PHB2 general feats review (heroic tier)

[Nail]

I am playing in three different 4e games. All WotC material is allowed and we have seen no balance issues with anything.

That's a pretty strong statement!

...and it's predicated on having a wide diversity of classes, feats, items, and players in each of your three games. Is that true?

 

[Cadfan]

That's a pretty strong statement!

...and it's predicated on having a wide diversity of classes, feats, items, and players in each of your three games. Is that true?

I'm not him, but I am also in three games and have seen no balance problems. We have used nearly every class in the game, and allow all feats. None of the groups has a ton of access to magic item customization (the guidelines are being followed, so there's just not that much cash around in comparison to need), and the variety of player types is a little low since one game is 100% new and casual players except for me as DM. Also, the highest level group is level 10. So my *feel* for game balance only goes that high at this juncture.

There have been one or two WOAH moments, but they've been relatively bland in comparison to the sorts of WOAH moments I've had in 3e.

For example, the battlerager vigor fighter is really, really durable in combats against lots of weaker foes.

The warden felt weak at level 1 because she didn't pick toughness and almost everyone else in the group did, creating a mismatch with her expectations: she expected to be the most durable in the group, but with a low armor class and hit points about equal to everyone else, she was not. Until she advanced a level and took toughness and gained 7 hit points for leveling up.

I feel like our fey pact warlock is weak, but part of that is his lack of tactical play. He took powers that let him do some crazy hit and run attacks, but he's so worried about getting hurt that he never actually does them. Tactically, he should be moving into melee reach and flanking with the warden, gaining prime shot and flanking bonuses, then protecting himself with eyebite and teleporting to safety if a cursed foe dies. In practice, he hides in the back line, doesn't get prime shot, doesn't get flanking, and ends the day with all of his healing surges and without having done a lot.

Our paladin has some issues with athletics, acrobatics, and being grabbed. She's a charisma paladin with a 12 strength, so her athletics and acrobatics are pretty terrible. She recently got grabbed by an icy grasp cast by a higher level spellcaster. We realized after a round or two that she could only make a high enough athletics check to escape if she rolled a 19. With two rolls a round it eventually happened, but that was pretty lame. And of course the spellcaster just tried to re-grab her. The party (this is my highly tactical group) stopped that from happening by dazing the spellcaster and walling him up in a wall of fire, meaning he had to choose between spending his single action to leave the fire and survive, or to sustain the grab. He chose life, and then ironically the paladin killed him.

I can also imagine some ways to build characters that aren't very good, such as a greatweapon fighter who doesn't take any defensive or healing class abilities. But overall, I haven't seen any meaningful problems yet.

There are one or two I anticipate at high levels, and I'm a "expertise is a must-have" believer, but that's my experience so far.

 

[Mengu]

I am playing in three different 4e games. All WotC material is allowed and we have seen no balance issues with anything.

Like Nail underlined, most balance issues I see stem from players. You can have two fighters in the same group:

1. Tiefling greatweapon fighter with 17 strength, wielding heavy warpick, has Ferocious Rebuke, using Footwork Lure (+6 vs AC 1d12+3), or heaven forbid Sure Strike (+8 vs AC 1d12).

2. Dwarf Battlerager with 17 strength, 18 con, wielding waraxe, has dwarven weapon training, using Brash Strike (+7 vs AC 1d12+11), and 4 temp hitpoints from vigor every time he is hit in melee.

These characters are not balanced against each other in any way, shape, or form, because the first player did not have system mastery, and the second player knows every nook and cranny like the back of his hand.

As a DM it's ok to eliminate some of these elements in a diverse group to make sure one character does not outshine another too much. House rules are not the devil, especially if they are merely in the form of excluding some options from the game.

 

[Obryn]

So far, I've been very impressed with WotC's balance.

I have outright banned only two items - the boring ones that give +2 to every damage roll you make and are way too low-level for such a perk.

I put the Battlerager on my Watch List - that is, I'll watch it and see if it's broken if anyone wants to try one during play.

And I've houseruled Expertise, so there are no feats, and PCs just get +1/+2/+3 to-hit with everything at 5th/15th/25th level.

I was concerned that Sorcerers would outperform Warlocks in every respect, but on a readthrough, that doesn't seem to be an issue. They actually do different stuff, and it's different enough that I think the two classes will play very differently.

