Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 371681" data-attributes="member: 3051">First of all, I try to balance things at around 12th-13th level.  The number was kinda arbitrary, but it's generally where people are just starting to get the good stuff from Prestige Classes, and before they get a +5 Wish bonus.  Numbers just get way too out-of-control if you can raise a stat to the 30s.Expanded Spells:Getting Fireball at 4th spell level may seem much, but realize that they can't get it until 10th character level at the earliest, and won't be able to cast nearly as many as a Sorcerer.  Go read Piratecat's Story Hour; Nolin (the Bard) has a prestige class that lets him cast Fireball, among other things.I just don't think it's that much of a problem.  You could argue that all four spells chosen have to be linked (thematically, spell school, whatever), and that it's still subject to DM's approval.Mainly I wanted this Feat for 2E conversions.  I had a Bard in AD&D (Blade kit) that used some of these spells, and now they've been taken away.Spell Finesse:You're using a 20th-level Wizard, starting at 18 INT, who wished himself 5 INT and is optimized for Evocation spells, versus a level 16 tank with bad reflex saves and a 12 DEX?  Hardly a fair comparison.  I could just as easily argue that the target is a level 16 Rogue who started with 18 DEX, increased it 4 times, has +6 DEX gloves, a +5 Cloak of Resistance, and Lightning Reflexes for a total of +26; he'd save on a 2, even against your level 20 damagemeister, and with Improved Evasion he probably wouldn't care if you could increase the DC by a few points.  Also, since at high levels you might be practically guaranteed to have SR items, lowering the caster level would be catastrophic.Once you get to the really high levels and start using Wishes for stats, these sorts of debates just get ridiculous.  It ends up as a rock-paper-scissors thing where a tank beats a rogue/monk beats a caster beats a tank.Improved Combat Reflexes:Isn't Spring Attack already one of those "anti-Feats" you're talking about?  There are Feats that let you take AoOs in more advantageous ways (I like Stand Still, PsiHB), and Spring Attack prevents you from using them.  Personally I don't have a problem with being told "The bad guy hits you anyway"; it's like watching the bad guy (who has Deflect Arrows) grab your projectiles and throw them away, he's doing something you didn't think was possible.  That's what Feats are for, IMHO.Sharpshooter:I forgot that we changed the phrasing, it doesn't affect magical Concealment (Blur or Displacement).The 1/10th Cover thing was proposed here long ago simply because there's a 9/10ths Cover category already.  Also, there were too many situations where 1/4 Cover (standing behind a 3' wall) was just too severe.  I'm fighting in a dining room, and there's a chair between me and the enemy.  Nothing critical is protected, it's just going to get in the way a bit on melee attacks.As for the Buckler comment, I forgot that we use a house rule to make shields better.  Shields don't provide an Armor bonus, they provide Cover.  Bucklers provide 1/10th Cover (1 AC against melee), for example.This way it stacks with armor but not with mundane cover or the Shield spell.  Also, unlike normal cover you lose it if flat-footed.  Since it's not an armor bonus you keep it against Touch spells.Improved PF:The reason I don't allow the other end to be enchanted is for balance.  It also makes it clear that the shaft is NOT a real weapon in its own right.  According to the core rules, a double weapon has each end enchanted separately; so, while you CAN have them be entirely different enchantments, you effectively HAVE to enchant both ends.  (Note that NWN changed this, a fix I think worked nicely)According to the PHB the shaft of an enchanted weapon still gains benefits (hardness and HP) from an Enhancement bonus on the head.  So, I wanted that to be reflected a bit in the statistics for the shaft.So, let's compare a Two-Bladed Sword +3 (both ends enchanted separately) with a Glaive +4 that costs roughly the same:Sword: Main hand +3+STR attack, 1d8+STR+3 damage (19-20/x2)Off hand +3+STR/2 attack, 1d8+STR/2+3 damage (19-20/x2)Glaive:Main hand +4+STR attack, 1d10+STR+4 damage (20/x3)Off hand +4+STR/2 attack, 1d6+STR/2 damage (20/x2 for blunt)So the main hand improved by +1 attack and +2 damage, while the offhand gained +1 attack but lost 4 damage.If you play the NWN variant where a double weapon has one enchantment, so that the sword is now +4, the difference becomes +1 damage on the main hand but -5 damage on the offhand.  This combo will never be better than existing double weapons for someone who fights with that style; it's more of a fallback for people who use polearms.Also, since you can't put other abilities on the shaft, if your weapon has things like Flaming instead of pure Enhancement, the shaft gets even weaker.As for your Human Fighter, he definitely needs Power Attack.  Given the suckiness of the shaft end, he probably wouldn't want Improved TWF.One of the characters in my campaign is a female Half-Elf Ranger 1/Psychic Warrior 11 named Kai who wanted these.  Her Feats:1 (Ranger)> Improved Initiative, and the usual Ranger stuff2> Combat Reflexes3> Speed of Thought, Polearm Fighting6> Psionic Weapon, Power Attack7> Weapon Specialization: Glaive9> Stand Still, Psionic Charge12> Deep Impact, Blind-FightNo Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Cleave, Dodge/Mobility/etc., and she hasn't even taken Quickdraw, Improved Polearm Fighting, or Improved Combat Reflexes yet.  So yes, I'd agree it's moderately balanced.Most of these Feats were designed for a primitive jungle-dwelling Wood Elf culture IMC, where most of them are Barbarian/Rangers with a little bit of Rogue, Druid, or Psychic Warrior.  Got a neat Prestige Class for them, too, based on the old Stalker kit and the DMG Assassin.</blockquote>

Verification