New Feat: Reckoning

[Stalker0]

Reckoning
Your fierce determination or keen intellect allows you to better fight an opponent that got away the first time
Prereq: Cha 13+ or Int 13+

Benefit: In order to gain the benefits of this feat, you must fight an opponent in two seperate encounters. In the second encounter, and any additional encounter after that, you gain a +1 bonus to attacks, damage, saving throws, and AC against that opponent.

In addition, roll a Cha or Int check. For every 5 points on the roll, you recieve an additional +1. You must reroll the check in every new encounter with the opponent.

Special: The opponent must be the same opponent you faced previously, and you must be able to determine it is the same opponent. You do not receive the bonus if the opponent's identity is disguised in some way. The bonus still applies if the opponent has been altered in some way, polymorphed for example, as long as you know it is the same opponent from before.



This feat is to model the classic hero and recurring villian scenario, it allows a character to grow along side the villian he faces and become stronger and more determined to defeat him. Or for a villian, allows him to become even more dangerous to the party every time they thwart his plans.

 

[Nyeshet]

I would make the bonus to attack, damage, saves, and AC a morale bonus rather than unnamed. That would limit it somewhat (as several lower level spells or bardic music specials that raise such are based upon morale). Also, it would mean that if the player had some magic that made them immune to MAE then they would lose the benefit. Also, they would either have to choose to roll Int or Cha or would have to roll only the one they have the higher ability score in. Rolling both and choosing the better of the two would make this more powerful. I assume that is what you mean - not to add the results of both, right?

After all, potentially as much as +5 at lower levels (or as high as +8 at higher levels, I think) is a phenomenal bonus if unnamed. Even named it is powerful. I might up the pre-reqs to Int 15+ and Cha 15+ - along with a special pre-req of almost dying (going negative) due to a second encounter with a foe priorly defeated and thought slain - or something like that.

 

[Stalker0]

The bonus is quite high, but the circumstance is very limited. How often in most campaigns does a player actually fight a recurring enemy? The feat needs to have enough oomph to make it worth taking.

 

[Nyeshet]

That's a good point, but . . .

. . . I'm still not quite sure. At the least I would make it a named bonus, and morale does make a great deal of sense for the type of bonus.

I think it depends a bit on campaign style. I tend to use non-suicidal foes. If they are reduced to 1/3 - 1/4 of their hp, they will strive to escape. Animals do not attack till death unless they are sick or unless they are guarding something worth their life (such as pups, a mate, a territory already lessened due to encrouchment of civilization or another predator, a meal when they are starving, etc). Bandits will not continue the attack once several of their number have fallen. There are always easier targets elsewhere or later. If they feel they cannot escape, they will often surrender. Animals that cannot escape (or magical beasts, or vermin, etc) will fight to the death, true, but these are not exactly the sort of 'reoccurring villain' you intend with this feat. If the PCs stay in an area for a while, they are all but certain to face again a priorly fought (and captured or escaped) villain.

Basically, the situation comes up often enough in my campaigns that the feat feels rather strong to me - especially for its requirements. Granted, I also tend to play a lower magic game, so bonuses to hit, damage, saves, and AC are not as high as typical in a high (ie: standard) magic game - further strengthening this feat, but from what I know of normal magic level games, a non-named bonus of as much as +5 at lower levels and at least +1 at any level is significant.

So long as the game is 'standard' magic / wealth level and foes often fight to the death, this feat is fair as is. If foes often seek to escape once they are significantly wounded or the world is lower magical / wealth, then this feat at least needs a named bonus rather than an unnamed. If the world is lower magic / wealth and foes often seek to escape or seek clemency (ie: surrender and are allowed to live - at least until they are turned over to the local Justice), then this feat is a bit too much even if the bonus is named. The pre-reqs need raising. So it all depends on the setting and the DM's style of play.

 

[Quartz]

This feat is to model the classic hero and recurring villian scenario, it allows a character to grow along side the villian he faces and become stronger and more determined to defeat him.

This is more typically represented by gaining levels.

 

[Stalker0]

This is more typically represented by gaining levels.

True, but its also a way for a player to specialize against a villian if that's the kind of thing he wants to do.

 

[Li Shenron]

I really think it's too high per se, even if it's going to be used rarely. I would make it max +3.

 

[Darklone]

KoK Players Guide has two feats doing a similar thing ... The first needs Wis 13+ and allows you to hold your action till everyone else acted in the first round... then you get a +2 to hit and to damage. The second feat gives you a +2 to hit after three rounds of combat against one specific opponent.

In your case, I'd give a flat +2 to hit and to AC vs. this specific guy. That's big but similar to a rangers favored enemy.

If your DM feels generous, you might increase the bonus to hit and damage by a +1 for every encounter the two of you had since you took the feat.

What I like about it: If both take it, it's neutralised.

Edit: Make it a circumstance bonus and as a name I'd propose VENGEANCE.