PHB2 general feats review (heroic tier)

[DracoSuave]

I find it intriguing that in the original post, the only feats that were allowed were ones that seemed boring or useless to the OP. The ones that seemed good and/or useful weren't allowed.

'This feat makes a weapon no one would normally take into a useable weapon, allowing for concepts in superheroic fantasy characters using that weapon to be supported by the system. BAN IT!'

 

[Tuft]

I noticed that too.

I know from plenty of experience that banning things I thought were "too good" often led to hurt feelings and less fun in-game. It's tempting to ban stuff (like Battlerager Fighters?), but if it's ruining no player's fun, it's not worth the cost.

Easy to say, harder to practice.

Words of wisdom, indeed!

 

[DogBackward]

If you wanna make the "Improved ---" powers work, I suggest you add the following to the feats:

Improved Bull Rush: If your Bull Rush is successful, you can Slide the target 1 square instead of Pushing it.
(Fling him aside makes just as much sense as push him forward.)

Improved Grab: You also gain a +2 bonus to all defenses to resist a Grabbed target's attempt to escape your Grab.

I've always hated anything that's just a flat bonus. That's why I rarely take Skill Focus, and I'm not gonna take Expertise unless I'm using a build that requires it, like a low-stat or low-Prof. weapon wielder or the like. I much prefer feats that give you extra options with your existing abilities. Admittedly, there's not much you can do with Improved Grab that isn't overpowering, but adding the defense bonus makes it more worthwhile to try to keep someone grabbed, at least.

(By the way, OP: D&D is about getting together with friends and having fun, not trying to find new and innovative ways to stifle creativity and drive your players away. You might wanna think on that before going ban-crazy.)

 

[DracoSuave]

I am not happy with the Goliath weapons training feat...it seems a very poor choice after the Dwarven and Eladrin ones, which do roughly the same thing, but also grant proficiency with superior weapons.

Roughly the same thing, but not -exactly- the same thing. DWT and EWT give you access to a single weapon type in superior, and a static damage bonus to a non-strength giving class. Most melee weapon fighters are Strength based, so the bonus makes up for the lack of strength at heroic tier.

On the other hand, the Goliath IS a Strength based class. As well, the bonus gets larger as you enter paragon and epic tier; This feat isn't supposed to analogue DWT, it's supposed to be a racial 'Weapon Focus but Better' feat. It gives Goliaths a reason to go after a Great Sword rather than a full blade, or a maul rather than a mordenkrad.


That said... do want me some Dwarven Mordenkrad Avenger.

 

[MrBeens]

I'm curious if the OP has done this for all feats in the PHB and Martial power also, as long as with all of the powers.
How much of the game is left to your players?
The thing about feats is that they are a limited resource. I could understand being concerned about some of the mechanics of them if they just applied to everyone, but what is wrong with one guy being so well trained with a crossbow that he reloads it really fast - to do this he has to give up another equally useful feat like Toughness.

 

[keterys]

It's interesting to see how many feats are not allowed. I'm used to more the other way - a few feats are chosen as banned and rest allowed.

I think Combat Medic would be good if it allowed you to trigger Second Wind on another character as a minor. At that point it would be very useful.

 

[TheLordWinter]

Wow - there's a lot of harsh critique of the OP here. Allusions to him being "a really annoying DM" or "ban crazy." I gotta say, having come from the 3rd edition environment, I am also not letting things in whole-cloth. You don't need splat books to be creative, and your feat selection shouldn't determine how much fun you're having with your character, should it?

Once upon a time during 3rd edition, after playing with numerous ridiculous source books and in the thick of the edition, I decided I wanted to understand it a bit better by just playing a core game with my friends. Foremost they were livid at the very suggestion, and were adamant that we not do it. It ended with them saying they'd rather not play than play in just core.

So with that perspective in mind, banning now makes perfect sense to me. If later on something seems fine? Let it back in. While I'd disagree with some of the OP's choices on banned feats, the notion that he can choose what is and isn't allowed in his game? That I'll get behind.

I for one am all for picking and choosing what races, classes, paragon paths, epic destinies, feats, rituals and even equipment I bring into my game world. It's my setting, shaped by the actions of the players, and so I feel entirely comfortable saying what props are and are not allowed there-in. The overall "fun" isn't going to be lessened by making do with less, the players will simply have to be more creative with what they have. At least, that's my two cents.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Well, there's two differences here. The Player's Handbook 2 is not just "another splatbook", it is a core book. Technically Martial Power is too, but it's more of an outlier than the PHB 2.

Secondly, there's a difference between letting things and then deciding "Hmm, this isn't working out too great" and saying "Hmm, I don't like the looks of this. Instant ban."

The DM that I play with tends to have a bit of a hair trigger about things too, and I'm constantly trying to talk to him about stuff. For example, he was going to make Masterwork Armor super rare and very hard to get a hold of...but he was just making this decision as a gut reaction to things like Godplate without ever seeing it in play or really looking at the math.

Once I was able to show him the math and how Masterwork Heavy Armor essentially allows the Heavy Armor users to keep up with the DEX users, he understood why he was being too quick to take it out, and let it back in for the most part. There's still some little "extra" things we might have to do to get it, but it's not longer stuff like "You want Tarrasque Plate? Kill a Tarrasque." sort of stuff.

This is why being too quick with the banhammer can be a bad thing. It's usually a lot better to let something in first, see how it works, and then take it out if it's OP. If you want to let your players know that ahead of time, that's cool...but at least then they get a chance to try it and see if it works well in the system or not.

 

[Lakoda]

Thoughts?

Yes.

Coordinated Explosion - this is meant as a way help out when you HAVE to blast allies in order to hit the target. You can't always (or at least don't have the time) to move everyone into position before you AoE them. This is meant as a bit of a help to that.
Distant Advantage - 4e has never made shooting into melee dangerous, as evident by the fact that allies don't provide cover.

Melee Training - I only this for DEX (and obviously the swordmage's specific one is still in).

Restful Healing - wow, really?! this is the easiest feat ever, you rest and you get maxed healing, how hard is that.

Speed Loader - I'd allow it, I don't see it having much impact.

Surging Flame - I don't mind this that much, but what gets me is that the other damage types don't have one like it.

 

[Obryn]

Well, there's two differences here. The Player's Handbook 2 is not just "another splatbook", it is a core book. Technically Martial Power is too, but it's more of an outlier than the PHB 2.

I think that's kind of a spurious argument. 4e's PHB2 is no more "core" than 3e's PHB2 in the way you're describing.

I don't think "core" in this context means anything other than "It's largely setting-neutral, so drop it in anywhere!" It's not core as in "It's essential for the game!" And, by definition, if it's not essential, you don't lose anything if you get rid of it. 4e without splatbooks is a perfectly playable, complete game.

With that said, I agree that swinging the splatbook banhammer around prematurely doesn't help anyone. I'd much rather give everything a shot, then decide for myself. (Heck, I'm even doing this with Battlerager Vigor...) My players are easy to work with, and I'll let them know when something is experimental.

Also, as I said above, by my read nothing in PHB2 (apart from Expertise) is noticeably power-creepish. :shrug: All I can say is that I'd allow all of it, and that I can't see a mechanical reason to ban any of it. In fact, I see a lot of logic behind many of the existing feats - even Melee Training. But if a group wants to ban stuff, it's their game - I might disagree and debate it, but if that's how they play, it's pretty much irrelevant.

-O