Feats

Jdvn1 · Jun 13, 2005

Knight Otu said:
I feel this should be somewhat rewritten, if used at all. There are a number of problems with the feat:

Most reach weapons cannot be used against adjacent enemies. This feat would either allow the wielder to ignore that restriction, or allow the wielder to exceed the reach of the weapon.

Wielders of polearms that do not provide reach would be allowed to exceed the reach of the weapon.

The feat allows hitting multiple enemies with one attack roll, similar to whirlwind attack - without the multitude of prerequisites, and without the language to prevent extra attacks (such as cleave). And it is not quite as narrow as whirlwind attack.

These points combined lead me against this feat, and its improved version.

The feat, as I read it, would allow one to exceed his reach. Which is pretty powerful, I think, but that's where the AoO comes in, too. And the cover bonus to AC. It does give an ability similar to Whirlwind Attack, but is much less powerful (only one attack, and the two mitigating factors mentioned). This seems like another dextrous sort of feat, so I'd consider adding Dodge to the prereq's or increasing the BAB req to +6 or +11 (so you're using your full attack (and losing iterative attacks) for only two hits anyway) or both.

GnomeWorks said:
Stabbing Thrust is just a problem feat. It's only advantage is allowing a creature to, essentially, extend its reach, which is a serious issue and shouldn't be allowed with one simple feat.

What would you recommend for prereq's? I dont' think Combat Expertise quite fits... Combat Reflexes? Dodge? Mobility? It's not an easy maneuver to do, regardless.

Knight Otu said:
For the bardic feats in general, most are lacking a range where one is needed. Also, the general description notes that activating the feats is usually a standard action, while many of the feats refer to a five round long performance as though it was a general rule.

Fermata should propably use a Will save.

The costs in bardic music uses should seriously be examined. They seem off in a few cases.

I'll look into ranges and costs. The Will save makes sense. I'll also see if any Eberron feats might be comparable.

Bront · Jun 13, 2005

Jdvn1 said:
A move action for an attack is probably too powerful, IMO. I dont' mind the option to make a Tumble check, but the AoO is the balancing factor, here, and makes sense mechanically.

You could make it a standard action to do both, meaning you still have a move action. But, otherwise you have a move action to tumble and a standard action to attack. So, the idea is, for this to be a worthwhile feat, it has to do something beyond normal. The origional way it's written requires 2 feats, which is just as good as having a high tumble skill, which doesn't seem like a good trade off.

It was just my offering. Tweek it to your heart's content, it's your proposal thread

Jdvn1 · Jun 13, 2005

Bront said:
You could make it a standard action to do both, meaning you still have a move action.

Yeah, that's what I mentioned in the post before that.

Bront said:
It was just my offering. Tweek it to your heart's content, it's your proposal thread

Nono! I started it, but it's for everyone. We have to find a balance and flavor that's suitable for LEW.

Also, I'd rather have an underpowered flavorful feat that gives characters a cool ability than an overpowerful feat that got vetoed.

Bront · Jun 13, 2005

Well if you use my writeup, you have somethign that's nice and flavored. Of course, I don't know what'd you'd actualy DO with a move action...

Like I said, steal it and deal with it. It seems to be that most proposals edit the first post. Go for it.

azmodean · Jun 13, 2005

I really like Bront's version, but I think it would be better for it to be a standard action, or full-round action with some kind of bonus to the attack.

My reasoning:
1. As written, you still have a standard action left, and could attack again, or even perform another Slice Through. Attacking as part of a move action is problematic.
2. Tumbling through an opponent's space is hard (DC 25), if you have to perform an action that difficult to get the benefit of the feat and spend a full-round action on it, I think you deserve a bonus of some sort in addition to the attack. Perhaps denying the opponent their dex bonus vs. the attack. There are several feats that allow that.
3. I think it would be good as a standard action, as the focus seems to be on mobility, and that would let you do something like close with the enemy and get past them, or get past them and then keep moving, with the feat providing the benefit of an attack while you're moving. With Spring attack as a prerequisite, it's definitely not overpowered.

Bront · Jun 13, 2005

Revised due to popular demand.

SLICE THROUGH [GENERAL]
You may strike your opponent when tumbling through them.
Prerequisites: Dex 13+, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, 5 Ranks Tumble, BAB +6
Benefit: As a standard action you can make a normal melee attack against your opponent while tumbling through his square if you succeed your tumble check. The attack happens while in the opponent's square(s), so does not gain any benifits from flanking. You must tumble in a straight line, and be able to make it through to the other side of the opponent as if tumbling normaly (one-half speed). All other rules for tumbling through an opponent's square apply.
Normal: Tumble at one-half speed through an area occupied by an enemy (over, under, or around the opponent) as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so. Failure means you stop before entering the enemy-occupied area and provoke an attack of opportunity from that enemy.

azmodean · Jun 14, 2005

Oh, you might want to note that this movement counts against your maximum movement for a round. Or you might specify it as being "free" movement that doesn't count, I'd be fine with that, just don't know about the judges.

Bront · Jun 14, 2005

As written, I believe it's like taking a move action as a standard action, but you get an attack with it as well in the tumble. So, if you continue to move, it would be like making a double move. If the judges feel it needs clairification, I can do that.