[3.5] I solemnly swear that I have good intentions

[Diceless]

This post will turn the noses of many genre purists

I am not an experienced D&D player, although I have read the 5e manuals and many of the 3.5 manuals, and have on 3.5, paradoxically, much more experience than on 5e. However, if the standard for achieving a good degree of skill involves knowledge of all the supplements, then no, I cannot call myself a "good" player. But the purpose for which we all play - I believe - is to have fun. I, to do that, to feel fulfilled, I have to be satisfied with the credibility of the character I am playing. And that, often, involves a "simulative" approach to the game on my part, shall we say, which is not appreciated by everyone.

I am about to start a campaign on D&D 3.5, Forgotten Realms setting. There will be many parties, and characters from a single party will sometimes mix with each other. The characters start at level three. I have a clear idea of what I want to play, but I have no intention of relying on strategies that aim for powerplay or maximum mathematical efficiency, IF this involves distorting the basic idea I have for my character. I much prefer to play something that makes sense and follows a narrative thread, even if that might not be the perfect combination in terms of skills and talents to get to maximum efficiency and achieve maximum results.

The word "build" itself is something I don't like using when it comes to role-playing games.

However, even though I think I have a clear idea of my "build," I would greatly appreciate an opinion, perhaps from those who think like I do. I'd like to briefly share with you its background. In essence, the character I intend to play is the result of the union between a wild witch of Nar descent and a human monster hunter. The hunter was supposed to kill the Witch, but as happens in the darkest and most macabre stories, he ends up falling in love with her. From this union, a child is born: Layre. However, the hunter realizes he has made a terrible mistake when he discovers that the Witch, seemingly insane and rambling, intends to sacrifice the child to dark and forgotten Gods (probably Abyssal Dark Lords) through a deadly ritual. The hunter arrives just in time to save the child and - perhaps - kill the Witch, but the ritual has already begun, and the child survives, yes, but at a dear cost: the loss of his right eye.

Duncan - this is the name of the Hunter - thus decides to raise the child, aware that cursed blood runs through his veins and that the mystical legacy he carry is undoubtedly dangerous, especially when it will likely manifest one day. Layre, on the other hand, knows nothing of this story. He do not know his true origins, nor the secret he carry within, let alone the truth about his real father: Duncan has deceived him with a multitude of lies and nonsense, and the boy has convinced himself that he is just an ordinary orphan, the son of a couple of thieves who died hanged, but who was "bought" by a man who apparently was looking for an assistant. This is what Layre is today at twenty: an Aspiring Monster Hunter. To this day, Layre still travels with Duncan, who has become his Master and, certainly, whom he has become very fond of.

So, briefly, this is the character concept. If the opportunity arises, the character will manifest his powers and multiclass into an arcane class, most likely the Warlock. For now, he's a melee fighter.

I shared this summary of the character's story with you to help you understand the underlying idea. Layre is an agile and versatile fighter, but not a frontline soldier. He moves swiftly on the battlefield, dodging enemy attacks, demonstrating particular tactical and acrobatic abilities. He studies the weaknesses of his opponents and, when forced into confrontation, strikes to kill. Lacking the strength prized by rough warriors and their aggressive martial nature, he is trained to end the fight before his energy begins to wane. Where this caution is not enough, Layre usually relies on a well-considered retreat, but the spirit of a reckless youth does not always reconcile with the wisdom of adults and masters. He is skilled and tenacious, to the extent that an individual accustomed to achieving goals through natural inclination rather than true dedication might be. Perceptive, sharp, agile, he is fundamentally a good tracker and a decent leader.

The chosen ability scores are as follows:
Str 13 (+1), Dex 16 (+2), Con 12 (+1), Int 13 (+1), Wis 10, Cha 14 (+2)

Rogue 1/Fighter 2

Feats:
H: Improved Initiative
Rogue 1st: Dodge (1st level feat), Sneak Attack 1d6, Trapfinding
Fighter 1st: Combat Expertise (Bonus Feat)
Fighter 2nd: Combat Reflexes (Bonus Feat), Improved Trip

Picking Rogue as a first level class allows me to obtain a very high number of skill points to spend on class skills, which are important to highlight the character's abilities, and because class features like Trapfinding are "canonical" to me, and I find it plausible that Layre would possess them. Sneak Attack, in the case of the character, can be seen as an ability that allows him to deal more damage precisely and accurately when the right conditions occur (perhaps denying the opponent's Dexterity bonus during combat). From my point of view, among the base classes to choose from, it was the one that best reflects Layre's athletic abilities. The two levels in Fighter simply allow me to gain proficiency in martial weapons (the character will use a two-handed longsword) and valuable bonus feat slots. Yes, it's true that the Ranger class would better represent his professional background and skills, but I didn't want to choose a favored enemy; I couldn't justify it without resorting to banalities that I didn't want to use. Additionally, it didn't have important Rogue class skills like Diplomacy that I wanted to have from the start. Also, I wouldn't have chosen a class in which I wouldn't spend another level; Evasion is a great feat for a character with a good Reflex save bonus, and the Rogue gets Evasion almost immediately.

"Track", on the other hand, is a feat that would have been very useful to me, but spending a feat slot at the early levels for this was too much even for me. I needed the character to be more prepared on the offensive side, since for the aforementioned reasons, he will never be as strong as a pure warrior. I don't exclude the possibility of taking "Track" with subsequent levels. Justifying the temporary absence of such a capability for someone who should possess it (Layre is still a Hunter after all) is possible if we consider Layre's Apprentice status as justification. The boy is young and still learning. With a good Search skill check (which synergizes very well with Rogue abilities), I can find traces but not follow them as an experienced hunter would.

I had also considered the Scout class, but even in that case, important abilities were lacking that I wouldn't have obtained even by multiclassing into Fighter later on. Skirmish would have been very useful, perhaps in combination with Spring Attack. In the end, however, I opted for the Rogue. The goal I set for myself is to reach Elusive Target as soon as possible, which should work well with the rest of the build. As a bonus language, I chose Draconic, and I spent two skill points in Knowledge (Arcana) to justify this choice. Layre is intrigued by magic, dragons, and ancient legends, as if that mystical part of himself, unknown, wanted to emerge by manifesting through curiosity about the study of related arts and knowledge.

So, that's what I thought. I know that for many of you, it will be "horrible" to read, and I'll probably receive a lot of criticism. I know you won't even agree with the distribution of the statistics, but I felt the need to make the character I imagined so strongly at that moment clear. And so I did. I ask you? Could I have done better? Could I have made different, more fitting choices without altering the character I described to you? What do you think?

