Fixing SKR's Feat Point System - Page 2

willpell · 06-03-2012, 04:54 AM

IMO you guys are a little too judgmental. Endurance may not be strong but it can save your life if you're stuck in the desert or something, plus it's the prereq for Diehard, plus it means you never have to take off your armor. It should be cheap, but not practically free.

And 5 points for Skill Focus is really really low, considering how SF lets you do everything from giving a Fighter/Cleric/etc. a decent check on one more skill than he could afford, to having your already-skillful Rogue bust the Level 1 skill cap by almost double. I would have way too much fun being able to buy two Skill Focuses for the price of one feat.

Also I don't think SKR was far off in pricing Manyshot at a 12; it lets you get extra attacks and that's always going to be a fairly big deal, if only because you trust your luck.

sonofzeal · 06-03-2012, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willpell

IMO you guys are a little too judgmental. Endurance may not be strong but it can save your life if you're stuck in the desert or something, plus it's the prereq for Diehard, plus it means you never have to take off your armor. It should be cheap, but not practically free.

Generally speaking the only characters who would pick this up (likely as a prereq for a PrC like Dwarven Defender) are usually the characters who already have the highest Con / Fort. If they're in a position where having this feat is going to save them, the rest of the party is probably pooched. And such occurences are not frequent in most games; I don't know if I've ever once had a character who was forced to make those checks.

And Diehard isn't that great either. The only time it kicks in is when you'd be unconscious, or in other words "out of the fight and alive". Most of the time, continuing to fight under those circumstances puts you in grave risk of actual death. Not to mention that, past lvl 4 or so, the chances of hitting that relatively narrow range is not huge. It's a better feat than Toughness I suppose, but that's really not saying much.

Quote:

And 5 points for Skill Focus is really really low, considering how SF lets you do everything from giving a Fighter/Cleric/etc. a decent check on one more skill than he could afford, to having your already-skillful Rogue bust the Level 1 skill cap by almost double. I would have way too much fun being able to buy two Skill Focuses for the price of one feat.

A +3 is not going to matter much in most cases. If you haven't already invested in that skill, it's not going to get you a reliable success. And if you are investing in that skill, there are plenty of ways to boost it. Masterwork Tools are 50gp a pop for a +2. Boosting skills is not "expensive" in game terms.

Quote:

Also I don't think SKR was far off in pricing Manyshot at a 12; it lets you get extra attacks and that's always going to be a fairly big deal, if only because you trust your luck.

The attack penalty on Manyshot is simply too high. The range is too limited. And because it's a "volley", you can only apply precision damage (Sneak Attack, Skirmish, Favoured Enemy) once. Manyshot is not a good feat, and it becomes worse as you level and your full attack routine improves in comparison.

willpell · 06-03-2012, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofzeal

It's a better feat than Toughness I suppose, but that's really not saying much.

Speaking of which, do you know where SKR got the idea of Toughness +5? Did he just make it up or is it in one of the books somewhere.

Quote:

A +3 is not going to matter much in most cases. If you haven't already invested in that skill, it's not going to get you a reliable success.

Perhaps not, but it significantly ups your odds of an unreliable one. 1d20+0 will hit a DC 10 check half the time; 1d20+3 makes it closer to two-thirds. I prefer for my character to have at least a chance of contributing in a lot of situations, and just generally seeming like a well-rounded individual, instead of being a one-trick pony who's dumb as a box of rocks (unless being dumb as a box of rocks is a part of his characterization, rather than just a consqeuence of not having any skill points).

Quote:

And if you are investing in that skill, there are plenty of ways to boost it. Masterwork Tools are 50gp a pop for a +2.

There are many checks for which a masterwork tool doesn't make sense, and others for which it's overpriced (Alchemist's Lab being the obvious example, but even Climb costs 80 gold rather than 50, and that's a big deal for level 1 characters unless the GM is generous). Plus you can stack Skill Focus and the masterwork tool, and ranks and an ability score. Maybe there are other sources of bonuses in books I haven't read, but at least in core Skill Focus has utility for helping your check hit an absurd bonus at the early levels.

Quote:

The attack penalty on Manyshot is simply too high. The range is too limited. And because it's a "volley", you can only apply precision damage (Sneak Attack, Skirmish, Favoured Enemy) once. Manyshot is not a good feat, and it becomes worse as you level and your full attack routine improves in comparison.

Being able to full-attack is not something you can rely upon in my experience. And precision damage only matters to a handful of classes. Multiple attacks as a standard action is danged impressive according to everything I've seen (which is admittedly not much compared to professional optimizers, or even people who get to play every week for a year or so; I am sadly not one of those people).

sonofzeal · 06-03-2012, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willpell

Speaking of which, do you know where SKR got the idea of Toughness +5? Did he just make it up or is it in one of the books somewhere.

