• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Dirty Fighting Feat...worth it?

Dristram

First Post
From how I understand the wording of the Dirty Fighting Feat in Sword and Fist, it must be used as a full-attack action. That means if a PC has multiple attacks, in order for him to make use of this Feat, he'd have to only one attack and not move. Is that correct? And if so, I don't see why anyone would take it besides flavor. Or am I missing something?
 

log in or register to remove this ad



No your interpretation of this feat is absolutely correct and I think the same this feat is of no real use, I wouldn't take it either.
Even Sean K. Reynolds says that the feat is not worth taking it, I think he made a better version of this feat which you can check out at his HP www.seankreynolds.com . Or wasn't he the one who said that and made the feat.
I don't know the prerequ. of the feat but its only considerable to take it if you have only one attack anyway a round, which means only if you have a low-level character, and even in this case there are pretty better feats anyway, don't waste your feats for nothing.
 


In *theory* it could be useful if you have a fairly low attack bonus and can only reliably hit with your first attack, are using a low damage weapon, and/or have no appreciable strength bonus to your damage. In practice? It's pretty much useless. :)
 

It's a fine feat for certain low-level mooks, so DM's should keep that in mind.

Aside from that, I agree with the previous posters.
 

Dr_Rictus said:
It's a fine feat for certain low-level mooks, so DM's should keep that in mind.

Aside from that, I agree with the previous posters.

and i agree with dr rictus... for a 3rd lvl fighter thug or something like that, its not bad at all...
 



Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top