Thanks to those who sincerely want to advise me. :)

[AMFV]

This post will turn the noses of many genre purists

I'm not sure what you're meaning by that, I don't suspect that will be the case. Genre isn't that strong in 3.5.

I am about to start a campaign on D&D 3.5, Forgotten Realms setting. There will be many parties, and characters from a single party will sometimes mix with each other. The characters start at level three. I have a clear idea of what I want to play, but I have no intention of relying on strategies that aim for powerplay or maximum mathematical efficiency, IF this involves distorting the basic idea I have for my character. I much prefer to play something that makes sense and follows a narrative thread, even if that might not be the perfect combination in terms of skills and talents to get to maximum efficiency and achieve maximum results.

Now this will probably turn some noses. Mostly because it is entirely to have a character with a clear narrative thread and good mechanical efficiency, if not the maximal mechanical efficiency. They're not in opposition. In fact a character who has the mechanical competencies will likely seem to fit their narrative better. A strong warrior who loses every fight is going to turn into a joke. And many many media have made that mistake. A smart character who can't solve the puzzle or the mystery isn't going to feel narratively smart. So there is a baseline level of competency to have your character function narratively.

The word "build" itself is something I don't like using when it comes to role-playing games.

Well think of the "build" as the mechanical underpinnings of your story. Characteristics that represent what your character can do. It's like the notes that you'd use in writing or the foundations of a building or the base coat in paint.

However, even though I think I have a clear idea of my "build," I would greatly appreciate an opinion, perhaps from those who think like I do. I'd like to briefly share with you its background. In essence, the character I intend to play is the result of the union between a wild witch of Nar descent and a human monster hunter. The hunter was supposed to kill the Witch, but as happens in the darkest and most macabre stories, he ends up falling in love with her. From this union, a child is born: Layre. However, the hunter realizes he has made a terrible mistake when he discovers that the Witch, seemingly insane and rambling, intends to sacrifice the child to dark and forgotten Gods (probably Abyssal Dark Lords) through a deadly ritual. The hunter arrives just in time to save the child and - perhaps - kill the Witch, but the ritual has already begun, and the child survives, yes, but at a dear cost: the loss of his right eye.

Duncan - this is the name of the Hunter - thus decides to raise the child, aware that cursed blood runs through his veins and that the mystical legacy he carry is undoubtedly dangerous, especially when it will likely manifest one day. Layre, on the other hand, knows nothing of this story. He do not know his true origins, nor the secret he carry within, let alone the truth about his real father: Duncan has deceived him with a multitude of lies and nonsense, and the boy has convinced himself that he is just an ordinary orphan, the son of a couple of thieves who died hanged, but who was "bought" by a man who apparently was looking for an assistant. This is what Layre is today at twenty: an Aspiring Monster Hunter. To this day, Layre still travels with Duncan, who has become his Master and, certainly, whom he has become very fond of.

This is a cool story. Your build isn't this story. We'll go into that later. But because you are deliberately anti-optimizing your character doesn't fit the story you're presenting.

So, briefly, this is the character concept. If the opportunity arises, the character will manifest his powers and multiclass into an arcane class, most likely the Warlock. For now, he's a melee fighter.

Suel Arcanamach is something you should look it's a great choice for later multiclassing into Arcane characters, although it might take some refluffing.

I shared this summary of the character's story with you to help you understand the underlying idea. Layre is an agile and versatile fighter, but not a frontline soldier. He moves swiftly on the battlefield, dodging enemy attacks, demonstrating particular tactical and acrobatic abilities. He studies the weaknesses of his opponents and, when forced into confrontation, strikes to kill. Lacking the strength prized by rough warriors and their aggressive martial nature, he is trained to end the fight before his energy begins to wane. Where this caution is not enough, Layre usually relies on a well-considered retreat, but the spirit of a reckless youth does not always reconcile with the wisdom of adults and masters. He is skilled and tenacious, to the extent that an individual accustomed to achieving goals through natural inclination rather than true dedication might be. Perceptive, sharp, agile, he is fundamentally a good tracker and a decent leader.

(Emphasis Mine)

So the reason you took the dodge feat is that you envision it helping your character to be an agile combatant, but it doesn't. It doesn't do anything for you mechanically it doesn't help you represent your character as an agile dodge. It's just called "Dodge" it doesn't actually make you good at dodging. So that's something I would swap out. Craven could be a good choice if you wanted to play up your character's background as being somebody who has experienced a lot of terrifying things and who isn't afraid to retreat.

Combat Finesse would be also a pretty good choice, since you are intending for your character to be more agility focused and that actually ties stuff to your Dex.

The chosen ability scores are as follows:
Str 13 (+1), Dex 16 (+2), Con 12 (+1), Int 13 (+1), Wis 10, Cha 14 (+2)

Those are fine. That's a fine ability distribution maybe you could go a little higher in Con. But that's fine. I mean you're getting a very generous point buy anyways. I will say 16 Dex gives you a +3, not a +2. So you might want to make that adjustment. Which is also why something like Craven could be a good fit here.

Rogue 1/Fighter 2

Nothing wrong here, especially. You might want to consider a few more levels of Rogue in the future, depending on your build goals. Up to Rogue 4 can be taken without any further BAB loss, so that might be something worth doing. There are feats that allow Sneak Attack to stack with other features. Craven is definitely something you should look into that gives your sneak attack scaling.

Feats:
H: Improved Initiative
Rogue 1st: Dodge (1st level feat), Sneak Attack 1d6, Trapfinding
Fighter 1st: Combat Expertise (Bonus Feat)
Fighter 2nd: Combat Reflexes (Bonus Feat), Improved Trip.

I think that your overall feat choice isn't terrible. But you're trying to be something that your stats don't reflect and that's kind of a problem. Three of your feats are based on making melee attacks and for you those attacks are based on Strength, whether you conceptually want that or not. So you are 10% worse at using those than others would be. If you really want to make a dexterous tripping character.

Change your Human Feat from Improved initiative to Combat Expertise. Change your level 1 feat to Weapon Finesse, change your first Fighter Bonus feat to Exotic Weapon Proficiency Spiked Chain. Which is a tripping weapon that works with your finesse, you can even discuss reflavoring it. It's one of the only weapons that actually is worth a feat. It fits with your concept, and now your character is good at tripping. You are now good at the thing you want to do. Which is pretty key.

Edit: Also using a weapon with 10' reach will give your character more of an ability to dodge in and out of combat than any other feat would.

