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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6399355" data-attributes="member: 2525">It's a truism that CR's tend to go up as party level goes up.  Hence, not a fallacy.If it reduced damage by 100% in one instance, and 10% in the other, then it is correct to see it is less effective in the 10% than it is in the 100%.  That's not a false argument.  "Effective" is a word that scales, as some things are more effective than other things. In this case, the feat is more effective at preventing percentages of damage when the damage being done in the first place is low.It does, obviously so.  It is far more utilitarian to prevent 100% of damage, that it is to prevent 10% of damage.  In this context, that is exactly what utility means.  You are still taking a LOT of damage in one instance, and NO damage in the other.  It's obviously more utility when it prevents 100% of damage.No it does not, because you could take 1000 hits at 0 damage, but you cannot take 1000 hits at 27 damage, no matter your level.  It does not even out.  Preventing 100% damage is a heck of a lot more utilitarian than preventing 10% of the damage, regardless of level and hit points.Don't care, not a 4e discussion, not the same sort of balancing in the rules, and not universal DR either. Let's stick to this game.Tell me have you found in actual 5e games that this feat has just as much utility at high levels than it does at low levels? Because in actual play I have found, over the past 16 months or so of playing it, that it has a lot less utility as levels go up.</blockquote>

Verification