Improved Toughness?

[Creamsteak]

Weapon focus and power attack... poor man's weapon specialization.

 

[Darkness]

Toughness is better than Improved Toughness for people who will never be higher than second level. Like how Dirty Fighting is a decent feat for a first or second level NPC thug who never expects to be a 6th level NPC thug.

But both feats are lousy for PCs, because PCs do expect to be 3rd level, or 6th level, or 11th level some day. The PC takes Mobility, because he needs it for Whirlwind Attack some day. The thug takes Dirty Fighting, because it's a bigger immediate benefit than Mobility... and immediate is all he'll ever care about.

Right. Maybe that's why they seem to have eliminated Dirty Fighting in 3.5.

 

[Darkness]

Weapon focus and power attack... poor man's weapon specialization.

Wealthy man's Weapon Specialization, you mean. 'cause a poor man can't always afford a two-handed weapon.
('cause: Power Attack for 1 pt. when using a 2-handed weapon = +2 damage, same as WSpec.)

 

[Darklone]

There are some cheap simple twohanded weapons.

 

[Creamsteak]

Wealthy man's Weapon Specialization, you mean. 'cause a poor man can't always afford a two-handed weapon.
('cause: Power Attack for 1 pt. when using a 2-handed weapon = +2 damage, same as WSpec.)

Also true. Damn, greater weapon specialization is looking like crap.

If a player took improved toughness at 1st level (when it is actually weaker than normal toughness), would people allow that player to use a size larger hit die instead? Just curious. It doesn't seem bad with the mid hit die groups (monks/rangers/rogues), though it might be odd that a fighter spends 1 feat and makes up the hit die gap with the barbarian...

 

[Scion]

Nope, but generally the actual toughness I use is: treat your con as 2 higher for the purposes of hp only. You always gain at least 3 hp from this feat.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

Improved Toughness is from the Complete Warrior. It gives +1 hp per HD both retroactively and in the future. The pre-req is a +2 Fort save. So a 12th-lvl character who takes it gains +12 hp in one shot and an additional +1 for all future levels.

Is this not overpowered!?!? Why wouldn't every character take this? I can foresee every 15th-lvl character taking it for a quick +15 hp (as well as future hp).

I'm thinking it should have Toughness as a pre-req? What do you think?

Not really... if you looked at Masters of the Wild there were 3 new feats. Dwarf's Toughness, Giant's Toughness, and Dragon's Toughness. Dwarf's Toughness gave you 6 extra HP per time you took it, Giant's Toughness gave you 9 extra, and Dragon's Toughness gave you 12. The only prereq was the Fortitude save which guaranteed that non-warriors wouldn't be able to make much use of it. All three are bonus feats for Fighters so you can see how quickly a Fighter could build up HP with those feats. I am playing a Half-Orc Fighter/Barbarian and just from taking those feats I'll have 72 bonus HP built up not counting my Con Bonus. High level characters face creatures that almost never miss irregardless of a character's AC. Hit Points are really the only way to survive so what brick player wouldn't bulk up on HP Feats.

 

[James McMurray]

High level characters face creatures that almost never miss irregardless of a character's AC.

Not if you focus on AC. At 20th level you can have (Core rules only, and not an exhaustive list)

49: 10/base + 13/armor + 7/shield + 1/dex +1/haste +11/nat +5/def +1/dodge

Drop that by 6 if you don't want to use Alter Self to turn yourself into a Troglodyte, but increase it by 4 if you'd rather use polymorph to become a stone giant. A defending weapon and combat expertise (or improved combat expertise) can increase that even more.

Digging around can get your AC up even higher, or apply penalties to your foe's attacks.

Checking a few CR 20 critters shows:

Balor: +1 vorpal longsword +31/+26/+21/+16 melee (2d6+8/19–20) and +1 flaming whip +30/+25 melee (1d4+4 plus 1d6 fire plus entangle); or 2 slams +31 melee (1d10+7)

Pit Fiend: Full Attack: 2 claws +30 melee (2d8+13) and 2 wings +28 melee (2d6+6) and bite +28 melee (4d6+6 plus poison plus disease) and tail slap +28 melee (2d8+6)

Old Red Dragon: +36 bite +31 with the rest

Relying on AC instead of dumping feats into hit points means you'll have more feats available for offense. If temporary hit points are needed, just get your friendly neighborhood divine spellcaster to throw out a bear's heart (20d4 temp hit points for everyone).

 

[Darklone]

Not if you focus on AC. At 20th level you can have (Core rules only, and not an exhaustive list)

49: 10/base + 13/armor + 7/shield + 1/dex +1/haste +11/nat +5/def +1/dodge

Drop that by 6 if you don't want to use Alter Self to turn yourself into a Troglodyte, but increase it by 4 if you'd rather use polymorph to become a stone giant. A defending weapon and combat expertise (or improved combat expertise) can increase that even more.

Fighting defensively, tumble, Shieldfeats, deflection bonus, miss chances, tower shield, higher dex bonus in a mithral armour, strange bonuses such as sacred to AC...

Woah. I see how that smackdown got AC above 200.

 

[James McMurray]

Yep. At higher levels your tank is much better off focusing on AC instead of spending a feat for 15 hit points. He should definitely have enough hit points to withstand the area of effect and touch spells that don't care about hit points, but unless you've rolled really poorly an extra 20hp isn't going to matter very often.

AC was alot easier to maximize in 3.0 before they put the nerfs on the various stats to AC classes, restricting the bonus to the level in the prestige class. Before then a Monk / Duelist / Bladesinger / Mystic Wanderer build could get an AC in the 2-300s at 20th level.