Picking Rogue as a first level class allows me to obtain a very high number of skill points to spend on class skills, which are important to highlight the character's abilities, and because class features like Trapfinding are "canonical" to me, and I find it plausible that Layre would possess them. Sneak Attack, in the case of the character, can be seen as an ability that allows him to deal more damage precisely and accurately when the right conditions occur (perhaps denying the opponent's Dexterity bonus during combat). From my point of view, among the base classes to choose from, it was the one that best reflects Layre's athletic abilities. The two levels in Fighter simply allow me to gain proficiency in martial weapons (the character will use a two-handed longsword) and valuable bonus feat slots. Yes, it's true that the Ranger class would better represent his professional background and skills, but I didn't want to choose a favored enemy; I couldn't justify it without resorting to banalities that I didn't want to use. Additionally, it didn't have important Rogue class skills like Diplomacy that I wanted to have from the start. Also, I wouldn't have chosen a class in which I wouldn't spend another level; Evasion is a great feat for a character with a good Reflex save bonus, and the Rogue gets Evasion almost immediately.

Going Rogue for Sneak Attack and Skill points is fine, you'll probably want to take the Craven feat unless you're going to take a bunch more levels in Rogue.

"Track", on the other hand, is a feat that would have been very useful to me, but spending a feat slot at the early levels for this was too much even for me. I needed the character to be more prepared on the offensive side, since for the aforementioned reasons, he will never be as strong as a pure warrior. I don't exclude the possibility of taking "Track" with subsequent levels. Justifying the temporary absence of such a capability for someone who should possess it (Layre is still a Hunter after all) is possible if we consider Layre's Apprentice status as justification. The boy is young and still learning. With a good Search skill check (which synergizes very well with Rogue abilities), I can find traces but not follow them as an experienced hunter would.

You don't actually need Track to have the character "tracking" only to follow actual tracks. A level in Ranger would do that fine.

I had also considered the Scout class, but even in that case, important abilities were lacking that I wouldn't have obtained even by multiclassing into Fighter later on. Skirmish would have been very useful, perhaps in combination with Spring Attack. In the end, however, I opted for the Rogue. The goal I set for myself is to reach Elusive Target as soon as possible, which should work well with the rest of the build. As a bonus language, I chose Draconic, and I spent two skill points in Knowledge (Arcana) to justify this choice. Layre is intrigued by magic, dragons, and ancient legends, as if that mystical part of himself, unknown, wanted to emerge by manifesting through curiosity about the study of related arts and knowledge.

You definitely need to look into the Suel Arcanamach prestige class. It fits very well with your intended flavor. Spring Attack is a trap.

[pabelfly]

"Layre is an agile and versatile fighter, but not a frontline soldier. He moves swiftly on the battlefield, dodging enemy attacks, demonstrating particular tactical and acrobatic abilities. He studies the weaknesses of his opponents and, when forced into confrontation, strikes to kill. Lacking the strength prized by rough warriors and their aggressive martial nature, he is trained to end the fight before his energy begins to wane.

I've seen other people tackle the issues they see with the build. I'll go with an alternate commentary, and tell you how I'd do the build instead.

Human
Barbarian 1/Scout 2
1) Education
H) Two-Weapon Fighting
3) Knowledge Devotion

Scout works well with an agile hit-and-run class. You get your bonus damage from Skirmish, and it's easier and more reliable than Sneak Attack. You want TWF to get extra hits with for Skirmish. Barbarian gives you Pounce, which lets you do multiple attacks on a charge. You can also trade Rage for Ferocity to boost DEX.

Education makes all Knowledge skills class skills, and Knowledge Devotion lets you use knowledge in certain skills translate into extra attack accuracy and damage against particular enemies. If you want to play the "I am effective in combat because I study my enemies" build, this is the best way to do it, in my opinion.

Where I'd go from here... I'd go a Swift Hunter build: Barbarian 1/Scout 4/Ranger X. Get the Swift Hunter feat, which lets you add skirmish damage to Favored Enemies otherwise immune. You'll also want Weapon Finesse, as mentioned.

Whatever you decide, good luck with your build.

[Curse]

Yes, it's true that the Ranger class would better represent his professional background and skills, but I didn't want to choose a favored enemy; I couldn't justify it without resorting to banalities that I didn't want to use.

...
Your mentor is a monster hunter ... Wouldn't that justify some kind of favored enemy ..?

Your own argumentation speaks for Ranger from several perspectives so why not take it if it fits your narrative?

[Prime32]

You don't actually need Track to have the character "tracking" only to follow actual tracks. A level in Ranger would do that fine.

Agreed that it's generally easier to take a level of ranger than take the feat by itself. Note that there are alternate class features which replace favoured enemy if that's not your thing. Favored environment, favored enemy (arcanists), rival organization, etc. Or a single level in Mystic Ranger from Dragon Magazine will get you 0th level druid spells. There's also Voice of the City, which replaces wild empathy with a talent for communicating with people whose language you don't speak.

As for Diplomacy as a class skill, there are ways of pulling that off. The Apprentice feat from DMG2 can add it as a class skill for your first four levels, while retaining the increased cap afterwards (worth looking at even if you don't use ranger, since an alternate option gives you a limited ability to follow tracks). Martial Study (Crusader's Strike or Vanguard Strike) could add Diplomacy as a class skill permanently.

Since you said you were interested in taking things in an arcane direction eventually, a ranger can also take the Sword of the Arcane Order feat at later levels in order to gain a spellbook and the ability to cast wizard spells from ranger slots.

Bringing up Mystic Ranger again, it starts with 0th level spells then gets new spell levels at 2nd/4th/6th/8th/10th. There are some interesting ranger-exclusive spells out there, like self-buffs which grant sneak attack, and this variant gets to use them sooner. Also a very strong user of Sword of the Arcane Order if you choose to go that route.

---

For another option, Spellthief might work. It gets a die of sneak attack + trapfinding, and some tricks which could reflect an unusual relationship with arcane magic. Though unless you're using the variants from Dragon Magazine and/or the Master Spellthief feat, you can be frequently left without much to do.

---

And then there's Swordsage. You'd probably still want a level in Rogue or a similar class (for much the same reasons as present), but it's very much an evasive hit-and-run type fighter in light armour. Compared to other ToB classes their fighting style is more learned than based on practical experience, so they know a lot of tricks but can be thrown off their rhythm easily if things go wrong, and benefit from planning ahead on how they're going to approach a particular opponent. They focus more on burst damage than full attacks, and can get both sneak attack + ways of rendering enemies flat-footed without hiding. They can get "magical" abilities at higher levels if you so choose (e.g. fire damage or momentarily turning invisible), but they're more in the "extension of your existing skills" style than "unlock a superpower" one.

[Diceless]

First of all, thank you to everyone who has donated their precious time to share their thoughts with me. I truly appreciate it. As I mentioned, I am still a newcomer, but a newcomer extremely fascinated by this new world for me —although I have been playing role-playing games for about fifteen years now, on other platforms and with different game systems—and engaging with all of you is a pleasure I cannot deny.

