Defensive Mobility: +5 instead of +2

[bardolph]

With all the discussion of Rangers and Archer vs Two-Blade styles, it got me thinking: Defensive Mobility is definitely underpowered, especially when held up against Toughness.

+2 AC simply isn't enough of a bonus to risk getting hit by Opportunity Attacks. As it stands, it amounts to a 10% chance that the +2 bonus will make the difference between getting hit and getting missed. Compared to Toughness, you would need to provoke an average of 50 hp worth of attacks before Defensive Mobility pays for itself! Not a whole lot of help, if you ask me. Even with Defensive Mobility, a character is better off not risking those OAs if he can help it.

However, if the AC bonus was bumped to +5, suddenly the risk becomes worthwhile, since there would now be a 25% chance that Defensive Mobility will turn a hit into a miss. Not too shabby. However, because it is "only" 25%, there still exists a reasonable chance you'll get hit, so it probably woudn't pay to wade into the middle of a bunch of nasties and deliberately provoke their opportunity attacks.

Whaddya think?

 

[Samurai]

With all the discussion of Rangers and Archer vs Two-Blade styles, it got me thinking: Defensive Mobility is definitely underpowered, especially when held up against Toughness.

+2 AC simply isn't enough of a bonus to risk getting hit by Opportunity Attacks. As it stands, it amounts to a 10% chance that the +2 bonus will make the difference between getting hit and getting missed. Compared to Toughness, you would need to provoke an average of 50 hp worth of attacks before Defensive Mobility pays for itself! Not a whole lot of help, if you ask me. Even with Defensive Mobility, a character is better off not risking those OAs if he can help it.

However, if the AC bonus was bumped to +5, suddenly the risk becomes worthwhile, since there would now be a 25% chance that Defensive Mobility will turn a hit into a miss. Not too shabby. However, because it is "only" 25%, there still exists a reasonable chance you'll get hit, so it probably woudn't pay to wade into the middle of a bunch of nasties and deliberately provoke their opportunity attacks.

Whaddya think?

+2 is fine, +5 is too much IMO.

First, there's an additional 10% chance each time of not getting hit. That could happen multiple times if you are lucky. Toughness just gives a single, flat 5 hp.

Second, many OAs may do much more than 5 points of damage. A powerful hit could do 10 or more damage, and some creatures may have poison, fire, or ongoing damage, or a Fighter-type might stop your movement on a successful OA, or you may be knocked down, etc. All kids of things could happen on a hit that make you much rather avoid being hit than have a few extra HPs.

Finally, consider that unless those 5 HPs are your last ones, they don't really matter. If you have 30 HPs left at the end of a battle instead of 25, does it really matter? No. The only time it matters is if you are on the borderline of going down, where the 5 points makes the difference between unconscious/dying and still standing. And if you were hit even 1 less time over a ten round battle, that probably would have also made the difference in keeping you standing. 3 less hits over a ten round battle is FAR better than 5 extra HPs. Heck, I'd say even 1 less hit over 10 rounds is better than 5 HPs...

 

[keterys]

Defensive Mobility is a decent feat, and there's nothing stopping an archer from taking toughness if he'd prefer it.

+5 is just too large a swing. Heck, the +2 is already bad enough with halfling trickster rogues for bumping things off the RNG

 

[bardolph]

+2 is fine, +5 is too much IMO.

First, there's an additional 10% chance each time of not getting hit. That could happen multiple times if you are lucky. Toughness just gives a single, flat 5 hp.

Second, many OAs may do much more than 5 points of damage. A powerful hit could do 10 or more damage, and some creatures may have poison, fire, or ongoing damage, or a Fighter-type might stop your movement on a successful OA, or you may be knocked down, etc. All kids of things could happen on a hit that make you much rather avoid being hit than have a few extra HPs.

Finally, consider that unless those 5 HPs are your last ones, they don't really matter. If you have 30 HPs left at the end of a battle instead of 25, does it really matter? No. The only time it matters is if you are on the borderline of going down, where the 5 points makes the difference between unconscious/dying and still standing. And if you were hit even 1 less time over a ten round battle, that probably would have also made the difference in keeping you standing. 3 less hits over a ten round battle is FAR better than 5 extra HPs. Heck, I'd say even 1 less hit over 10 rounds is better than 5 HPs...

Remember, Defensive Mobility is not a flat +2 to AC. It's a +2 that ONLY applies to Opportunity Attacks. Are you really expecting to provoke 10 Opportunity Attacks per battle? Because that's how many you'd have to provoke in order for Defensive Mobility to save you on average ONE hit per battle. Chances are you'll be dead long before you get lucky enough to land in that two-pip sweet spot where Defensive Mobility makes any difference at all.

Even with Defensive Mobility, you are much better off not provoking OAs in the first place. Which basically amounts to a wasted feat.

 

[Boarstorm]

+5 is just too large a swing. Heck, the +2 is already bad enough with halfling trickster rogues for bumping things off the RNG

Gah, tell me about it. Little so-and-so's run around the battlefield with impunity. "Tumble? Why on earth would I want that!"

 

[Kzach]

With Artful Dodger, Lost in the Crowd, Nimble Reaction, Dex 18, Cha 18, Defensive Mobility and Leather Armour, my little rogue (at 2nd level) will have an AC vs. opportunity attacks of 26.

Defensive Mobility is just fine as it is, thank you very much