Revision Spotlight (6/17)

[Kobold Curry Chef]

I have a couple of different ways you could try fixing the feat.

First, simply raise the prereqs so it's not quite as easy to get at 1st level. Instead of Dex 13+, maybe Dex 16+ or 17+. A Dex of 13+ is a smidge above average for all people, and pretty average for adventuring types. Certainly it should be physically more difficult than, say, Dodge.

Second, and a better idea--simply change to feat to give +4 AC vs. one ranged attack a round. At low levels, it's still nearly an automatic deflect, but then a 20th level archer can still peg a 1st-level monk with a single arrow. (As he should be able to.)

Third, have it give the guy DR 10/- vs. one ranged attack. Still nearly an automatic deflection, and then you don't have to have a special rule for big boulders and what not.

Anyway, I agree with those who say they took the lazy way out in writing this feat.

 

[Nail]

Easy: An opposed attack roll, or (if you prefer) a Reflex save vs. the attack roll.

It works for Disarm, it works for Trip, it works for Sunder... etc.

I should move this to a different thread (house rules? ), but....

I'm not sure this feat is comparable to Disarm, Trip, or Sunder. Not only are those toe-to-toe combat feats, rather than ranged abilities, but they are attacks, rather than defence.

Moreover, an opposed attack roll mechanic would make the monk poorer at it than a straight-up fighter would be. A monk has a lower BAB and usually a much lower attack roll than the similar level fighter.

A Ref save might be a good option...but there, the fighter is left out in the cold, and the feat suddenly becomes an excellent choice for a Bard.

And come on...the purple-pant-wearing, flower-sniffing, instrument-strumming (if you know what I mean and I think you do) bard is better at deflecting lethal projectiles of death than the dexterous fighter?

 

[Psion]

Four militiamen with crossbows will quite naturally want to cover all four opponents, one to a man.

Only for the first round. After they see their bolts batted away, perhaps then they will concentrate their fire.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Or heck if they have a leader type they might concentrate fire under orders, that doesn't break the big old v word that people keep throwing around.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Like I said, for archers at least, rapid shot solves all -- you're only dodging the first attack.

I don't expect D&D to be realistic (though it's a plus when it is) -- not when an entire town's worth of crossbowmen could pepper ol' Wulf Ratbane with bolts and not take him down. Could the feat be better designed? Probably. Am I going to lose sleep or even bother house ruling it? Nah.

 

[satori01]

Massing fire is a time honored technique,(just ask the french Knights at Agincourt). I personaly feel it adds some intresting flavor given that the tactics used by the Norman army against the Housecarls in merry ole Britain, would have been less effective against the Shaolin Monks or Duelists of the King of France's Musketeers,(allowing for anarchnisms of course and assuming a duelist type character would take the feat).

I have known a monk player that stopped attempting deflect arrows at all due to continual failure at lower levels.

The Deflect feat now essentially now allows one negation of a "normal" projectile attack at the cost of:

1) the feat itself and it's prerequisties, ala high dex and improved unarmed attack
2) not using a shield,(ac loss)
3) not using a second weapon(extra attack, damage loss, ac loss)
4) not using a two handed weapon.(extra damage loss, power two hander power up loss)

The drawbacks will probably outweigh the benfit for most classes beside monks. The only thing I will say concerning Deflect Arrows for monks is to think of it like a class ability,(which in effect it is), and it now has utility at all levels.

I still think it is possible to easily design multi deflect feats, use the older DC20 mechanic for all attempts made after the one "freebie" allowed by the Deflect Arrows feat, possibly raising the DC by a variable,(+2?), amount for each additional missle.

 

[jasamcarl]

Anything that would give this feat, with its stated effect, a chance of failure would make it underpowered. At high levels, how many non-magic ranged attacks, with small objects no less, do most parties see? When it happens, it should be a no brainer. And a skilled opponent would most likely have more than one attack per round anyway, so that is how skill is taken into account.

I've heard no argument that its unbalanced. Where does the bad design come in?

 

[Felon]

It was a useless feat prior to this, now it at least provides some value.

Nonsense. I saw the monk in my party use it plenty of times to avoid damage, even at low levels. At any rate, suggesting it was previously worthless doesn't vindicate the current version.

Besides, blocking ONE missile attack isn't unbalancing.

If it automatically deflects one attack, then it's certainly unbalanced. An archer jas no chance whatsoever to even hit the monk without taking a full attack action.

Moreover, if it automatically fails against all other missiles that round, then not only is it unbalanced but it's lame.

At low levels, it's a great ability, but then again, who besides the monk is really going to take this feat. The fighter?

That statement doesn't support any arguement that it's balanced. It just demonstrates another way that it's lame.

 

[Kobold Curry Chef]

Bad design, to me, means that it takes all granularity, all scalability, out of that situation. D&D combat is all about granularity and scalability; you don't see absolute nonrandom events, really. Point Blank Shot doesn't mean you automatically hit; it means you're better (get a bonus) in that situation. Expertise doesn't mean you are automatically safe; it means you're better at fighting defensively. Damage reduction has a scale; hit points are a scale; armor class is a scale; combat rules have a lot of nudges and fudges one way or another up and down these various scales. This is all to provide some differentiation between skill levels of different characters. There's a fine difference between a 6th-level fighter and a 7th-level fighter, but it's there.

With Deflect Arrows, every person who has the feat is equally as good at it. If nothing else, it's a boring rule.

 

[TiQuinn]

Nonsense. I saw the monk in my party use it plenty of times to avoid damage, even at low levels. At any rate, suggesting it was previously worthless doesn't vindicate the current version.

If it automatically deflects one attack, then it's certainly unbalanced. An archer jas no chance whatsoever to even hit the monk without taking a full attack action.

Moreover, if it automatically fails against all other missiles that round, then not only is it unbalanced but it's lame.

Not nonsense, from what I've seen. I've seen it used a couple of times (usually unsuccessfully) and then quickly forgotten. I'm suggesting that it's a good idea that needed a tweak to make it effective in the game, and the new version sounds like it will accomplish that. Also just because an archer needs to take a full attack action does not make the feat unbalanced. For the most part, the archer types are away from melee action and can take the full attack action more than other characters. I think it's a definite improvement. YMMV.