Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="James McMurray" data-source="post: 4744264" data-attributes="member: 743">Even if it is, that doesn't make it the best option, merely the one they chose.Because monsters don't do enough damage when they're hitting 9 times out of 10. Make it 5 out of 10 with no other changes and the little threat we've got disappears.If, as as been said in this thread, you're going to get hit on a 2 by attacks with debilitating conditions, those feats aren't worth it. You'll still get hit on an 8 at best, and still get slapped with the conditions (most of which grant CA, meaning you're now being hit easier).If it means you're still getting hit on a 3 - 6? Definitely. At least IMO. I'd rather shore the weakness up other ways and use the feats for offence, giving my enemies fewer chances to hit me.All very true, but there's another forum for house rules. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />It was a direct reply to the quoted statement that items which grant defense bonuses are single use and short duration, not an attempt to use AV to prove anything about the game's math.</blockquote>