Dwarven defender question .

[elmuthalleth]

Hello to everybody and happy new 2007

A quick question : A player of mine has a 5th-lvl dwarf fighter who wants to became a dwarven defender , who has Toughness as requisite .
It is correct to give him the possibility to have Improved toughness ( the feat from Complete warrior ) in place of Toughness ?
This because at 6-7th level , toughness for a Dwarven fighter with 18 CON is lame .

Thank you for the response

 

[Darklone]

Well, it's the whole point of the prerequisite to be a lame feat

Imp Toughness is strong... I'd stick with Toughness. But the dwarven defender is weak enough IMHO (says the hostile archer), so you can change it

 

[Nyaricus]

I'm pretty sure they are interchangable; I've heard it somewhere I'm sure.

In any case, I assume you are the DM here? Let him have it. Imp Toughness makes a feat like that worth it, which is a Good Thing (tm). And remember: the most important thing is that everyone is having fun

cheers,
--N

 

[Legildur]

By the rules, no you can't.

Feats that are an improvement on or supercede others that can be substituted for earlier feats explicitly say so in their description. Expeditious Dodge substituting for Dodge is an example.

That being said, I wholeheartedly agree with Darklone and Nyaricus that is a Good Thing (tm).

 

[Nyaricus]

That being said, I wholeheartedly agree with Darklone and Nyaricus that is a Good Thing (tm).

That's all folks! Three for tea; the jury is in. Just do it!

In other words: bring on the good times

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I'll hang the jury, then.

I personally wouldn't do it.

I don't think it'll break your game if you do it. Honestly I don't. However, I personally belong to the camp that PrCs should bebalanced with base classes and not better. [Therefore, anyone who thinks that PrCs should be better than the base classes will have a problem with what I am going to say. I accept that.]

However, I get tired of people forgetting that PrC classes should have downsides as well as upsides. If you are entering a PrC without mixed emotions ... then probably the PrC isn't quite balanced enough. You should feel the loss of a few things while being excited about the different avenues your character can go.

Personally, I've always assumed the Toughness feat is one of those places where you ultimately chose to lose a little bit just so you can gain in another area. However, as I said earlier ... it isn't going to break your game.

 

[werk]

I agree with Leguidur, but I've pretty much removed toughness replacing with imp. toughness IMC. Toughness is just complete crap.

 

[frankthedm]

I agree with Leguidur, but I've pretty much removed toughness replacing with imp. toughness IMC. Toughness is just complete crap.

Toughness is not complete crap. It is a statement a feat that stacks with itself and has no prerequisite should not be optimal. Toughness grants 3 HP, Endurance and Diehard together only grant 10 single action HP. When you replace toughness with improved toughness {or even just allow Imp. Tough.], you make HP go up across the board. 1 hp per level / HD is better than what 3 feats could get the character once 10HD - 13HD is reached.

A lot of folk seem to feel having more HP hurts no one, but most who focus in Evocation beg to differ.

 

[Endur]

Toughness was going to be modified to 1 hit point per level when D&D 3.0 changed to D&D 3.5, but then WOTC decided that the change would require reworking too many stat blocks for monsters (with +3 hp) so they left toughness alone.

Its well known that the +3 hp feat is one of the weakest feats. Other weak feats are Dodge (+1 to ac vs. one enemy, but lame requirement of announcing it every round) and endurance. All three of these feats had proposed upgrades for 3.5, but only endurance was modified. Dodge almost became +1 ac. (i.e. vs. all enemies).

 

[the Jester]

Toughness was going to be modified to 1 hit point per level when D&D 3.0 changed to D&D 3.5, but then WOTC decided that the change would require reworking too many stat blocks for monsters (with +3 hp) so they left toughness alone.

Its well known that the +3 hp feat is one of the weakest feats. Other weak feats are Dodge (+1 to ac vs. one enemy, but lame requirement of announcing it every round) and endurance. All three of these feats had proposed upgrades for 3.5, but only endurance was modified. Dodge almost became +1 ac. (i.e. vs. all enemies).

Hmm, how do you know this? These are both changes that I have used in my low-magic game (as well as a number of other mods to the game).