D&D 5E Defensive Duelist fix?

DND_Reborn

Legend
Defensive duelist only works for a single attack where shield applies to all attacks until the start of the next turn. Not really the same thing.
And that would also be a simple fix for me, make the bonus to AC last until the end of the current turn. At least that way you can get it for any follow-up attacks?
 

log in or register to remove this ad





DND_Reborn

Legend
It's quite strong enough as it is.
For myself anyway, I have never seen a player take this feat for their characters--or frankly even talked about considering it.

Compare it to Arcane Deflection. Although it only adds a +2 static bonus to AC, it also can add instead a +4 bonus to a saving throw! That is pretty huge IMO.

Now, I think Defensive Duelist as a concept has total merit! I also think if the buff to AC was equal to your attack bonus with the weapon you are parrying with, instead of just your proficiency bonus, it would be better. I mean, it is a feat after all. They don't have to be OP of course, but for most of the levels of play a +2 to maybe +4 bonus against one attack, at the cost of your reaction, just isn't really that great as I see it.

Since you think it is good enough as it is, great! But apparently a there are players such as the OP and myself, who don't. I like the idea of adding something more to it, or buffing what it already does, or make it a half feat and give it a +1 DEX bump. Then I would probably see it taken a time or two, if for nothing else than the DEX bump.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
If it provided exactly that, it would be a permanent +5 to AC and the monsters might as well pack up their weapons and go home.

It's quite strong enough as it is.
I'm glad you like it. Why waste time in a thread where other people are discussing how to fix it for their group, who obviously disagree with you? That's rhetorical. There is no good reason. Please stop.
If the attack misses, deal damage to the attacker equal to your proficiency bonus.
I'd rather the damage have a chance to miss, and involve rolling for damage.
 

I'm glad you like it. Why waste time in a thread where other people are discussing how to fix it for their group, who obviously disagree with you? That's rhetorical. There is no good reason. Please stop.

I'd rather the damage have a chance to miss, and involve rolling for damage.
Sometimes it's worth the effort to try to convince people that their assumptions are off - in this case, making a case that the feat being buffed doesn't need it because it's sufficiently powerful as-is. Now, that does involve 'making a case' (as opposed to just saying "you're wrong.") but that would be a valid contribution to the conversation.

For example: At high levels, Defensive Duelist is very good - a +4 AC only once per turn is still fantastic even against multiple opponents, since it's going to change the result of 1/4 attacks outside of extreme cases. If you've already maxed out dex on your Errol Flynn-based fencer character, it's likely to be the best option (especially if your dm requires you to make all of your attacks before shield bashing). Any change made to the feat needs to account for this or you'll have something that's overpowered (as in, outshines non-rapier builds) at high levels even if it's still a meh choice at lower levels.

Or just remove the scaling and make it +5 (or whatever) regardless of level.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Sometimes it's worth the effort to try to convince people that their assumptions are off - in this case, making a case that the feat being buffed doesn't need it because it's sufficiently powerful as-is. Now, that does involve 'making a case' (as opposed to just saying "you're wrong.") but that would be a valid contribution to the conversation.

For example: At high levels, Defensive Duelist is very good - a +4 AC only once per turn is still fantastic even against multiple opponents, since it's going to change the result of 1/4 attacks outside of extreme cases. If you've already maxed out dex on your Errol Flynn-based fencer character, it's likely to be the best option (especially if your dm requires you to make all of your attacks before shield bashing). Any change made to the feat needs to account for this or you'll have something that's overpowered (as in, outshines non-rapier builds) at high levels even if it's still a meh choice at lower levels.

Or just remove the scaling and make it +5 (or whatever) regardless of level.
The most powerful serious proposal thus far still doesn't make the rapier build with optimized feats more powerful than a greatsword build with optimized feats, even at high level. (where -5 to attack means less than it did at low level, so both become more powerful as you level)

It's more powerful than low powered feats, which is fine. I'm never gonna build things to be intentionally at the lowest end of power present in the rule books. Giving a rapier rogue build a reliable reaction attack is already part of Sentinel, and depending on game style Mage Slayer, and the reaction attack here relies on an attack missing and not having had to use your reaction yet to use Uncanny Dodge.