Now this will probably turn some noses. Mostly because it is entirely to have a character with a clear narrative thread and good mechanical efficiency, if not the maximal mechanical efficiency. They're not in opposition. In fact a character who has the mechanical competencies will likely seem to fit their narrative better. A strong warrior who loses every fight is going to turn into a joke. And many many media have made that mistake. A smart character who can't solve the puzzle or the mystery isn't going to feel narratively smart. So there is a baseline level of competency to have your character function narratively.

I agree. Even though I have the desire not to distort a character born to satisfy my creative instincts and not be an "effective fighting machine," it is clear that I also want their contribution to be significant in the story, and therefore capable of shining in situations where it may be necessary. I will do my best to ensure that these two things coincide without canceling each other out.

This is a cool story. Your build isn't this story. We'll go into that later. But because you are deliberately anti-optimizing your character doesn't fit the story you're presenting.

Thank you. Of course, the story I described is only a brief excerpt from a larger and more detailed chronicle. For Layre, I have written a much more extensive background, rich in details and dialogues, but I didn't want to bore you with too many details, so I presented you with a brief summary.

Suel Arcanamach is something you should look it's a great choice for later multiclassing into Arcane characters, although it might take some refluffing.

Is the prestige class you suggest found in some specific manual? Googling the name, I read that it is on page 63 of the Complete Arcanist, but I couldn't find it. I am an Italian player who plays from Italy and I have an Italian manual. Perhaps it's a translation issue?

So the reason you took the dodge feat is that you envision it helping your character to be an agile combatant, but it doesn't. It doesn't do anything for you mechanically it doesn't help you represent your character as an agile dodge. It's just called "Dodge" it doesn't actually make you good at dodging. So that's something I would swap out. Craven could be a good choice if you wanted to play up your character's background as being somebody who has experienced a lot of terrifying things and who isn't afraid to retreat.

No, I chose the Dodge feat because, as I said, I thought my ultimate goal could be Elusive Target, which is actually a great feat. Dodge and Mobility are prerequisites for Elusive Target. Actually, if I have to be honest, fluff aside, a +1 to AC is something I don't mind. Layre, at least in these early levels, is a somewhat fragile character whose purpose is NOT to get hit, or it could go wrong for him. He has a slight deficiency in attack rolls, it's true, but with a mithral +1 chain shirt and the Dodge feat, I can reach an AC of 19 against a single enemy, which doesn't seem bad to me.

Those are fine. That's a fine ability distribution maybe you could go a little higher in Con. But that's fine. I mean you're getting a very generous point buy anyways. I will say 16 Dex gives you a +3, not a +2. So you might want to make that adjustment. Which is also why something like Craven could be a good fit here.

Yes, of course, I have a +3 bonus in Dexterity. Typo. I'll add that at fourth level, I'll raise Strength from 13 to 14; this way, I'll have an additional bonus to attack rolls and damage, and wielding a two-handed longsword, I should add another +1 to damage, if I understand correctly.

I think that your overall feat choice isn't terrible. But you're trying to be something that your stats don't reflect and that's kind of a problem. Three of your feats are based on making melee attacks and for you those attacks are based on Strength, whether you conceptually want that or not. So you are 10% worse at using those than others would be. If you really want to make a dexterous tripping character.

Change your Human Feat from Improved initiative to Combat Expertise. Change your level 1 feat to Weapon Finesse, change your first Fighter Bonus feat to Exotic Weapon Proficiency Spiked Chain. Which is a tripping weapon that works with your finesse, you can even discuss reflavoring it. It's one of the only weapons that actually is worth a feat. It fits with your concept, and now your character is good at tripping. You are now good at the thing you want to do. Which is pretty key.

Many have suggested that I take the Weapon Finesse feat and use a precise weapon like a rapier or a spiked chain. It's true, it's a wise choice, and definitely the best thing to do, which synergizes well with Improved Trip. But guys, I envisioned my character as a fighter with a longsword, period. I KNOW I'm a real IDIOT, and there's no valid reason why I shouldn't follow your advice, but I'm a hopeless romantic, and when I imagine something working a certain way, I have to play it that way. That's what I meant when I said I didn't want the character to lend itself to such choices, certainly convenient for the technical aspects of the game, but not for my imagination.

Going Rogue for Sneak Attack and Skill points is fine, you'll probably want to take the Craven feat unless you're going to take a bunch more levels in Rogue.

I didn't know about this feat. I should consider it. In any case, yes, I was thinking of taking at least another level in Rogue.

Spring Attack is a trap.

Why would Spring Attack be a trap? Is it overrated?

I've seen other people tackle the issues they see with the build. I'll go with an alternate commentary, and tell you how I'd do the build instead.

Human
Barbarian 1/Scout 2
1) Education
H) Two-Weapon Fighting
3) Knowledge Devotion

Scout works well with an agile hit-and-run class. You get your bonus damage from Skirmish, and it's easier and more reliable than Sneak Attack. You want TWF to get extra hits with for Skirmish. Barbarian gives you Pounce, which lets you do multiple attacks on a charge. You can also trade Rage for Ferocity to boost DEX.

Education makes all Knowledge skills class skills, and Knowledge Devotion lets you use knowledge in certain skills translate into extra attack accuracy and damage against particular enemies. If you want to play the "I am effective in combat because I study my enemies" build, this is the best way to do it, in my opinion.

Where I'd go from here... I'd go a Swift Hunter build: Barbarian 1/Scout 4/Ranger X. Get the Swift Hunter feat, which lets you add skirmish damage to Favored Enemies otherwise immune. You'll also want Weapon Finesse, as mentioned.

Wow, that's a great build! You've really laid out some solid logic; indeed, upon reflection, it's very effective and has its own charm. I didn't know about the Education feat, but I did know about Knowledge Devotion, and indeed it's one of the feats I consider valid to add to my final build, after Elusive Target, which remains my main goal. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to offend you; on the contrary, you've given me a great idea for a build that I might use for my next character, but the reason I can't fully follow it with Layre is that, fundamentally, as I mentioned, I imagine the character performing different actions. For better optimization, I'd like to stay within what I've described, changing everything else but not the type of weapon the character is destined for, for example.

Your mentor is a monster hunter ... Wouldn't that justify some kind of favored enemy ..?

Your own argumentation speaks for Ranger from several perspectives so why not take it if it fits your narrative?