No idea, sorry. I think he just made it up, as a tacit acknowledgement that Toughness by itself is ridiculously weak.

Quote:

Perhaps not, but it significantly ups your odds of an unreliable one. 1d20+0 will hit a DC 10 check half the time; 1d20+3 makes it closer to two-thirds. I prefer for my character to have at least a chance of contributing in a lot of situations, and just generally seeming like a well-rounded individual, instead of being a one-trick pony who's dumb as a box of rocks (unless being dumb as a box of rocks is a part of his characterization, rather than just a consqeuence of not having any skill points).

That's a fair call as far as personal preference goes, but taking a couple off-specialty Skill Focuses is hardly a significant balance concern. I'm happy with it being cheap; if it fits your playstyle and is a good deal for you, take it!

Quote:

There are many checks for which a masterwork tool doesn't make sense, and others for which it's overpriced (Alchemist's Lab being the obvious example, but even Climb costs 80 gold rather than 50, and that's a big deal for level 1 characters unless the GM is generous). Plus you can stack Skill Focus and the masterwork tool, and ranks and an ability score. Maybe there are other sources of bonuses in books I haven't read, but at least in core Skill Focus has utility for helping your check hit an absurd bonus at the early levels.

You're right that skills can be pumped very easily. Still, for most skillchecks, all that matters is success or failure. Unless you're substituting skillchecks for saves or attack rolls, even having autosuccess on a particular skill you've focused on isn't that big a deal. Again, not something I'm worried about. For most characters in most situations, Skill Focus at half value isn't all that tempting from an optimization perspective. And for those few exceptions, it'll remain worthwhile even if I up the cost a point or two, which is all I'd be doing anyway. I think it's fine where it is.

Quote:

Being able to full-attack is not something you can rely upon in my experience. And precision damage only matters to a handful of classes. Multiple attacks as a standard action is danged impressive according to everything I've seen (which is admittedly not much compared to professional optimizers, or even people who get to play every week for a year or so; I am sadly not one of those people).

It's nice, but you still have the other limitations mentioned: -4 or more to attack rolls is pretty crippling, and 30 range is highly limiting for an archery character. And archers are usually the characters who can most reliably depend on being able to full attack consistently. For a melee character, something like this would be nice... but for an archer, there's a pretty heavy "why" quotient.

Curmudgeon · 06-03-2012, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willpell

Multiple attacks as a standard action is danged impressive according to everything I've seen (which is admittedly not much compared to professional optimizers, or even people who get to play every week for a year or so; I am sadly not one of those people).

Multiple attacks with just a standard action? Not too hard to come by:

Manyshot feat
Improved Trip feat
Cleave feat
Snap Kick feat
Bounding Assault feat
Splitting weapon property
Skirmisher Boots magic item
Claw Gloves magic item
Animate Plants spell
Control Plants spell
Control Undead spell
Evard’s Black Tentacles spell
Giant Vermin spell
Insect Plague spell
Meteor Swarm spell
Scorching Ray spell

Any number of area effect spells will also "attack" multiple targets with a standard action casting, but I only listed spells which feature actual attack rolls, either by the spellcaster directly or by multiple entities under their control.

The Glyphstone · 06-03-2012, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willpell

Being able to full-attack is not something you can rely upon in my experience. And precision damage only matters to a handful of classes. Multiple attacks as a standard action is danged impressive according to everything I've seen (which is admittedly not much compared to professional optimizers, or even people who get to play every week for a year or so; I am sadly not one of those people).

..you're an archer. Any attack you make is a full attack, unless you started your turn out of line of sight of an enemy.

Aeryr · 06-03-2012, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flickerdart

If the opponent has no Sense Motive ranks and 10 Wisdom, they will still disbelieve a Bluff check of 4 80% of the time.

Also, for Rogues missing with attacks - why not just finagle some touch attacks to hit with? A simple 1-level dip into Pyrokineticist gives you both the means of making easy hits, and the reach to avoid some enemy counterattacks.

Then don't make incredible lies, and don't roll a 1

On the rogue matter if I were going for damage I prefer a well educated daring outlaw.

Spoiler

Curmudgeon · 06-03-2012, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aeryr

Something like: rogue 3 / Swashbuckler 3 / barbarian 1 / Swashbuclker +6 / Fighter 2 / Swashbuckler +5

Assuming you've got Swashbuckler as your favored class (which would be the case if you were a Human or Half-Elf) you're still suffering a 20% XP penalty from having Barbarian more than 1 level below your next-highest class.