Every other class that could take this feat doesn't have Sneak Attack, and doesn't get nearly as much out of a single extra attack, but will still want to give this feat some consideration. That's good.

As for the first paragraph, I simply disagree. It's threadcrapping, especially in the form I responded to before.
 

Sometimes it's worth the effort to try to convince people that their assumptions are off - in this case, making a case that the feat being buffed doesn't need it because it's sufficiently powerful as-is. Now, that does involve 'making a case' (as opposed to just saying "you're wrong.") but that would be a valid contribution to the conversation.
You don't have to believe that it needs improvement yourself in order to make suggestions to improve it for someone else. You just have to accept that they think it needs improvement. This is homebrew for one person, who hasn't found it very good. Its not going to break the game for everyone if you come up with some suggestions to improve it for them.

For example: At high levels, Defensive Duelist is very good - a +4 AC only once per turn is still fantastic even against multiple opponents, since it's going to change the result of 1/4 attacks outside of extreme cases. If you've already maxed out dex on your Errol Flynn-based fencer character, it's likely to be the best option (especially if your dm requires you to make all of your attacks before shield bashing). Any change made to the feat needs to account for this or you'll have something that's overpowered (as in, outshines non-rapier builds) at high levels even if it's still a meh choice at lower levels.
Yep. Its really powerful at higher levels where boosting your AC becomes harder and harder. Combined with full plate, shield, and defence fighting style, I got a lot of good use out of it in a high-end game.
 


Xeviat

Community Supporter
Supporter
I think pointing out the similarities to Shield is interesting. A level 18 wizard can have shield as an at-will spell due to a class ability (they get 2 at-will spells 1st or 2nd level spells). Base defensive duelist is weaker than shield. That supports increasing it, I think.
 

For myself anyway, I have never seen a player take this feat for their characters--or frankly even talked about considering it.

Compare it to Arcane Deflection. Although it only adds a +2 static bonus to AC, it also can add instead a +4 bonus to a saving throw! That is pretty huge IMO.

Now, I think Defensive Duelist as a concept has total merit! I also think if the buff to AC was equal to your attack bonus with the weapon you are parrying with, instead of just your proficiency bonus, it would be better. I mean, it is a feat after all. They don't have to be OP of course, but for most of the levels of play a +2 to maybe +4 bonus against one attack, at the cost of your reaction, just isn't really that great as I see it.

Since you think it is good enough as it is, great! But apparently a there are players such as the OP and myself, who don't. I like the idea of adding something more to it, or buffing what it already does, or make it a half feat and give it a +1 DEX bump. Then I would probably see it taken a time or two, if for nothing else than the DEX bump.
It should be noted that arcane deflections AC boost is also only for a single attack or ST. It's a lot like defensive duelist where the value is going to vary based on table style of play.
Against a single ogre both are amazing. Less so vs 4 goblins who decided you where the best target to pin cushion.
 

DND_Reborn

Legend
It should be noted that arcane deflections AC boost is also only for a single attack or ST. It's a lot like defensive duelist where the value is going to vary based on table style of play.
Against a single ogre both are amazing. Less so vs 4 goblins who decided you where the best target to pin cushion.
Sure, but to me the better part is the versatility of gaining the +4 bonus to a save! That has saved my wizard's butt a number of times. :) But that is also why I think Defensive Duelist needs a bump.
 

Sure, but to me the better part is the versatility of gaining the +4 bonus to a save! That has saved my wizard's butt a number of times. :) But that is also why I think Defensive Duelist needs a bump.
Oh yeah the save boost is amazing. Bonuses like that are extremely rare and saves also don't have critical threshold to worried about. One of my "plan to play whenever I get to actually play" PCs is a hobgoblin battle smith/ war wizard with saves that would make a pally jealous.
 


Though it wouldn't really buff it substantially, I think getting rid of the Dex prerequisite and Finesse requirement might be a good idea. Then it would identical to the Parry ability lots of NPC statblocks have (and those statblocks often use non-finesse weapons).
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Though it wouldn't really buff it substantially, I think getting rid of the Dex prerequisite and Finesse requirement might be a good idea. Then it would identical to the Parry ability lots of NPC statblocks have (and those statblocks often use non-finesse weapons).
Good point!
 


Dungeon Delver's Guide

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top