What you're saying makes perfect sense. I myself had considered the Ranger class, especially for the Track feat, which I intend to take before or after. The reason I backed off is that on paper, the Ranger is conceived as a fighter who hunts and studies their prey, yes, but who doesn't use specific agile and acrobatic combat maneuvers; a Rogue multiclassing with a Fighter, on the other hand, perfectly reflects this important aspect, in addition to having a crucial ability that the Ranger lacks and that I intend to use a lot, namely Tumble. If I had multiclassed Rogue/Ranger, I would have had a too slow or too fragmented offensive growth for the character and I would have been forced to multiclass again to fill those gaps. Honestly, the only thing that bothers me is the absence of Track, but if I take it later, I can justify its temporary absence by imagining that Layre, as an Apprentice, is still learning the hunter's art.

I'll add, saying that in addition to Knowledge Education, there are other feats that I have come to consider and that could complete my build, largely based on maximizing the potential of attacks of opportunity, such as Deft Opportunist and Expert Tactician.

[ciopo]

It's "Arcanamach di Suel", perfetto arcanista, pagina 29

[Prime32]

Many have suggested that I take the Weapon Finesse feat and use a precise weapon like a rapier or a spiked chain. It's true, it's a wise choice, and definitely the best thing to do, which synergizes well with Improved Trip. But guys, I envisioned my character as a fighter with a longsword, period. I KNOW I'm a real IDIOT, and there's no valid reason why I shouldn't follow your advice, but I'm a hopeless romantic, and when I imagine something working a certain way, I have to play it that way. That's what I meant when I said I didn't want the character to lend itself to such choices, certainly convenient for the technical aspects of the game, but not for my imagination.

Take a look at feycraft items (Dungeon Master's Guide II, p275). A feycraft light or one-handed weapon is +1,500gp and deals damage as one size smaller, but becomes usable with Weapon Finesse (if the weapon was already finessable then you no longer need the Weapon Finesse feat to wield it that way).

Since you're using a weapon without reach it's difficult to make AoOs against enemies approaching you (and you can't get that from steadfast boots either, unless you're willing to switch to a bastard sword). As far as I know there's no way for a longsword wielder to increase their threatened squares without resorting to spellcasting or freakish mutations (closest is Dancing Blade Form, which grants +5ft reach on your turn only). But a friendly wizard who knows enlarge person would be an especially useful ally.

[Darg]

Why would Spring Attack be a trap? Is it overrated?

No, it's actually a really useful talent. The problem is that many players on here have optimized away the need to control damage intake by obliterating their targets using pounce full attacks. That said, your stats would make that tactic very difficult to achieve. Spring attack is very useful because it allows you to effectively make use of the hide skill to conceal yourself or prevent being full attacked on yourself. It also helps you get into melee range of a creature with larger reach than you do without provoking and gives you a better withdraw action. Not to mention, you move with the attack action which leaves you with a free move action to do with as you want.

[Maat Mons]

If you don’t view Sneak Attack as being central to your character concept, the book Unearthed Arcana has a variant of Rogue that gains bonus feats instead of Sneak Attack. It’s on page 58 in the English-language version. I don’t know if it’s in the same place in the Italian version.

If you’re only interested in Fighter as a way to gain proficiency with all martial weapons, the book Player’s Guide to Faerun has a regional feat called Militia that gives proficiency with all martial weapons. As a regional feat, it can only be taken at 1st level, and it would require you to be from either Altumbel, the Dalelands, Impiltur, Samarach, Thindol, or Turmish. It’s on page 41 in the English-language version. I don’t know if it’s in the same place in the Italian version.

If you decide not to take the Militia feat, Rogue 2 / Fighter 2, using the variant of Rogue that gains bonus feats instead of Sneak Attack, is a pretty solid start for a skillful melee combatant. Rogue 4 / Fighter 2 would be a decent entry into whichever prestige class strikes your fancy. Depending on which prestige class you decide to aim for, there’s a feat called Able Learner in the book Races of Destiny. It causes cross-class skill ranks to only cost as much as class skills. It’s on page 150 in the English-language version. I don’t know if it’s in the same place in the Italian version.

[pabelfly]

Sometimes, when I'm trying to come up with a build, I end up with too many competing build goals. I'll have a whole bunch of things I want to do in a build (and none of these are bad things), but when I try to put it all together, I realize that that the whole is less than the sum of its parts, or that some build goals are simply not compatible with other build goals. I think you have a similar problem.

Here's the list, as I understand it, of what you want for your character:

1) Human
2) Dodge, Mobility, and Combat Reflexes as feats. Elusive Target as your intended Level 6 feat.
3) A single longsword as your main weapon
4) A low STR, high DEX martial build
5) 1d6 sneak attack
6) A bunch of skill points at first level
7) Trapfinding as a skill

If I've missed anything in this list, I do apologize.

Now, I want to be clear: there are no bad build goals. What I would suggest, though, is looking over the list of what you want from the character, and see what aspects you won't change of the build, and what build goals you can accept changing to create the concept to help you end up with a character you're happy to play.

[Troacctid]

I think you should just go ranger! It fits your character concept much better than fighter, and I don't think favored enemy actually conflicts with the story you're telling. Get those skill points!

I also think that you can afford to start off at the start of your warlock character arc instead of waiting for something to happen later in the campaign to kick it off. The development of warlock abilities could be the inciting event that drives your character to leave the life he has now to go on an adventure. Just a single level of warlock, giving him powers that he doesn't fully understand (no ranks in Spellcraft yet) or know how to use effectively (no ranks in Concentration yet).

You also really ought to have an in-character reason for the character to use a longsword, because it really doesn't fit the fighting style you described at all. If he wants to dart in and out of melee and end fights swiftly with powerful single blows while dodging enemy attacks, why would he choose a weapon that lends itself best to prolonged close-quarters combat with a more even balance of offense and defense supported by parrying and an offhand shield? What's special about the longsword from his perspective? Is there some emotional attachment? Did he inherit a sword that has great personal significance for him? Because the fighter you described really, really sounds like someone who uses a polearm for their fighting style, not a longsword.

[AMFV]

I agree. Even though I have the desire not to distort a character born to satisfy my creative instincts and not be an "effective fighting machine," it is clear that I also want their contribution to be significant in the story, and therefore capable of shining in situations where it may be necessary. I will do my best to ensure that these two things coincide without canceling each other out.

Well there are so many ways to build a character that would fit. That's the point

Thank you. Of course, the story I described is only a brief excerpt from a larger and more detailed chronicle. For Layre, I have written a much more extensive background, rich in details and dialogues, but I didn't want to bore you with too many details, so I presented you with a brief summary.

Which your character doesn't fit. Like the dialogues and details don't matter that much if your character is missing the tools for the broad concept completely.

