Round 18 is OVER

[Wulf Ratbane]

Might I suggest that next round, we vote for a winner and remove the one that gets the least votes, now that there are only three? Just for a change of pace?

Please do NOT change the structure of the vote mid-game.

You don't go 17 rounds of "Vote for the one you want to lose" and then switch to "Vote for the one you want to win."

It was crap like that that snookered Colby into taking Tina into the final round with him (stupid meathead).

What? You know what I'm talkin' about.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Please do NOT change the structure of the vote mid-game.

You don't go 17 rounds of "Vote for the one you want to lose" and then switch to "Vote for the one you want to win."

It was crap like that that snookered Colby into taking Tina into the final round with him (stupid meathead).

What? You know what I'm talkin' about.

Well, with only three left, there isn't much difference, and let's face it: its not nearly as abusive of a random change as the round where two feats snuck back in

 

[orsal]

Please do NOT change the structure of the vote mid-game.

Too late! The structure has already changed several times, on a round-by-round basis.

One person, one vote, vote for bad feat(s) to be eliminated this round.

One person, two votes, vote for bad feat(s) to be eliminated this round.

One person, three votes, vote for bad feat(s) to be eliminated this round.

One person, one vote, vote for bad feat (only one!) to be eliminated this round.

One person, one vote, vote for good feat already eliminated to be restored to the competition.

One person, one vote, vote for good feat to be temporarily immune from elimination.

 

[cthulhu_duck]

One person, one vote, vote for good feat to be temporarily immune from elimination.

There was 'nominate which feat you think will win' but I didn't think that it was mentioned that the feat that came highest in that category would get immunity...?

 

[two]

....guys, Improved Initiative is an *excellent* feat.

It gives you +x to hit, where x = the opponent's Dex modifier

How do *any* of these feats even compare? Power attack?! Rapid shot?! They all give you PENALTIES. WHy the heck would you vote for a feat that gives you a bonus over a feat that gives you a penalty?!

For the incredibly obvious reason that Impoved Initiative is not guaranteed to give you anything at all in any given combat, and if it does, it is only good for one or two attacks.

Rapid shot, obviously, can be used (and is) every round of combat for ye olde highly effective ranged attack specialist.

The most amusing thing about improved initiative is that it's often taken by PC's with incredibly high dex. Meaning, they often win initiative anyway; if you already go first without the feat doing anything, the feat is worth, well, exactly zip.

The middle cases, where the +4 is the determining factor in who goes first, are a rather low percentage. Do the math; take notes during combat; see for yourself.

It's extremely rare, even in high level combat, for the person that goes first to somehow change the result of a combat because of the fact that they could go first.

 

[AntiStateQuixote]

It's crazy talk, man . . . I can't believe you hate Improved Initiative

For the incredibly obvious reason that Impoved Initiative is not guaranteed to give you anything at all in any given combat, and if it does, it is only good for one or two attacks.

Augh! What feat guarantees anything in combat? Rapid shot lets you take an extra attack at the expense of reducing your chance to hit, but it does NOT guarantee that the extra attack will hit. Power Attack lets you do more damage IF you hit with an attack that has a reduced chance to hit when you use the feat, but it does not guarantee that you will hit or do extra damage. Weapon Finesse increases your chance to hit because (presumably) you are using a better ability score to determine your chance to hit, but it does not guarantee that you will hit even though you are using your better ability score to modify the d20 roll. None of these feats "guarantees" anything.

Rapid shot, obviously, can be used (and is) every round of combat for ye olde highly effective ranged attack specialist.

Assuming there is more than one round of combat . . . yes, this feat will be used more often than Improved Initiative in a given combat, but it is debatable if this is more useful.

The most amusing thing about improved initiative is that it's often taken by PC's with incredibly high dex. Meaning, they often win initiative anyway; if you already go first without the feat doing anything, the feat is worth, well, exactly zip.

Well, when these high-DEX critters (Rogue with Sneak Attack?) face other high-DEX critters (Rogue with Sneak Attack?) then the one with Improved Initiative is most likely to win initiative. There are plenty of critters that have high initiative modifiers. Getting a +4 to your initiative increases the chance that you will go before ANY critter (regardless of their modifier) by 20%.