Aeryr · 06-03-2012, 07:44 AM

True, my bad to used to ignore multiclass penalties (it can work trading the levels in fighter for swordsage, and graving the jumping/pouncing maneuvers).

Ernir · 06-03-2012, 08:20 AM

If feats are being assigned a value, I'd like to see the lower end of the scale used more. There are some hilariously terrible feats out there.
Like the +2/+2 skill feats. I can't imagine the situation where I'd like to risk delaying my Mounted Combat line in favor of one.

I'd be pricing them at something like 2...

Quote:

Increasing the availability of feats in general favours non-casters, in my opinion.

Not sure I agree with this being true in general. This is true at the extreme feat shortage end of the scale, where the spellcasters can actually contribute without using feats, while the (non-ToB) melee characters can barely do anything but hack away with their 1d8+4 longsword.
But it changes a bit once the feat shortage is less than critical, IMO. Some spellcasting feats are really, really strong, and easy to cherry-pick.

I don't think increasing feat availability necessarily benefits the casters more, but I wouldn't trust it closing the gap very much.

Especially when Empower Spell is cheaper than Weapon Finesse.

willpell · 06-03-2012, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernir

If feats are being assigned a value, I'd like to see the lower end of the scale used more. There are some hilariously terrible feats out there.
Like the +2/+2 skill feats. I can't imagine the situation where I'd like to risk delaying my Mounted Combat line in favor of one.

I'd be pricing them at something like 2...

It should probably come as no surprise by now that I love those feats.

Airanath · 06-03-2012, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

BAB +3 at 1st level?

Also not legal.

Sure, switch this with blind fight, it was a distraction from the rogue 20 build I made to free up some feat slots, and one of the feats not require, but fun to have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Step 7. Feats must come before step 9. Class Features in the Level Advancement sequence (see Player's Handbook on pages 58-59), so you can't satisfy the feat prerequisite.

I posted the order I took the levels, at 12th, its when he took swordsage 1, which, by the way, grants a stance known and 6 manuevers knows.
Lets say Island of Blades, due to your next point, to which I'll concede.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Regardless of initiator level, you follow the rule for what stance you get at Swordsage 1:

Sure, I'll concede to this point by RAW.
As such lets switch some feats around:
Lvl 10: Craven (In place of Crippling strike, since I am going for raw damage, and stuff can be immune to this anyway)
Lvl 13: Martial Stance (Assassin Stance)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

That Dark Creature template's Hide in Plain Sight doesn't overcome the need for cover/concealment in order to use the Hide skill, and you only can guarantee cover/concealment for 1 round per combat with Cloak of Deception and only if you've got a swift action available ─ though that still won't work in daylight.

With all the remaining money, I just need to get creative.
Smoke Sticks, Wands of Darkness, Flash Pellets, a pletora of items that don't consume even a small part of the wealth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Bogus nonexistent custom magic item.

Its still not custom, I forgot about that part of the Dorje rule, which is particularly silly one way or another. Let's use power stones instead. From the pricing given at the EPH, each would cost: 12.5x1(Power Level)x19(ML)= 237,5 gold to create, double that for market price, 475gp a pop. Allowing us to purchase 241 of those babies for the same price as the Dorje, and have some change. And they actually improve the Insight bonus by an aditional +1! I should have looked at that earlier, its cheaper than a Dorje, just less space friendly. I recon that base of operations you can buy with the money you still have is important now. You need what? 1? 2 of those a day? If you fight more than 1 mark that is!
A custom magic item would grant me +6 insight bonus while worn, for a insanely cheaper price.
Something like: Bracers of Combat Awareness:

Spoiler

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

There are just so many rules violations that I'm not going to bother with any more of this.

There were 2, and due to distractions during the creation. And they were so big it took me 5 minutes after waking up to solve them. Also, thank you for actually improving this character! Who would have tought 240 ML 19 Power Stones, were cheaper than a dorje with the same power at ML 17! Who would have tought of that!

@Aeryr: TWF still deals more damage, due to a simple problem: Sneak Attack doesn't double on crits. So you are hitting attacks a bit more often, but the raw damage output is lower. The whole debate of rogues and TWF is that. I won't argue tought, I would play your daring outlaw more often than said rogue, just because it seems a funnier character concept. My point was, statisticaly, TWF is a viable choice for rogues, as it meshes well with SA. I didn't bother with considering flanking because I was making the char as self suficient as possible. He can provide for all his buffs on his own trough items.

