on earth would you waste a feat to gain that benefit?

As far as heavy armor is concerned, wearing heavy armor is widely considered, and rightly so, strictly inferior to wearing light armor, because the loss in Dex also means a loss in initiative, but more than that because heavy armor reduces movement speed, and imposes much stiffer skill check penalties. In the same vein as Power Attack being more useful to two-handed weapon users, and in order to throw an inferior option a bone, I decided to amplify the feat's effect when wearing heavy armor.

Edit: Note that the given rectified example still has a not-inconsiderable AC of 19, and has lost only 2 points of AC to prevent 4 damage from an attack.

If players are running around dealing 20 damage at 1st level, then the enemies shouldn't be dealing 1d4-1. I bring this up, because giving up a 10% chance to take 0 damage in exchange for a 100% chance to subtract 4 from any damage that the character is dealt is a real tradeoff when you could be taking 10 or more damage from attacks.

I'm not trying to say that I'm completely against tweaking this feat, but I want to put things into more perspective before I make alterations.

I clarified that nothing overcomes the DR and that the DR doesn't stack with other sources of DR.

EDIT: How would people feel if the feat required Heavy Armor Proficiency, and maybe even Heavy Armor Optimization (which would hence require BAB +4 or even +6 just because)? Then the basic DR effect would only work if you wear Heavy Armor, and there would be no special doubling of the DR.

[NeoSeraphi]

EDIT: How would people feel if the feat required Heavy Armor Proficiency, and maybe even Heavy Armor Optimization (which would hence require BAB +4 or even +6 just because)? Then the basic DR effect would only work if you wear Heavy Armor, and there would be no special doubling of the DR.

An interesting prospect. I think just Heavy Armor Proficiency would work, as that would firmly cement this feat's usefulness to the group that needs it most: frontline fighters.

Speaking of which, why isn't this a fighter bonus feat?

[Ziegander]

An interesting prospect. I think just Heavy Armor Proficiency would work, as that would firmly cement this feat's usefulness to the group that needs it most: frontline fighters.

Are you saying that you think I should leave the feat as is, but add Heavy Armor Proficiency to the list of prerequisites?

Speaking of which, why isn't this a fighter bonus feat?

I always forget that stuff, that's why.

[NeoSeraphi]

Are you saying that you think I should leave the feat as is, but add Heavy Armor Proficiency to the list of prerequisites?

Yes.

I always forget that stuff, that's why.

Okay, King of Fighter Fixes. Glad I pointed it out then.

[silver spectre]

I kinda doubt it, as said elf has to invest more in their Con to qualify for said feat and then put points into Dex to apply it...

Yeah... I wasn't thinking about the penalty when I stated that. Just had the dex bonus in mind.

Are you saying that you think I should leave the feat as is, but add Heavy Armor Proficiency to the list of prerequisites?

I also think (for what its worth) that's a really good step, but does wearing heavy armor mean that you can (for this feat) suddenly double your effective AC from other sources as well (Dex, natural armor, shield, deflection, etc...)?

[Ashtagon]

I think a clause should be in there that only armour bonuses, shield bonuses, and enhancement bonuses to those two can be converted from AC to DR.

converting Dex bonus to DR is just silly.

[Ziegander]

I also think (for what its worth) that's a really good step, but does wearing heavy armor mean that you can (for this feat) suddenly double your effective AC from other sources as well (Dex, natural armor, shield, deflection, etc...)?

I think a clause should be in there that only armour bonuses, shield bonuses, and enhancement bonuses to those two can be converted from AC to DR.

converting Dex bonus to DR is just silly.

This feat was designed to be the true mirror to Power Attack. Power Attack can convert any sort of bonus to attack rolls (including Dex, Luck, and Sacred bonuses) into extra damage, so why shouldn't this feat be able to convert any sort of bonus to AC into extra DR?

[silver spectre]

This feat was designed to be the true mirror to Power Attack. Power Attack can convert any sort of bonus to attack rolls (including Dex, Luck, and Sacred bonuses) into extra damage, so why shouldn't this feat be able to convert any sort of bonus to AC into extra DR?

Damage reduction can reduce a far greater amount of damage than power attack can dish out simply because it can apply to far more attacks than the character has (if his opponent has multiple attacks or there is more than one of them).

Power attack has a limit to the extra damage it can do in a single round as it is limited to that single characters number of attacks in that round.

Power attack also has a melee only limitation, and as is, this makes archers even less of a threat than they already were.

[Isair]

A feat like this is a must have for characters wearing heavy armor or those capable of increasing their AC with ability scores (monk, duelist) and those who have feats like combat expertise, especially at high levels. Why? Because at high levels (even at medium, truth be told), the AC provided by armors and shields has a hard time following the Atk bonus of creatures. Basically, attacks will hit most of the times unless a character focuses most of his resources increasing his AC and doing little else.

DR, however, is way more useful. Creatures in MM do not deal extreme amounts of damage like characters can, despite their huge strength modifier. If you have a decently high DR, which you can gain with this feat, you basically make yourself immune to a creature's basic attacks.