The middle cases, where the +4 is the determining factor in who goes first, are a rather low percentage. Do the math; take notes during combat; see for yourself.

Actually, given a large enough random sampling of combats with critters with various initiative modifiers that are evenly distributed above and below the initiative modifier of another critter (before accounting for Improved Initiative) EXACTLY 20% of all encounters should begin with the critter having Improved Initiative winning iniative BECAUSE the critter had improved initiative. I don't think that 20% is a rather low percentage . . . maybe you do.

It's extremely rare, even in high level combat, for the person that goes first to somehow change the result of a combat because of the fact that they could go first.

Wow, not played much high level combat where a single save or die effect TOTALLY determines who lives or dies? Not played much high level combat where a well-timed grapple (preferably on the first round of combat) totally incapacitates the enemy wizard? Not played much high level combat where the ability to flee via magic BEFORE you get crushed saves your life on the first round? I can think of a TON of situations where who goes first completely determines success or failure in a given mission.

Someone said before to track situations in which your enemy wins initiative. AFTER he's dead, calculate the damage he did on his last action. If YOU had one initiative instead of your enemy, that's damage you wouldn't be healing after the fight. I think that's a pretty good argument for going first. Save resources for later use by going first and taking down the enemy that much faster.

And again I must say Improved Initiative is the only feat left in the pool that can benefit EVERY character in the game regardless of class, focus, etc.

 

[Heathen72]

Too late! The structure has already changed several times, on a round-by-round basis.
One person, one vote, vote for bad feat(s) to be eliminated this round.
One person, two votes, vote for bad feat(s) to be eliminated this round.
One person, three votes, vote for bad feat(s) to be eliminated this round.
One person, one vote, vote for bad feat (only one!) to be eliminated this round.
One person, one vote, vote for good feat already eliminated to be restored to the competition.
One person, one vote, vote for good feat to be temporarily immune from elimination.

With respect to Orsal and Rystil Arden, I think I will be continuing with the current process of elimination - partly because because people often vote before reading the thread, but mostly because I don't want to ruin the integrity of the game too much, this late in the exercise. I know I made some slight changes in the earlier rounds - these were mainly to maintain interest in the threads, and to eliminate as much as the chaff as quickly as we could (people were already complaining that the threads had outlived their usefulness, so I wanted to push on to the interesting stuff ) Just before the final rounds I had to include the 'buy back' thread because up till that point people had no way of 'protecting' a feat, and some had been eliminated with as few as 5 (in one case 4) votes.

There was 'nominate which feat you think will win' but I didn't think that it was mentioned that the feat that came highest in that category would get immunity...?

Yeah! That was a 'surprise'!! The 'immunity round' was just a piece of fluff, really, and while it generated a bit of 'controversy' PA was voted off the next round anyway (only to be reintroduced later on).

One change I am thinking of making for the last round is to make the last two rounds blind - people won't be able to see the poll before they vote. Any thoughts on that?

 

[Heathen72]

Talk about a close round!! 101 each to Improved Init and Rapid Shot!!

 

[ARandomGod]

Improved Initiative is really the best of the four anyway though. If many fights in your campaign aren't mainly decided by the first round's actions, then you either have a weird mix of PCs and enemies or else one of the teams isn't using the initiative to best advantage...

I have to agree.

Interestingly enough, the two I'd pick as out are the two "winning" at this point anyhow. I'd pick weapon finesse and/or power attack. Power attack is pretty good and all, but there's a LOT of math and figuring and .. and... well, I can see why some people might really like that. Plus it lets you hit HARD.

Whereas I'd get rid of Finesse just because I think that ALL 'finessable' weapons should be finessed as a default, and should require a feat to NOT finesse them.

 

[orsal]

With respect to Orsal and Rystil Arden, I think I will be continuing with the current process of elimination

Hey, it's all the same to me. I didn't intend to sound like I was seconding Rystil Arden's suggestion, just answering Wulf Ratbane's objection to it.