Fitz10019 · 06-03-2012, 11:56 AM

Overall, I think is a great approach. [My houserule is to handle L4, L8, L12, L16, L20 stat bumps as an increase in the point buy system, so I favor this kind of resource spending.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofzeal

Mostly, though, I just eyeballed:

10 FP: this feat is excellent, a high priority for any relevant characters
8 FP: this feat opens up some new tactical possibilities or expands existing ones significantly
6 FP: this feat is decent, but the sort of thing you'd otherwise pass over for lack of feat slots
4 FP: this feat is weak, and generally not worth thinking about except for highly specialized builds

[elsewhere...]
Metamagic (including Quicken) is relatively cheap because it carries its own cost.

Because metamagic feats can be applied to many different spells, to me they would always ping as 10 (excellent) or 8 (new tactical possibilities).

I think the latter comment ("carries its own cost") shows you have more rules at work that aren't listed in the bullet points of the premise. It'd be good to articulate those other factors. Here are other possible factors:

The number of prerequisites a feat requires could be a factor. Use 10,8,6,4 FP as a baseline, then calculate 12-(# of prereqs), and take the lower score.

A feat could have different costs for different classes. A preparation caster with a huge spell list like a wizard, cleric or druid gets much more versatility from a metamagic feat than more limited casters like sorcerers, bards, rangers, paladins, or beguilers.

sonofzeal · 06-03-2012, 06:47 PM

After several comments, I've raised Metamagic feat costs slightly. I also lowered TWF from 8 to 7.

Curmudgeon · 06-03-2012, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

There are just so many rules violations that I'm not going to bother with any more of this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airanath

There were 2, and due to distractions during the creation.

As a useful guideline, if you're distracted and haven't gotten the details right, you might not want to post and broadcast your unreadiness to the entire community.

Illegal Mage Slayer feat (prerequisite not met)
Illegal Shadow Blade feat (prerequisite not met)
Illegal stance @ Swordsage 1 (not 1st level)
2 bogus custom items (scabbards). These don't exist in the game, and you need to be a magic item creator with Craft Wondrous Item, plus DM approval, to introduce such into the game. You don't have those.
Illegal dorje (manifester level higher than allowed)

I stopped enumerating after the first 5 illegal components in your build. There were more, but (as I noted) I'm not going to bother fixing any more of them for you.

D@rK-SePHiRoTH- · 06-03-2012, 10:54 PM

Would you allow this feat?

Battle Experience
Prerequisite: none
Effect: You gain a permanent +1 bonus to hit, damage, armor class, saves, initiative, hit points and combat maneuvers opposed checks.
Special: you can select this feat multiple times. It's effects stack
Special: A fighter can select
Special: Whenever the effects of this feat or multiple iterations of it are equal or superior to those granted by another feat presented in the Player's Handbook, you are considered as having that feat for the purpose of prerequisites. IE, if you have selected Battle Experience twice, you are treated as having Dodge, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization.

I believe this feat could fix most problems without the need of introducing a point-based system,
I also believe that this is still not as powerful as Knowledge Devotion, Craven, or Shock Trooper.

EDIT: I'm not trying to make a point, I just want some feedback.
The reason why I consider this feat inferior to those above mentioned it's that it gives a lot of small, static, unfocused bonuses. It makes you overall better but not easily powerful.
Even if you took it 5 times, you'd still be only as good at attacking as a character who took once Knowledge Devotion. And with the other 4 feats he could have obtained effective tactics (charging, jack b quick etc).
Your defense would be better, but defense matters less than offense.
I really think that this feat would make a good, balanced addition to the game, and be a decent (but not excellent) fighter fix.

sonofzeal · 06-03-2012, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D@rK-SePHiRoTH-

Would you allow this feat?

Battle Experience
Prerequisite: none
Effect: You gain a permanent +1 bonus to hit, damage, armor class, saves, initiative, hit points and combat maneuvers opposed checks.
Special: you can select this feat multiple times. It's effects stack
Special: A fighter can select

I think this is still not as powerful as Knowledge Devotion, Craven, or Shock Trooper.

It's more powerful. Craven mostly just boosts damage, and boost it relative to your level. Given that hp also goes up relative to your level, that's only natural. Damage needs to scale.

To-hit, AC, Saves, Init, and combat maneuvers work differently. For those, you're working off a d20's range, which is static. I'd take this feat over any of those, especially since (unlike most of them) there's no prereqs or other investments necessary, and (unlike all of them) it can be stacked repeatedly.

I'm not sure what your point is though. None of those feats are under discussion yet.

Fitz10019 · 06-04-2012, 10:37 AM

I thought it might be interesting to categorize the feats, to see if the Feat Point Cost values are consistent. I think this would make it easier to evaluate the 3000 other feats from various sources.