Here are some examples of monsters:
Dire Bear CR 7: claw +19 melee (2d4+10); bite +13 melee (2d8+5)
Stone Golem CR 11: slam +18 melee (2d10+9)
Balor CR 20: +1 vorpal longsword +33//+26/+21/+16 melee (2d6+8; +1 flaming whip +30/+25 melee (1d4+4+1d6 fire); slam +31 melee (1d10+7)

Now the types of characters mentioned above can easily gain enough AC to be able to subtract a number equal to their BAB (thanks to magic armors, shields, other magical items like Amulet of Natural Armor). So here are some amounts:
7th lvl characters: 7 DR without heavy armor, 14 with. The first reduces the average damage dealt by the Dire Bear by half. The second makes the creature's attacks basically useless in terms of damage.
11th lvl characters: 11 DR without heavy armor, 22 with. The first reduces average damage dealt by the golem by 1/2 again, the second by makes the creature's attacks basically useless.
20th lvl characters: 20 DR without heavy armor, 40 with. Balor cannot deal damage with its attacks to either characters.

These were very simple calculations. Sure there are creatures with Power Attack, and sure some characters only have average BAB.
Still, for front-line characters, this feat would mean that all monsters who rely more on damage dealing attacks rather than other abilities (and this covers nearly half the monsters, if not more) would never be able to truly do much damage and the entire encounter would became far too easy. Tank-type characters would virtually be virtually indestructible against those monsters and could resolve the entire encounter by themselves.

Now if you can even increase your AC to tremendous amounts through feats, class abilities and items, plus gain all this DR, you suddenly have a character who can solve any melee challenge by himself without the aid of the party, for they would have AC enough to be safe from a good % of attacks and those that hit would deal little damage.

[Yitzi]

If you want to weaken it, an idea (strongly based on a feat from my fighter fix) is that the amount of AC spent is capped by either your total mobility bonuses to AC (i.e. everything you can't use while grappling) or your total armor bonuses to AC (i.e. everything that doesn't apply against touch attacks), whichever is less.

[Cieyrin]

As far as heavy armor is concerned, wearing heavy armor is widely considered, and rightly so, strictly inferior to wearing light armor, because the loss in Dex also means a loss in initiative, but more than that because heavy armor reduces movement speed, and imposes much stiffer skill check penalties.

Uh, what?

This number is the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC that this type of armor allows. Heavier armors limit mobility, reducing the wearer’s ability to dodge blows. This restriction doesn’t affect any other Dexterity-related abilities.

Max Dex bonus never has affected anything besides the AC bonus.

EDIT: How would people feel if the feat required Heavy Armor Proficiency, and maybe even Heavy Armor Optimization (which would hence require BAB +4 or even +6 just because)? Then the basic DR effect would only work if you wear Heavy Armor, and there would be no special doubling of the DR.

Hmm, I both do want Heavy Armor Proficiency but also don't, as I'm just trying to imagine Fistbeard Beardfist not being able to take a hit and laugh it off and it's not working.

[Ursus the Grim]

Isair: You've fallen into a pitfall here, in the interest of fairness. The amount of DR you gain can't exceed your BaB. See my above example. A 7th level Fighter could have no more than DR 7/-. To be honest, that goes a long way towards reining this in.

1) Adamantine Armor is not worth the price at all, ever. 2) A Barbarian doesn't lose AC to get his DR. 3) Yes, a Barbarian's DR is fairly insignificant.

So. . . your justification is "the standard ways of getting DR/- are too hard, here's an easier way?" And you don't think that's overpowered? I mean, if you come out with a strictly better way of getting DR, doesn't that mean its, erm, strictly better?

As far as heavy armor is concerned, wearing heavy armor is widely considered, and rightly so, strictly inferior to wearing light armor][. . .]

That's not only vague, its a pretty big assumption based on opinion. In the medium to low-op games I've played, Mr. Full Plate generally makes a harder target than Chip the Halfling Ranger. High level play is one thing, but until then that +10 is an awful large gap to make up.

the loss in Dex also means a loss in initiative,

But that's not a virtue of the heavy armor. And if you're playing a tank of a fighter, chances are you want them to engage you first, so you get full attacks on the first round. If you're playing point buy, just don't put those points in Dex and put them in Str or Con, which are (arguably) more important for a tankish fighter anyway. If you're rolling, you've got your dex bonus to initiative anyway.

. . .but more than that because heavy armor reduces movement speed, and imposes much stiffer skill check penalties.

Yeah, I hate that I can't put heavy armor on my skill monkey characters.

In the same vein as Power Attack being more useful to two-handed weapon users, and in order to throw an inferior option a bone, I decided to amplify the feat's effect when wearing heavy armor.

Which is fine, but you have to judge it on the basis of heavy armor being worn. Which you pretty distinctly avoided doing earlier on in your response.

If players are running around dealing 20 damage at 1st level, then the enemies shouldn't be dealing 1d4-1. I bring this up, because giving up a 10% chance to take 0 damage in exchange for a 100% chance to subtract 4 from any damage that the character is dealt is a real tradeoff when you could be taking 10 or more damage from attacks.

Honestly, I don't understand what you're trying to say here then. Are you adding the ineffectiveness of the CR systems to the list as to why this is a balanced feat?

I'm not trying to say that I'm completely against tweaking this feat, but I want to put things into more perspective before I make alterations.

[. . .]
EDIT: How would people feel if the feat required Heavy Armor Proficiency, and maybe even Heavy Armor Optimization (which would hence require BAB +4 or even +6 just because)? Then the basic DR effect would only work if you wear Heavy Armor, and there would be no special doubling of the DR.

Its okay to defend things, but you've kind of ignored the point that posters wiser than me have made, ie Djinn and Zeta Kai.

I would consider it a bit more balanced if you altered or removed the heavy armor clause, but balk at Heavy Armor Optimization. Personally, I consider it bad form to require a non-core feat as a prerequisite for anything unless its in the same source as the goal.