Other than that... Well, I think it's pretty impressive to have this much stuff, and have all of it be useful, still.

-O

 

[Nail]

...what about the boring feats that give you +1 damage? Is there a cut-off between +1 damage and +2 damage? Really?

 

[Cadfan]

I put the Battlerager on my Watch List - that is, I'll watch it and see if it's broken if anyone wants to try one during play.

From my experience, the battlerager is most powerful at level 1. His temporary hit point ability is frontloaded. At level 1 he gets his con modifier in temporary hit points when he's struck in melee. At level 10, he gets... his con modifier in temporary hit points when he's struck in melee. His con modifier has increased by 1, yes, but the typical damage of a hit has more than doubled.

Come to think of it, we had a similar experience with the rogue. At level 1, our human rogue was sneak attacking for a net total of 3d8+6. By level 5, it was 3d8+7, but monster hit points had about doubled.

There are just a few classes that are frontloaded a bit. I didn't find them frontloaded enough to make other players unhappy, though.

 

[Obryn]

From my experience, the battlerager is most powerful at level 1. His temporary hit point ability is frontloaded. At level 1 he gets his con modifier in temporary hit points when he's struck in melee. At level 10, he gets... his con modifier in temporary hit points when he's struck in melee. His con modifier has increased by 1, yes, but the typical damage of a hit has more than doubled.

Come to think of it, we had a similar experience with the rogue. At level 1, our human rogue was sneak attacking for a net total of 3d8+6. By level 5, it was 3d8+7, but monster hit points had about doubled.

There are just a few classes that are frontloaded a bit. I didn't find them frontloaded enough to make other players unhappy, though.

Now, that is a very interesting observation.

Since I'm starting new PCs at level 7 or 8 nowadays, I'll keep that in mind!

-O

 

[Herschel]

Can you elaborate why? Is it mostly for flavor? Kind of an homage to Weapon Finesse?

Personally, I like the feat. I look at it in one of two ways - either (say) a Paladin has trained enough with his attacks to become as competent with basic attacks as he is with smites; or else he's learned to enhance his basic attacks with divine energy, to make them more powerful.

I can see only allowing it for Dex, Int and Wis.

Charisma: My sword really likes me, so it swings better.

Constitution: I'm healthier/more durable than my sword and it respects that.

 

[jeffwik]

Of all those feats, I think combat medic should have been a general "all uses of the heal skill become minor actions" and thrown out the +2. That would have made it a much better and more generally useful feat I feel.

Improved grab and improved bullrush I feel are actually decent feats: attacks that move foes or eat their actions are typically daily or encounter powers, and if you only need to move a foe a single square, or delay him for a half round it can often be a waste to use a limited resource that would fling him 5 or stun him. Getting a +4 to make those actions more certain is a very good thing if you use them a lot.

Bull rushing and grabbing become less and less viable options as you go up in level, because you don't add in any bonuses from weapons or implements. So a 1st level character's Str vs. Fortitude attack is maybe +3 or +4, not unlike a 1st level wizard targeting a NAD, but at 30th level there's a disparity of +5 or +6; the monster's Fort goes up higher than the PC's strength... Actually more than that what with the issues that Weapon Expertise is supposed to address.

I'd rewrite Improved Grab and Improved Bull Rush as granting a scaling bonus; +1 up to 5th level, +2 up to 10th level, +4 up to 15th level, +5 up to 20th level, +7 up to 25th level, and finally +8, so your demigod fighter (Strength bonus something like +25 without the feat) has a chance at shoving Graz'zt (Fort defense 45) without a natural 20.

 

[jgsugden]

Melee Training: Not overpowered. All it does is bring a basic attack up to the level of being a baseline useful attack. In almost all instances, your class at-wills will do more damage or have a more dramatic impact on the game. Personally, I took it with my dwarven wrath invoker because it just feels wrong to have a drawf that isn't smashing orc heads in with his hammer.

Implements/Weapon Expertise: In 3.5, the sweet spot for D&D was levels 5 to 9. In 4E, the sweet spot is where the math doesn't break down - levels 1 to ~14. After that, the impact of the +ability mod to attack powers makes everything too wonky. These feats are fine in levels 1 to 15 - not essential yet, and still useful. You may go three or four combats without it making any impact before level 15. That isn't overpoweed in my book.