Feat Name Feat Cost Category Categorization Notes
Improved Feint 8 action economy upgrade a standard action is improved to a move action, or a move to swift, etc.
Quick Draw 5 action economy upgrade
Rapid Reload 6 action economy upgrade
Improved Critical 8 any attack, possible always could apply
Combat Expertise 6 any attack, with trade-off build-in trade-off you can choose
Power Attack 10 any attack, with trade-off
Manyshot 7 any attack, with trade-off
Blind-Fight 6 combat, situational, opponent(s) you do not directly decide when this is applicable, because it varies by opponent
Cleave 7 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Dodge 5 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Great Cleave 4 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Greater Spell Penetration 5 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Improved Precise Shot 8 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Improved Turning 6 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Spell Penetration 8 combat, situational, opponent(s)
Deflect Arrows 7 combat, situational, other(s)' choices you can't create the needed situation, others do
Improved Counterspell 7 combat, situational, other(s)' choices
Snatch Arrows 4 combat, situational, other(s)' choices
Two-Weapon Defense 4 combat, situational, other(s)' choices
Improved Flanking 8 combat, situational, your choices you can try to create the needed situation
Mobility 4 combat, situational, your choices
Mounted Archery 5 combat, situational, your choices
Mounted Combat 6 combat, situational, your choices
Point Blank Shot 6 combat, situational, your choices
Ride-By Attack 8 combat, situational, your choices
Shot On The Run 8 combat, situational, your choices
Spirited Charge 8 combat, situational, your choices
Greater Weapon Focus 6 every attack, definite; improved attack can be used in every round of combat, usually every attack
Weapon Finesse 8 every attack, definite; improved attack
Weapon Focus 7 every attack, definite; improved attack
Greater Weapon Specialization 4 every attack, definite; improved damage can be used in every round of combat, usually every attack
Weapon Specialization 5 every attack, definite; improved damage
Knowledge Devotion 8 improved damage, situational, other expense, scaling included because it's different from PHB feats, notably scaling
Extra Turning 8 limited count a finite resource
Stunning Fist 8 limited count
Toughness 3 limited count
Combat Reflexes 8 combat, situational, other(s)' choices; limited count two limiters here
Augment Summoning 10 magic I failed to differentiate much among magic-related feats
Empower Spell 7 magic
Enlarge Spell 7 magic
Eschew Materials 4 magic
Extend Spell 7 magic
Greater Spell Focus 6 magic
Heighten Spell 6 magic
Maximize Spell 7 magic
Natural Spell 10 magic
Quicken Spell 10 magic
Silent Spell 7 magic
Spell Focus 7 magic
Still Spell 7 magic
Widen Spell 6 magic
Greater Two-Weapon Fighting 3 More Attack(s) (with more precision damage possible) 'more attacks' groups many ways this is done
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting 4 More Attack(s) (with more precision damage possible)
Rapid Shot 8 More Attack(s) (with more precision damage possible)
Snap Kick 5 More Attack(s) (with more precision damage possible) added as a Non-PHB example
Whirlwind Attack 9 More Attack(s) (with more precision damage possible)
Trample 6 More Attack(s) (without more precision damage) the mount attacks, probably without precision damage
Brew Potion 4 non-combat only does not occur during combat
Craft Magic Arms and Armor 6 non-combat only
Craft Rod 6 non-combat only
Craft Staff 6 non-combat only
Craft Wand 6 non-combat only
Craft Wondrous Item 8 non-combat only
Forge Ring 6 non-combat only
Scribe Scroll 6 non-combat only
Spell Mastery 6 non-combat only
Track 5 non-combat only
Improved Initiative 8 once per combat used once per combat (unlike Power Attack)
Spring Attack 9 once per round gives an attack that's designated as a standard action
Armor Proficiency (Heavy) 5 Proficiency could probably be folded into category Remove Penalty
Armor Proficiency (Light) 5 Proficiency
Armor Proficiency (Medium) 5 Proficiency
Exotic Weapon Proficiency 5 Proficiency
Martial Weapon Proficiency 4 Proficiency
Shield Proficiency 5 Proficiency
Simple Weapon Proficiency 3 Proficiency
Tower Shield Proficiency 6 Proficiency
Improved Unarmed Strike 4 Remove AoO not as good as next
Improved Bull Rush 5 Remove AoO+Bonus no AoO and a bonus on the opposed roll; this is a whole family of combat feats
Improved Disarm 6 Remove AoO+Bonus
Improved Grapple 8 Remove AoO+Bonus
Improved Overrun 6 Remove AoO+Bonus
Improved Sunder 6 Remove AoO+Bonus
Improved Trip 10 Remove AoO+Bonus; More Attack(s) (with more precision) SoZ noted Improved Trip is better, and here it falls into two categories with no limiters
Far Shot 5 Remove Penalty a penalty is removed or lessened
Improved Shield Bash 8 Remove penalty
Precise Shot 7 Remove Penalty
Two-Weapon Fighting 7 Remove Penalty
Diehard 3 Remove Penalty the inability to act is removed(?) - this was difficult to categorize
Run 4 Remove Penalty; action economy upgrade; Skills, Combat applicable unlike Improved Trip, hitting more than 1 category does not mean higher value
Endurance 3 Saves
Great Fortitude 7 Saves
Iron Will 7 Saves
Lightning Reflexes 7 Saves
Acrobatic 4 Skills, Combat applicable some skills apply in combat
Alertness 4 Skills, Combat applicable
Animal Affinity 4 Skills, Combat applicable
Combat Casting 4 Skills, Combat applicable
Deft Hands 4 Skills, Combat applicable
Magical Aptitude 4 Skills, Combat applicable
Stealthy 4 Skills, Combat applicable
Skill Focus 5 Skills, Combat applicable (some); Skills, Non-combat (some)
Agile 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable some skills do not apply in combat
Athletic 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Deceitful 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Diligent 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Investigator 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Negotiator 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Nimble Fingers 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Persuasive 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Self-Sufficient 4 Skills, Non-combat applicable
Leadership 15 special case As SoZ said:A truly game-breaking feat if used right
Extras
Ascetic Hunter 10 multiple class feature advancement the best of two worlds
Daring Outlaw 10 multiple class feature advancement
Swift Ambusher 10 multiple class feature advancement

