Feat Problems With PHB II

[Seeten]

Steadfast Determination.
Endurance pre-req, Use Con instead of Wis for Will Saves.

You do not fail fortitude saves on a 1.

This feat is so nice, I'd totally take it, except my paladin doesnt have a feat free for...Endurance. Ugh.

 

[Caliban]

Steadfast Determination.
Endurance pre-req, Use Con instead of Wis for Will Saves.

You do not fail fortitude saves on a 1.

This feat is so nice, I'd totally take it, except my paladin doesnt have a feat free for...Endurance. Ugh.

If the PBHII feats become legal for Living Greyhawk before I play him again, my newly 18th level dwarven defender is taking it for his 18th level feat.

 

[Seeten]

After I go level 9, for pious templar 4, and get power attack/divine might, I think I'll go a couple levels of fighter for: Weapon Mastery, Endurance, Iron Will, Indomitable Will, and Steadfast Determination. Ugh, Thats way too many. Maybe just 1 level of fighter for weapon mastery...or maybe I'll just take weapon mastery for my level 12 feat and keep going templar.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I noticed none of the overpowered feats were arcane feats. Good old WotC. Powering up the melee fighters.

I'm definitely getting ranged weapon specialization for my Order of the Bow Initiate. *salivates*

 

[Derren]

On the "these feats are too powerful" issue, consider this:

I think the vast majority of the feats in D&D are too weak, too boring, or both.

Historically, we've been way too conservative about creating exciting, potent feats. We've spent way too much ink printing feats that give you a small numerical bonus (often only applying in a corner-case game situation), and not nearly enough creating new equivalents of Cleave and Spring Attack. PH2 represents an intentional shift in that mentality.

The other tricky issue is that unlike, say, spells, feats don't have an easy ranking system to compare them against one another. If Spring Attack were a "4th-level feat" and Toughness were a "0-level feat," it'd be easier to see how much better the former is supposed to be compared to the latter. PH2 has a lot of feats that, due to their high prereqs, are effectively "high-level" feats, and thus are very much intended to be more powerful than those that've come before.

Some folks will freak out when they see what's available in PH2. I think that's just flat-out a good thing--it's about time folks got excited about a new D&D book

Also a way to justify power creep, but it doesn't make pc any better.

"Buy our new book and you will be much stronger then the other gamers and your DM because now we print the REAL feats and not the wimpy stuff used in earlier books.

 

[Seeten]

Please power creep away for fighters. I think Druids and Clerics can handle the competition.

 

[Derren]

Please power creep away for fighters. I think Druids and Clerics can handle the competition.

Of course, but only when you rewrite the MM in one year or two as becausel of the new feats/prcs/spells all classes are simply much stronger then when the MM was designed. (And WotC would probably even do that. More money for nothing).

 

[Seeten]

What if a group of 6 just plays 3 Clerics and 2 Druids and a Wizard? They better rewrite the MM faster, since that group will mop the floor with any fighter heavy group. Dont think the Cleric can do the fighter's job?

As it stands today, the game is grossly unbalanced towards Spellcasters. Giving powerful feats to Fighters isnt power creep, its balance.

 

[Stalker0]

What if a group of 6 just plays 3 Clerics and 2 Druids and a Wizard? They better rewrite the MM faster, since that group will mop the floor with any fighter heavy group. Dont think the Cleric can do the fighter's job?

As it stands today, the game is grossly unbalanced towards Spellcasters. Giving powerful feats to Fighters isnt power creep, its balance.

I agree. At high levels, spellcasters reign. Spells are almost always more powerful than attacks, especially when you get to the cooler spells. What keeps the balance is that fighters can swing all day, spellcasters can't. However, at high levels, casters have enough spells to keep going for several encounters a day. As a dm, in order to drain them you really have to throw out a lot of encounters, which is either annoying or impractical.

Lets also remember that at high level spellcasters can do a whole lot more out of combat. They can scry, tell the future, they can wish for stuff!! Fighters fight, let them do it well.

 

[IanB]

The general rule is no 5' step in the same round as any other movement. Hence, if you moved at all on your turn in the round, you cannot take a 5' step with this feat.

This is wrong. Immediate actions taken when it is not your turn always apply to your next turn's limit, not the previous turn. Essentially, it is at the end of your turn that your immediate/swift action counter is reset.

You never have to worry about movement on your turn interfering with your ability to use this feat - it can only interfere with what you do on your next turn, and that's assuming you treat the movement from this feat as a normal 5 foot step.