No, I chose the Dodge feat because, as I said, I thought my ultimate goal could be Elusive Target, which is actually a great feat. Dodge and Mobility are prerequisites for Elusive Target. Actually, if I have to be honest, fluff aside, a +1 to AC is something I don't mind. Layre, at least in these early levels, is a somewhat fragile character whose purpose is NOT to get hit, or it could go wrong for him. He has a slight deficiency in attack rolls, it's true, but with a mithral +1 chain shirt and the Dodge feat, I can reach an AC of 19 against a single enemy, which doesn't seem bad to me.

What part of Elusive Target do you think is good? It's not a good feat. Especially since it costs you three feats to get it. It's not even worth one.

Many have suggested that I take the Weapon Finesse feat and use a precise weapon like a rapier or a spiked chain. It's true, it's a wise choice, and definitely the best thing to do, which synergizes well with Improved Trip. But guys, I envisioned my character as a fighter with a longsword, period. I KNOW I'm a real IDIOT, and there's no valid reason why I shouldn't follow your advice, but I'm a hopeless romantic, and when I imagine something working a certain way, I have to play it that way. That's what I meant when I said I didn't want the character to lend itself to such choices, certainly convenient for the technical aspects of the game, but not for my imagination.

I'm gonna be honest "longsword dude" is almost never depicted as "trip dude" usually that would be somebody with a spear or chain.

Why would Spring Attack be a trap? Is it overrated?

No, pretty much everybody agrees that it is garbage that you only take because it's a prerequisite for things. Generally the problem is that you want to be making more than one attack. And the only people who do well with one attack, Martial Initiators already have ways of doing everything you could do with Spring Attack without spending three feats on it. Sudden Leap for example. That gives you additional mobility without spending three feats, you can get it for one.

No, it's actually a really useful talent. The problem is that many players on here have optimized away the need to control damage intake by obliterating their targets using pounce full attacks. That said, your stats would make that tactic very difficult to achieve. Spring attack is very useful because it allows you to effectively make use of the hide skill to conceal yourself or prevent being full attacked on yourself. It also helps you get into melee range of a creature with larger reach than you do without provoking and gives you a better withdraw action. Not to mention, you move with the attack action which leaves you with a free move action to do with as you want.

So you make one attack and then attempt to hide, fairly close to your target. If the DM even rules that Spring Attack works for that. It says that you can make a Hide check as part of movement, it also doesn't give HIPS which is already a problem and if you have some way of doing that you already have better tricks. It is a trap, it is a bad feat, it is not worth the feat slot it is NOT going to prevent damage. Preventing damage is great. That's why things that actually do it... Diamond Mind or Iron Heart Counters for example are rated well.. but this isn't going to do that for, and definitely not by later levels when you're likely to have it.

AC gets rated poorly also, because it doesn't do a good job of preventing damage. That's the thing, you want survivability, but spending feats on **** that doesn't work is dumb.

[Troacctid]

Spring Attack is a trap because of the feat tax. It's good enough to be worth one feat slot, it's just not good enough to be worth three. Flyby Attack is usually the one you really want (or Mobile Spellcasting, if you're a caster).

[pabelfly]

There are two problems with Dodge.

First, you need to remember to use it every turn. You probably won't. People tend to forget small, fiddly bonuses.

Second, there are far more efficient ways to boost your AC. Why take a feat to sometimes boost your AC by +1 when you can take a feat that will permanently boost your AC by +1, or a feat that will temporarily boost your AC by 3 or more points instead?

Unless you have specific feat combos or classes you want to enter, Dodge is more of a feat tax than something you'd deliberately pick up for a character.

[AMFV]

Spring Attack is a trap because of the feat tax. It's good enough to be worth one feat slot, it's just not good enough to be worth three. Flyby Attack is usually the one you really want (or Mobile Spellcasting, if you're a caster).

I'm gonna disagree with you there. Like it is useful, but I don't think it's worth a feat, especially on a martial build where your feats are so precious. Like you're not going to build around doing a lot of damage with one attack for almost any build. So it's not going to be worth the squeeze for it. Like maybe there's some build where it would have good value, but I just it see it being worth the feat for the benefits you get.

I will say that out of the Dodge - Mobility - Spring Attack tree that is required for every PrC that Spring Attack is the least sad option.

[Diceless]

At the moment, I'm traveling by train, and it's difficult for me to respond adequately to each of you, so forgive me if I forget - surely - something and if I can't tag each one of you. However, I wanted to let you know that I've read everything you've suggested and reflected on it deeply. Fortunately, time is on my side, and I still have a week to optimize the character, always keeping in mind that min-maxing is not my goal.

The approach I personally use, at least for this campaign, is a simulationist approach aimed at realizing, on paper, the character I have imagined, and its purpose is not to cover up the weaknesses of my party members. So we should consider Layre as an individual, not as a stopgap. If the character has the same skills as others, so be it; the DM will handle it. We've been assured of that; characters will rotate in different parties from time to time. The talents I described in the opening of my post are almost all geared towards acquiring Elusive Target; whether they are also convenient for the characterization of the character is an interesting addition, but I didn't do it just for that.

I'm considering using class variants, as someone suggested I do. Actually, I had completely forgotten about their existence. As I said, I'm still a newbie, and it shows. Unfortunately, the Scout doesn't have class variants or privilege variants that would allow me to better achieve my goal, and it's a shame because the Scout class would have been my second choice. Spring Attack was a talent I had considered precisely for the combo with Skirmish, but guys, I want to play peacemaker in this feud over the usefulness of Spring Attack and tell you: relax, a guy running back and forth like a maniac to dart beside enemies and hit them, maybe even with the possibility of hiding and starting over immediately after - as if it were a parody of a Scooby Doo chase - sees it as a sort of improbable clowning, believable only in those somewhat parodic manga where comedic characters are frighteningly strong. I consider and imagine combat as a sort of medieval martial confrontation, close-quarters melee combat. If you're alone against a single opponent, you don't start running around risking unnecessary fatigue. And indeed, the rule from the core rulebook that sees the opponent gain an attack of opportunity when you decide to retreat without withdrawing completely lends some credence to my argument. If you're fighting against a huge beast without any kind of plan, or if you're surrounded by multiple enemies, either you retreat immediately or you're so strong that you don't even feel the natural instinct of fear for your own life. So, although I still believe that Spring Attack is a very valid talent when used in the right conditions and useless when used without reason (like everything else, for that matter), I don't think I'll choose it for Layre.

I've also decided that the character will hail from Amn, although he was conceived in the Dalembiyr Valley, in the North, but I won't take talents linked to the region of origin.

Instead, I'm considering two options:
- the possibility of giving up Combat Expertise and Improved Trip, but leaving the rest unchanged, thus having two slots to use;
- the possibility of using the Adventurer variant of the Rogue, giving up Sneak Attack, but gaining an additional talent. In that case, the Rogue would be my resource from which to obtain the class skills I want and many skill ranks.