I don't intend to update this table -- consider it a snapshot of SonofZeal's primary table in the OP.

I'd really like to know how people would evaluate multi-class compatibility feats, like Ascetic Hunter, Daring Outlaw and Swift Ambusher. I would say these are 10's for multiple class feature advancement. [appended to table above]

Curmudgeon · 06-04-2012, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz10019

I'd really like to know how people would evaluate multi-class compatibility feats, like Ascetic Hunter, Daring Outlaw and Swift Ambusher. I would say these are 10's for multiple class feature advancement. [appended to table above]

I think you're off with describing Ascetic Hunter as "multiple class feature advancement" and "the best of two worlds". This feat advances unarmed damage with Ranger levels, but it doesn't advance favored enemy bonuses with Monk levels. The benefit which it does give is situational (actually nonexistent without another feat: Stunning Fist). So this feat and a 1-level Monk dip gives good unarmed damage; it's really just for Monk 1/Ranger X. It's a decent feat if you'll be making unarmed strike, so worth about 6 points due to dip cost and situational nature.

Swift Ambusher provides a boost to skirmish, but no boost to sneak attack, from combined Rogue+Scout levels. The only benefit on the Rogue end is in qualifying for some Ambush feats, which is definitely not worth the cost of a feat. Again, it's a dip feat: Scout 3/Rogue X, instead of a real multiclassing feat. Another situational feat with a high associated cost (a 3-level dip with loss of 1½d6 sneak attack damage); worth about 5 points.

Daring Outlaw, on the other hand, gives full advancement to sneak attack, grace, and dodge bonus ─ useful features from both Rogue and Swashbuckler classes. Sneak attack is the stronger pick-up, especially since this feat as worded lets you achieve full sneak attack progression with zero Rogue levels. Fully worth 10 points; maybe 12.

Set · 06-04-2012, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dumbledore lives

I think spell focus might be undervalued, because while not a definite pick if I'm at all focusing on one school it can be pretty useful. With this a Gnome illusionist could get even more ridiculous DCs, getting effectively +2 for what used to be +1. I'd say they should both be around +7, but I'm not expert on these kinds of things.

The wonky bit is that Spell Focus's value is dependent upon the school chosen.

Spell Focus - Abjuration and Spell Focus - Divination are kinda junky. (Barring access to a bunch of homebrew or third-party Abjuration or Divination spells that make more use of saves than the current batch.)

Spell Focus - Evocation, Transmutation, Illusion, Enchantment, Necromancy or Conjuration are going to be much more useful, and, even then, Spell Focus - Conjuration seems to be taken 9 out of 10 times as a prereq for Augment Summoning, and not for it's own sake.

Fitz10019 · 06-04-2012, 01:21 PM

Valid points. I was thinking about Daring Outlaw but wanted to list more than one of the type. I agree with 12 for Daring Outlaw, less for the others.

I guess that goes to show that these hybrid class feats should not be treated as their own category, but as more members of the other categories. We should look at what they do.

