Improved Toughness?

[Wolffenjugend]

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?

 

[Scion]

I've actually been using just base toughness as +2 con for hp only forever now. It has been fine, and even with the change almost no one ever takes it.

It is only a few extra hp, nothing major. Nothing like a whole new combat option or becoming better at the ones you already have.

Even at level 20 it is 20 more hp, but this amounts to maybe one more average hit of damage. So taking dodge (which I also changed, but it isnt a big deal for this thread) is actually an equivalent or better choice in some ways. 5% of the time it negates an attack, which saves 20 hp right there.

This isnt terribly precise I know but like I said, I've been useing toughness as what this feat does and it has been fine.

 

[UltimaGabe]

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).

Maybe I've just been playing with completely different people than you, but I'm pretty sure nobody in my group, or me for that matter, would rather get an extra 15 HP at 15th level than get something like Spring Attack or Whirlwind Attack. True, at 15th level you're getting a bit of a bonus, but at that point you've already got a ton of HP, no matter what your class is- so the only people that would really benefit from it would be people with especially low HP, like Wizards, but the only times it would be worth taking, there's plenty of other feats out there that would be much more lucrative. I don't see why 15 extra HP would be such a huge benefit that it would be chosen over something as universally useful as Spring Attack or Great Cleave- and if they choose that over other feats, then fine with me. The extra HP isn't going be an unbalancing factor. At pretty much any level, that's less than one hit from a Fighter of the same level.

 

[Darklone]

My low magic rules include more feats for everyone, yet only one of 9 PCs took it. It's a nice feat, but not overpowered.

 

[James McMurray]

I too can never foresee a point where my 15th level caster will want to take that over Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, Greater Spell Penetration, some handy metamagic feat, etc.

15 hit points won't even let you withstand one full extra attack at those levels.

 

[Sejs]

Is this not overpowered!?!?

Nope. Toughness at 3hp per feat is absolute, utter garbage. Improved Toughness is an acceptable payoff for using a feat.

 

[the_bruiser]

I can pretty much assure you that if I were playing a fighter, I would take this feat *a ton*. Assuming that it's on the fighter feat list, my feats would probably be something like this for a human fighter.

H1 - wpn foc: greatsword
L1 - power attack
F1 - cleave
F2 - sunder
L3 - improved toughness
F4 - wpon spec: greatsword
L6 - expertise
L6 - improved toughness
F8 - improved toughness
L9 - improved toughness
F10 - improved toughness
L12 - improved toughness
F12 - improved toughness
F14 - improved toughness
L15 - improved toughness
F16 - improved toughness
L18 - improved toughness
F18 - improved toughness
F20 - improved toughness


With a 28 point buy, I'd start with the following, assuming I didn't want to *totally* min-max down to 8s, or play a half-orc or dwarf, or anything like that.

str 16
dex 12
con 14
int 12
wis 10
cha 10

So, my HP would go as follows:

Level, HD, Con, Con Bonus, # Imp. Tgh., Feat Bonus, Total HP
1, 10, 14, 2, 0, 0, 12
2, 20, 14, 4, 0, 0, 24
3, 26, 14, 6, 1, 3, 35
4, 31, 14, 8, 1, 4, 43
5, 37, 16, 15, 1, 5, 57
6, 42, 16, 18, 2, 12, 72
7, 48, 16, 21, 2, 14, 83
8, 53, 16, 24, 3, 24, 101
9, 59, 16, 27, 4, 36, 122
10, 64, 18, 40, 5, 50, 154
11, 70, 18, 44, 5, 55, 169
12, 75, 18, 48, 7, 84, 207
13, 81, 18, 52, 7, 91, 224
14, 86, 18, 56, 8, 112, 254
15, 92, 20, 75, 9, 135, 302
16, 97, 20, 80, 10, 160, 337
17, 103, 20, 85, 10, 170, 358
18, 108, 20, 90, 12, 216, 414
19, 114, 20, 95, 12, 228, 437
20, 119, 20, 100, 13, 260, 479


Assuming that I got amulets of health per the increasing CON score, which I probably could.

Yep, that's what I'd do. Or at least I'd give it a shot. Meanwhile, I'd rely on power attack, increasing strength, and my greatsword to still put out a pretty good amount of damage. Sunder to destroy opponent's weapons on occasion (a +2 LS takes 19 damage to destroy; against a so-so opponent I'd succeed in hitting it, usually, and by 5th level be doing that much damage every time). Expertise to help my AC in the rare event that I needed it. I'm not sure it'd be the best character ever,or even close, but gosh, I'd sure be willing to give it a shot.

 

[Crothian]

You can only take the feat once. In 2 different games both around 9th level we've seen people look at the feat, but they always find something better.

 

[Scion]

I let it be taken as many times as desired.

But even then, if a character wanted to make a massive hp build then go for it. Your character above has given up a 'lot' of power to get where he is. His options are very limited, all he is really good at is soaking up damage. That is fine by me He is a tank. Cool.

 

[Crothian]

I let it be taken as many times as desired.

But even then, if a character wanted to make a massive hp build then go for it. Your character above has given up a 'lot' of power to get where he is. His options are very limited, all he is really good at is soaking up damage. That is fine by me He is a tank. Cool.

Ya, I don't see it as overpowered, I'm just saying by the rules it's not allowed.

And if a player wanted to max out HPs, I'd suggest a really cool PrCl in Mercanaries that is all about HPs. Cool class, it is.