If I then chose the Survivalist variant of the Fighter, I could also get Survival as a class skill, and in that case, I might consider taking Track. Track uses Survival, so taking Track without spending ranks in the skill wouldn't make much sense. Layre will use light armor and martial weapons, so I don't need proficiency in heavy armor and perhaps not even medium.

However, the possibility of using Sneak Attack to deal more damage is an idea that has always appealed to me. To use it, I would need something that allows me more easily to negate the opponent's Dexterity. I had thought of replacing Improved Trip with Improved Feint, but against non-humanoid creatures, beasts, or monsters with low intelligence, it's not very useful. Also, you can't feint constantly against an enemy. Considering what I've written, do you have any ideas regarding this?

[Prime32]

However, the possibility of using Sneak Attack to deal more damage is an idea that has always appealed to me. To use it, I would need something that allows me more easily to negate the opponent's Dexterity. I had thought of replacing Improved Trip with Improved Feint, but against non-humanoid creatures, beasts, or monsters with low intelligence, it's not very useful. Also, you can't feint constantly against an enemy. Considering what I've written, do you have any ideas regarding this?

Feint is a really awkward way of setting up sneak attack, even against humanoids (needing Improved Feint just to feint and attack in the same turn is... why). Flanking with your allies is much more reliable, and actually lets you make full attacks. But...

Swordsages can get access to easy feinting, easy flanking and Improved Trip... sort of. Less powerful and can't be spammed every turn, but more reliable when you do use them. That's how Tome of Battle was designed in general: it's hard to make an incompetent character even if you're picking options entirely at random (and likewise it makes picking an optimal weapon less important), but at the same time it's hard to make a truly broken character either.

Take 1-3 levels in swordsage, and besides decent skill points you're getting:

Standard action unless otherwise stated. While in the heat of combat, you can't spam the same maneuver over and over; you have to take a full-round action to catch your breath before you can use it again (more front-line classes can recover more easily, but they don't know as many maneuvers as swordsage does; the Adaptive Style feat helps if you find this painful). You know 6 of these at 1st level, and learn another at each level thereafter. Your options include but are not limited to:

Setting Sun

• Baffling Defense: As an immediate action you can make a Sense Motive check and use the result in place of your AC against a single attack. Only works if it's possible for you to react to the attack (i.e. you can't be flat-footed).
• Counter Charge: When a foe charges you, you can attempt an opposed Str or Dex check against them as an immediate action (with a +4 bonus if you attempt a Str check against a creature of smaller size, or a Dex check against someone larger). On success you sidestep their attack, on failure they gain an extra +2 bonus on their attack against you.
• Mighty Throw: Make a trip attempt as if you had Improved Trip, and you can use the higher of Str or Dex on your trip attempt. On success you don't get the free attack from Improved Trip, but you can push the opponent up to 10ft back.

Diamond Mind

• Emerald Razor: Make a melee attack targeting touch AC in place of regular AC.
• Moment of Perfect Mind: As an immediate action, make a Concentration check in place of a Will save.
• Sapphire Nightmare Blade: As part of a melee attack, make a Concentration check (DC = your foe's AC). If you succeed, you catch the foe flat-footed and deal +1d6 damage if it hits (on top of any sneak attack etc. you might possess). If if fails, your attack is made at a -2 penalty.

Desert Wind

• Flashing Sun: Make one extra attack as part of a full attack, but all attacks are at a -2 penalty.
• Wind Stride: As a swift action, gain +10ft speed until the end of your turn.

The Martial Study feat lets you learn a new maneuver from any list; if you choose one from Devoted Spirit (which swordsages normally can't access) then you gain Diplomacy as a class skill for all classes.

Passive abilities, but you can only maintain one at a time; switching between them is a swift action. You learn one at 1st, 2nd and 5th level.

• Island of Blades: As long as you and an ally threaten the same opponent, you both count as flanking even if you're not on opposite sides.
• Stance of Clarity: Focus on a single opponent to gain +2 AC against them, but -2 AC against everyone else.
• Step of the Wind: Ignore penalties from difficult terrain; when fighting someone suffering from difficult terrain you get +2 attack, and +4 to make/resist bull rush and trip attempts
• Stonefoot Stance: When fighting an opponent of a larger size category than yourself, gain +2 AC and +2 on Strength checks against them as long as you stand your ground (i.e. the stance ends if you move more than 5ft).
• Assassin's Stance: (available at lv5+, requires one Shadow Hand maneuver) You gain sneak attack +2d6
• Pearl of Black Doubt: (available at lv5+, requires one Diamond Mind maneuver) Each time a foe attacks you and misses, you gain a cumulative +2 bonus to AC until the start of your next turn.

[RNightstalker]

Kudos to you for sticking to your guns about your character. I think the best way the playground can help is if you'd give us two lists: one for dealbreakers that you absolutely want to have, and the other for things you'd like to include.

[Darg]

So you make one attack and then attempt to hide, fairly close to your target. If the DM even rules that Spring Attack works for that. It says that you can make a Hide check as part of movement, it also doesn't give HIPS which is already a problem and if you have some way of doing that you already have better tricks. It is a trap, it is a bad feat, it is not worth the feat slot it is NOT going to prevent damage. Preventing damage is great. That's why things that actually do it... Diamond Mind or Iron Heart Counters for example are rated well.. but this isn't going to do that for, and definitely not by later levels when you're likely to have it.

AC gets rated poorly also, because it doesn't do a good job of preventing damage. That's the thing, you want survivability, but spending feats on **** that doesn't work is dumb.

You only need cover or concealment to hide without HiPS. Not always available sure, but not exactly rare either. It's only one of the tricks you can use with the feat.

It isn't going to prevent damage? How do you figure? Movement without provoking AoOs doesn't prevent damage? Keeping a creature outside of 5 ft step range so that they can't full attack you doesn't prevent damage? Combined, you can attack a huge or larger dragon without having to deal with the massive full attack lineup and without provoking an AoO as you move into range to attack yourself.

AC is excellent damage prevention vs attacks. If it isn't an attack then of course AC isn't going to prevent damage. Just like how fire damage immunity is terrible damage prevention against anything not fire. If you have 18 AC vs a +4 attack you have a 35% chance not to be hit at all. Or put another way, you would be able to take on average 2.86x as many attacks as 0 AC before you drop. The +1 AC from dodge makes that 3.33x attacks. Want to know what mobility does for AoOs at this point? 10x attacks. We could also do incremental average damage reduction. Dodge would reduce attack damage taken on average by 14.3% and dodge + mobility reduces by 71.4%. It's an extremely large amount of damage negation if you actually use the feats, which really help when you want to set up a flank or want to move around a crowded battlefield.