Daring Outlaw would fall into:

combat, situational, your choices + improved damage [improving Sneak Attack]
combat, situational, opponent(s) [improving Dodge]
Saves [improving Grace]

Ascetic Hunter would fall into:

every attack, definite; improved damage [damage die]
limited count [really an improvement to an existing limited count, Stunning Fist]
remove restriction [new category: multi-classing permitted where otherwise not]

Swift Ambusher would fall into:

combat, situational, your choices; +improved damage [skirmish damage]
combat, situational, your choices; +improved AC [skirmish AC]
limited feat type [new category: allowed as a Scout bonus feat]

Are these categories useful, or am I just muddying the water?

I'm keen on the idea that you can homebrew a feat, give it a low price for its situational type, and watch your players enjoy it. All the while it doesn't have to be a be-all-end-all improvement over all other feats.

imneuromancer · 06-04-2012, 03:09 PM

I respect SKR, but I almost literally LOL'd in front of complete strangers when I read the text of Combat Casting:

"since most of the time you're make Concentration checks are in combat so it's in your best interest to take this +4 feat over the general +3 feat"

You only get the bonus when casting on the defensive or when in a grapple.

If you are casting on the defensive or when grappling, you probably have not done something right, and that extra +1 ain't gunna help you. But that extra +3 may help against that archer or monk that is trying to disrupt your spellcasting through damage (which is not covered in Combat Casting)...

sonofzeal · 06-05-2012, 07:19 AM

Fitz10019 - thanks for the table! I'm not quite sure what to do with it yet, but it looks handy!

Quote:

Originally Posted by imneuromancer

I respect SKR, but I almost literally LOL'd in front of complete strangers when I read the text of Combat Casting:

"since most of the time you're make Concentration checks are in combat so it's in your best interest to take this +4 feat over the general +3 feat"

You only get the bonus when casting on the defensive or when in a grapple.

If you are casting on the defensive or when grappling, you probably have not done something right, and that extra +1 ain't gunna help you. But that extra +3 may help against that archer or monk that is trying to disrupt your spellcasting through damage (which is not covered in Combat Casting)...

I also love how that very line has a grammar mistake.

Other gems - admitting that EWP is 50% as good as Weapon Spec but giving it 90% the cost, or describing Improved Initiative as "not quite as good as a +2/+2 skill feat because you normally can only use it once per combat".

hoverfrog · 06-11-2012, 08:27 AM

Some of these feats are worth more in different kinds of games. For example Track is almost completely useless in urban campaigns but in a wilderness campaign where the PCs are on the hunt for escaped fugitives or dangerous monsters it becomes almost indispensable. For that reason it seems to be to be very difficult to choose appropriate points for a generic system because each game will be different.

Also Scribe Scroll (6 points) is more expensive than Brew Potion (4 points) though potions and oils are usable by anyone while scrolls are usable only by a caster of the same type as the maker. True there are costs for item creation and potions don't have the range of versatility of a scroll but surely that is balanced out and the costs should be the same?

I don't mind if you disagree but I'd like to understand the reasoning for the difference, small though it is.

Flickerdart · 06-11-2012, 08:56 AM

Potions are awful. I've never once seen anyone use a potion, even one they didn't pay for. If a million Player's Handbooks were printed without Brew Potion, I do not think anybody would notice.

sonofzeal · 06-11-2012, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoverfrog

Some of these feats are worth more in different kinds of games. For example Track is almost completely useless in urban campaigns but in a wilderness campaign where the PCs are on the hunt for escaped fugitives or dangerous monsters it becomes almost indispensable. For that reason it seems to be to be very difficult to choose appropriate points for a generic system because each game will be different.

Also Scribe Scroll (6 points) is more expensive than Brew Potion (4 points) though potions and oils are usable by anyone while scrolls are usable only by a caster of the same type as the maker. True there are costs for item creation and potions don't have the range of versatility of a scroll but surely that is balanced out and the costs should be the same?

I don't mind if you disagree but I'd like to understand the reasoning for the difference, small though it is.

Flickerdart kind of nailed it about Potions. They're almost invariably a horrible price for the benefit. Healing Potions are the most common, but almost any character is better off with some other method, even just a Healing Belt (MIC). Rare is the party where there isn't at least one spellcaster or someone who has UMD, and either of those are all that's necessary for wands and scrolls to absolutely dominate in any cost/benefit analysis. And if there isn't a caster or UMDer, who's taking this feat? Even 4 points is a bit harsh, but I'd rather err on the side of caution. It still gets a lower score than any other item creation though.

