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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5683091" data-attributes="member: 4937">a) The first feat alone is insanely good.  In RAW terms, you are getting DR 4/- at the cost of one feat, and the feat essentially scales with level topping out at DR 13/- or so for just one feat.   Compare that with the Barbarian topping out at DR 6/-.  It's so good, that I really can't see anyone who wears heavy armor not taking this feat.   Improved Arminger lets you wear lighter armor and tops out around DR 20/-(!!!).  I would imagine that the expected damage taken in melee against level appropriate monsters would be unreasonably low, and I'd love to see some calculations of how a melee combatant with this feat fares against fights of between CR = CL-2 and CR-CL.  My expectation is that these fights would be made statistically trivial, where they would not be if Arminger were replaced with a core feat.Battle Rush makes it even worse and is arguably the most powerful general purpose feat I've ever scene, with high level characters probably returning 20-25 temporary hit points to themselves each round unsituationally and without a combo of any sort.  A character with these feat and arminger could achieve virtual invincibility against monsters with a CR more than 2 or so below his own character level, allowing him to take on armies single handedly, and allowing him to stack up 100's of temporary hit points over the course of a large battle and probably entering any 'boss fight' with a 1000 hit points.b) Leaving the question of balance aside, my personal feeling is that the longer you stay in a feat tree the better it needs to be.   Otherwise, there aren't really any choices in the system.  Everyone will dip from the front loaded entry feats in your system and will all basically end up looking very much the same.  Additionally, while in this particular case you don't have the usual problem, the more usual problem with feats is that they are underpowered compared to spells and like spells need to scale up in power as they become available at higher levels.  Of course, you've got two feats that are each probably better than the Stoneskin spell, so I don't think that usual criticism applies.</blockquote>

Verification