Are these feats too powerful?

[Ave Rage]

A player in a game of mine has a half-dragon paladin and has taken these two feats:

"Lucky" grants the 'luck' ability (you know, reroll any one roll a day) he found it in "the book of feats".


and a feat he made called "Draconic spell resistance" which gives him SR of his level + 11

I thought that both of these feats were overpowered as a cleric has to take a domain to get the one ability and you have to be drow to start off with SR. For the dragon feat, he says a pre-req is that you have to be a dragon which offsets the power of the feat, but in terms of power that's saying you have to be 4th level to take this feat. When I look at it like that it seems much more overpowered when after 4th level, every caster pretty much has a 50% miss chance (I dont see why anyone wouldn't take this feat if they could).

I just wanted the boards opinion on these. Thanks for any help.

 

[kreynolds]

Spell Resistance of CR + 11 more or less equates to 50% of spells failing against him when those spells are cast from a spellcaster who's level is equal to the player's (see the sidebar on page 300 of the 3.5 MM for more on this). In my opinion, that's way too much gain for a feat without offsetting said gain. I don't think having a prerequisite of "dragon" makes up for that at all either. After all, dragon's don't get SR for the cost of single feat.

You might also check out Savage Species. It recommends at least a +1 level adjustment just for having SR.

 

[jgsugden]

A player in a game of mine has a half-dragon paladin and has taken these two feats:

"Lucky" grants the 'luck' ability (you know, reroll any one roll a day) he found it in "the book of feats".

and a feat he made called "Draconic spell resistance" which gives him SR of his level + 11

I just wanted the boards opinion on these. Thanks for any help.

Balance is campaign specific. In a campaign with almost no spells or spell-like abilities, SR is pretty useless. In a campaign where spells fly around in every encounter, SR is an uber-ability.

In a 'typical' bread and butter game (core rules) campaign, my guess is that both of these feats would be too strong.

A weaker version of the lucky feat would allow the PC to (1/day) declare that he wants to be lucky before making a roll. Then, allow him to roll twice and select the better result. I allow that as a feat ... and it has not proven to be a problem.

The SR feat is probably too strong in almost all games. If I felt a need for such a feat, I'd probably rewrite the feat to grant an SR of 11 (no growth / level) or an increase of +2 to natural SR already present.

 

[der_kluge]

When my wife played a few years ago, she was one of those that would roll the dice, not like the result and declare "I didn't like that, I'm gonna roll that again", and say it directly to the DM. No one really cared, since she wasn't really into the game anyway, and she didn't know the rules, she just knew that high was good.

And I was responsible for modifying her character when she leveled, since she didn't know how. So, when it was time to pick a new feat, I took that "Lucky" feat since I felt it was only right to legitimize what she had already been doing.

For the next campaign, I gave it to my sorcerer.

I hardly ever used it. I think the feat's power is really dependent on the game. It can really come in handy when you have to make a critical life-saving roll, but for the most part, I would forget that I even had it. In run-of-the-mill combat, you don't want to just blow it because you rolled to low to hit something, because there might be a more important use for it later on. So, I wouldn't use, the combat would eventually be over with, and then that game would be over, so then I would have not even used it for that day.

Plus, there's a chance (and this happened to me a couple of times) you botch a roll, and then re-roll it with the Feat, and get a WORSE roll the second time. So, it's not perfect in that regard.

I think it's a perfectly good feat, and not overly-powerful at all.


The SR feat is fairly powerful. To beat an SR 11, a caster needs to make a 1d20 + caster level check (+modifiers if any) to beat that. An SR 11 implies that a caster level 1 spellcaster will fail to affect the Paladin 50% of the time. If, at 4th level, he has an SR 11, a 4th level caster can still affect him 65% of the time (7 or better on a 20) (75% of the time if the caster has spell penetration). Of course, *then* the paladin gets a save, or whatever. So yes, it's pretty powerful.

I wouldn't allow the second feat, not just because it's too powerful, but also because of all the additional rolls that will now be required for combat.

That said, I don't think it's uber-powerful, but I would modify it.
Draconic Spell Resistance
Dragon blood that flows through your veins gives you an innate spell resistance.
Prerequisites: dragon-blood, Cha 13+
You have innate spell resistance equal to your character level, plus your Charisma modifier.
Special: must be taken at 1st level

With this version, a 1st level paladin, with an 18 charisma would have an SR 5 (1+4). A 1st level sorcerer could beat that with a 4 or better on a 1d20.

 

[the Jester]

In my opinion both are too powerful as is.

die_kluge's version of the SR feat is good, though perhaps even a little weak.

 

[Camarath]

I suggest you give him SR 3 + chacter level instead of SR 11 + chacter level. That would basicly give him SR equal to his ECL (since Level Adjustment would not count toward SR) so it would be ineffective against casters of his own level or higher but would aid against lower level caster. If he wants to increase his SR let him do it at a +2 per feat.

 

[Ave Rage]

Thanks guys, that's exactly what I'm looking for.

I'll probably allow him to have SR, but a more reduced version.

The Luck ability I think I'll still not use if only because a cleric has to take a domain to get the ability and to be able to reroll that '1' on a save or die is extremely powerful.

Now, if he wants to take a level of cleric and take the "luck" domain, I wouldn't have a problem with it

 

[kreynolds]

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with a feat granting a static SR 12. Allowing improvement by +2 with additional feats is also a good idea. In fact, there's already a couple of feats (probably more) for the latter. Both are called Improved Spell Resistance, one is an epic feat in the ELH, and the other is a general feat from Dungeon #100.

 

[James McMurray]

Also check the Draconomicon for a spell resistance feat geared specifically to dragons. It probably won't help him much though, as it goes off of racial hit dice IIRC. But its definitely more balanced.

Tell him the feats prereq is "must be aTrue Dragon" instead of "must be a Dragon." Then use it on every dragon the party fights and see if they think its too powerful.

 

[Ave Rage]

Also check the Draconomicon for a spell resistance feat geared specifically to dragons. It probably won't help him much though, as it goes off of racial hit dice IIRC. But its definitely more balanced.

Tell him the feats prereq is "must be aTrue Dragon" instead of "must be a Dragon." Then use it on every dragon the party fights and see if they think its too powerful.

Well, if every PC would have taken the feat if offered, I don't see why every dragon wouldn't

I dont think I'll be putting any dragons in for awhile though. Last time I thought I was smart enough to run a dragon encounter things ended badly X(