As to Track, I'm of the opinion that it's mostly a glorified plothook disguised as a class feature. Generally speaking, if the DM wants you to follow something they'll be able to give the context clues without the feat. That said, I've used it before, especially when combined with Scent, to gain advantage even in an Urban setting... but such uses are not major. It makes sense that some characters can track better than others, but there doesn't really need to be a feat for it in the first place. If it was just a survival/search roll in the first place, nobody would have cared.

Neither feat is worthless, but I think both are the sort of highly situational/marginal things that really can't be given much weight.

Amoren · 06-11-2012, 11:17 AM

I recommend Divine Metamagic to be anywhere from 15-20 point cost, when you get to it. It is THAT good. :P

Anyway, improved feint seems to be a bit high, especially since it requires a prerequisite of combat expertise. And given how feinting is almost considered to be worthless by everyone, probably too much for the 8 price tag I saw it with. In fact, the only build I know of that uses Improved Feinting for any real effect is an Invisible Blade build, and only so they can qualify for surprising riposte if the DM won't rule that having a class feature that not only is equal to it, but surpasses it eventually, qualifies you as having it.

I recommend giving it a cost of six, since it's a 'decent' feat, but not something someone would take with limited choices because it is so rare and with better options. Surprising Riposte, however, should likely be given an 8, since it not only makes it deadly on Invisible Blade builds (especially with Hit and Run Fighter), but it means someone else can use it on the BBEG and make him flat footed for everyone ELSE until his turn comes up.

Tyndmyr · 06-11-2012, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernir

If feats are being assigned a value, I'd like to see the lower end of the scale used more. There are some hilariously terrible feats out there.
Like the +2/+2 skill feats. I can't imagine the situation where I'd like to risk delaying my Mounted Combat line in favor of one.

I'd be pricing them at something like 2...

Yeah, I don't know that I've ever taken one of them. They're pretty terrible.

Now, here's the big problem with the whole ball of wax....it's subjective as hell, and feats vary depending on combos. Iron Will is better if it's an entry requirement for that sweet PrC you want. What combos are available will vary depending on allowed sources.

So, long story short, feats don't have static values, which kind of undercuts the whole thing.

Edit: The original list really is quite hilarious. I admit I'd enjoy playing with it quite a bit, and gleefully taking "worthless" feats like Improved Init.

hoverfrog · 06-12-2012, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofzeal

Even 4 points is a bit harsh, but I'd rather err on the side of caution. It still gets a lower score than any other item creation though.

Awesome. I would definitely take it at that point cost and use it to make oils of magic weapon, keen edge, etc and those handy boost things like bull's strength that every fighter needs just before a fight. A whole party can boost up in a few rounds rather than have the buff spell casters waste their spells and time doing it. Still, I get that it isn't for everyone. Thanks for the explanation.

sonofzeal · 06-12-2012, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr

Yeah, I don't know that I've ever taken one of them. They're pretty terrible.

Now, here's the big problem with the whole ball of wax....it's subjective as hell, and feats vary depending on combos. Iron Will is better if it's an entry requirement for that sweet PrC you want. What combos are available will vary depending on allowed sources.

So, long story short, feats don't have static values, which kind of undercuts the whole thing.

Edit: The original list really is quite hilarious. I admit I'd enjoy playing with it quite a bit, and gleefully taking "worthless" feats like Improved Init.

Well, I'm mostly tried to err on the side of caution. Many feats have secondary purposes, which is why even the terrible ones don't have a negligible cost. And I tried working from the assumption that the people taking the feat are the people most likely to benefit from it.

So... while feats vary in value a lot, by trying to aim on the higher end of that range (maybe at the 75% mark), we end up with costs that are reasonable for some, a good deal for some, a bad deal for some, but unlikely to be particularly abusive except in extremely specialized builds. And people can pick and choose around the ones that are bad deals for any given character, since there'll likely be others that are better deals now that costs are lower on average.

It's a problem, you're right, but I don't think it's a big one. And it's certainly better than the current system which effectively assigns each feat a value of 10.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoverfrog

Awesome. I would definitely take it at that point cost and use it to make oils of magic weapon, keen edge, etc and those handy boost things like bull's strength that every fighter needs just before a fight. A whole party can boost up in a few rounds rather than have the buff spell casters waste their spells and time doing it. Still, I get that it isn't for everyone. Thanks for the explanation.

Honestly, I think that's excellent if I'm hitting the sweet spot where people start thinking "hey, y'know, maybe I could actually make use of this". Someone already mentioned that for all those +2/+2 skill ones, and more power to them! Neither they nor Brew Potions are ever going to seriously unbalance the game, but if it's low enough to pique people's interests without being a obviously good deal, I think that's perfect.