[pabelfly]

You only need cover or concealment to hide without HiPS. Not always available sure, but not exactly rare either. It's only one of the tricks you can use with the feat.

It isn't going to prevent damage? How do you figure? Movement without provoking AoOs doesn't prevent damage? Keeping a creature outside of 5 ft step range so that they can't full attack you doesn't prevent damage? Combined, you can attack a huge or larger dragon without having to deal with the massive full attack lineup and without provoking an AoO as you move into range to attack yourself.

AC is excellent damage prevention vs attacks. If it isn't an attack then of course AC isn't going to prevent damage. Just like how fire damage immunity is terrible damage prevention against anything not fire. If you have 18 AC vs a +4 attack you have a 35% chance not to be hit at all. Or put another way, you would be able to take on average 2.86x as many attacks as 0 AC before you drop. The +1 AC from dodge makes that 3.33x attacks. Want to know what mobility does for AoOs at this point? 10x attacks. We could also do incremental average damage reduction. Dodge would reduce attack damage taken on average by 14.3% and dodge + mobility reduces by 71.4%. It's an extremely large amount of damage negation if you actually use the feats, which really help when you want to set up a flank or want to move around a crowded battlefield.

Reminder that Mobility applies only if you specifically trigger an attack of opportunity by moving in our out of a threatened square. They occasionally happen, especially if your DM likes reach weapons, but I've personally not experienced it so often that I'd take the feat for it.

AC is good, but I think there's ways to get it for a character that are more consistent.

[Paragon]

Hey there,

I think you've come to the right place asking for ideas about the best d&d version yet :p

I agree with pretty much what everyone said that trying to ignore optimising the rules in 3.5 will probably leave you having a bad game experience.
With that said, let's try to simply give you more data to process and let you decide what you want to do with it :)

- Drow Fighter ACF (DotU) applies to fighters that want to drop heavy armor and get Dex to dmg on flat footed target within 30ft (+2 Init)
- Swashbuckler (CW) is an often overlooked base class. 3 levels are usually nice since it adds Int to damage, gets 4+Int skill, full BAB and Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat.
- Warblade (and maybe Swordsage) (ToB, both) are base classes that make martial character well, better martial characters, you might want to look into it
- Mariner (DCS) is yet another base class that might be a mix of stuff you'd like (if you refluff it as "not a sailor but a loner" taste, maybe).

I second the Ranger with ACFs propositions ; it is highly customisable.

As for prestige classes, Suel Armanach (Web) is pretty good for what you have in mind as suggested before. I would add Telflammar Shadowlord (UE) into the pool since you're hellbent on having worthless feats, might as well put them to good use :p

Have fun playing the game, and I hope your DM can bend enough rules so you won't suffer the backlash from unoptimised choices.

[Darg]

Reminder that Mobility applies only if you specifically trigger an attack of opportunity by moving in our out of a threatened square. They occasionally happen, especially if your DM likes reach weapons, but I've personally not experienced it so often that I'd take the feat for it.

AC is good, but I think there's ways to get it for a character that are more consistent.

Consistent AC is good, but so are situational bonuses you make use of a lot. Dodge -> Mobility -> Spring Attack encourages a specific style of play where you purposely provoke. It makes a lot of sense that if you don't play that way then the feats are less than ideal. Just like how a pounce shocktrooper isn't going to be that much stronger than a character without those if you aren't free to charge very often.

Edit: That said, I do house rule that dodge is just a straight up +1 to dodge AC. It pretty much ends up that way when you realize what "any action" allows you to do.

[pabelfly]

Edit: That said, I do house rule that dodge is just a straight up +1 to dodge AC. It pretty much ends up that way when you realize what "any action" allows you to do.

To me, the intent with the feat is pretty clear that you can only change it on your action each turn, so you can designate a different person to be "dodging". If they wanted you to be able to change it whenever you wanted (aka any action, regardless of who is doing it), it would be far easier to just give you a flat +1 to AC without any extra wording.

[Darg]

To me, the intent with the feat is pretty clear that you can only change it on your action each turn, so you can designate a different person to be "dodging". If they wanted you to be able to change it whenever you wanted (aka any action, regardless of who is doing it), it would be far easier to just give you a flat +1 to AC without any extra wording.

It really would have been easier (and arguably should have been.) I'm not one of the people that assumes that every statement by the rules completely overrules previous statements in the rules. "Any action" doesn't have to conflict with "during your turn" and so it doesn't. Thus it's "any action during your turn." Though action does include free/swift/immediate done on your turn. There are plenty of ways to have unimpeded repeated designation during one's turn.

[AMFV]

Reminder that Mobility applies only if you specifically trigger an attack of opportunity by moving in our out of a threatened square. They occasionally happen, especially if your DM likes reach weapons, but I've personally not experienced it so often that I'd take the feat for it.

AC is good, but I think there's ways to get it for a character that are more consistent.

The problem with AC is that monster hit bonuses scale much more rapidly than you're usually able to scale it. So basically you wind up being better off with forms of defense that don't care about the monsters hit bonus. That's why miss chance is generally a much better form of defense.

This isn't always true but it is often enough true that you should probably not consider AC as a super great defense unless you can get a whole crap load of it

Edit,:

To me, the intent with the feat is pretty clear that you can only change it on your action each turn, so you can designate a different person to be "dodging". If they wanted you to be able to change it whenever you wanted (aka any action, regardless of who is doing it), it would be far easier to just give you a flat +1 to AC without any extra wording.

I mean given the Dodge feat's kind of weak status I think you probably be okay just allowing it to given an increase of one to your AC all the time

[pabelfly]

The problem with AC is that monster hit bonuses scale much more rapidly than you're usually able to scale it. So basically you wind up being better off with forms of defense that don't care about the monsters hit bonus. That's why miss chance is generally a much better form of defense.

This isn't always true but it is often enough true that you should probably not consider AC as a super great defense unless you can get a whole crap load of it

1 AC is a (roughly) 5% chance to miss. Even if the enemy has ridiculous to-hit bonuses, with how BAB iteratives works, that can still be a relevant bonus for several parts of an enemy attack.

I mean given the Dodge feat's kind of weak status I think you probably be okay just allowing it to given an increase of one to your AC all the time

Agreed. 1 AC for a feat is on the slightly weaker side so that would be fine.

[Prime32]

Besides Elusive Target, there's another mechanic related to Dodge targets that's pretty potent: "Word Given Form" (Tome of Magic p218) gives all their attacks against you a 50% miss chance(!). It's a martial art mastery - basically a feat which you gain "for free" as a reward for meeting incredibly painful prerequisites (in this case six feats + 12 ranks in two skills, both of which require jumping through hoops just to get them as class skills).