D&D 3.x "The Big Big Book of Feats 3.5" by Anubis

[Anubis]

Yup. Those reasons are why I stated that I thought the abilities were individually balanced - I just think that a single feat that provides you with such a range of flexibility is not so balanced. Compare it to weapon focus, which gives you a +1 to hit with a single weapon of choice, and weapon focus starts to look a little... wan.

You'd be surprised how few people actually wanna take any of these feats due to the lack of other things they get because of it.

And I think they look fine in relation to each other. But a lot of ordinary combat feats become considerably less tasty when these options are available instead.

Uh, no. I don't think it's broken. I just think it's not well balanced in proportion to other feats. This is a feat that is must-have for fighters, much like weapon specialization, except that you get it at 1st level.

I honestly couldn't even imagine a fighter actually going into all this, especially given the Knowledge (ki) skill problem.

Here's my test subject to illustrate my thoughts, Boo:

Human fighter-1, STR 12, DEX 18, CON 16. Chain shirt (AC 18 total). Endurance, Energy Manipulation, Weapon Focus (ranged touch blast). Owns a greatsword, dagger, and mighty +1 composite longbow. He's a simple man, with clean but largely unadorned equipment.

Against an archer dressed in a chain shirt:
Rng 0-110 ft: 2.2 avg dmg (using bow)
Rng 115-220 ft: 1.1 avg dmg (using bow)
Rng 225-1100 ft: 0.275 avg dmg (using bow)
Rng 0-400 ft: 2.925 avg dmg (using ranged touch; costs 1 non-lethal damage)
Rng 0-400 ft: 1.4 avg dmg (using energy ball; costs 1 non-lethal damage)
Rng 405-800 ft: 0.7 avg dmg (using energy ball; costs 1 non-lethal damage)
Rng 800-4000 ft: 0.175 avg dmg (using energy ball; costs 1 non-lethal damage)

Boo has 13 hit points; most archers will have 11 hp. Boo's sweet spot is with the ranged touch, anywhere from 115 ft to 400 ft. The archer's sweet spot will be anything at 110 ft or less (note: my archer has 11 hp and does about 3.375 avg dmg with the bow at 110 ft; 1.875 avg dmg up to 220 ft; and 0.375 dmg further than that).

So, is this balanced? Sure. Boo will win at very long range, but the archer will win at a pretty decent range or less. Counting non-lethal damage, Boo will still win at 115 ft or longer.

But my point isn't that Boo can do better than the archer at the archer's specialty. My point is that Boo can do about as well as the archer at the archer's specialty, and gains a host of other tactical options as well.

The problem is what here? You can't use more than a single tactical option at a time.

And at higher levels, the archer falls behind. That ranged touch attack ignores all sorts of AC boosters that enemies will have against the archer, AND Boo's average damage climbs faster than the archer's, due to the +1 per level niceness, eventually eclipsing the archer even at close ranges. But that's still not broken, although it starts to make "archer" a less-than-optimal character choice.

For duels? Um, yep. Damn straight. Archers aren't the best duelists . . .

But even when Energy Manipulation becomes superior to the archer, Boo continues to have more tactical options than the archer, for the same feat.

-seasong

The problem is that you made the critical error of testing something in a duel atmosphere. That never gives accurate playtesting results. To test these feats, creatue a character with these feats and take some characters of other types and run them through entire adventures. THAT is how you get accurate test results.

Anyway, put Boo in a standard party and run him through some adventures, and the balance will become apparent.

Dueling is the specialty of energy-using characters, hands-down. In a one-shot fight, the energy user OWNS.

[Edit: Removed references to archer ammo due to realizing the rules changed in 3.5 . . .]

 

[Anabstercorian]

Good point about energy use, Anubis.

 

[seasong]

You'd be surprised how few people actually wanna take any of these feats due to the lack of other things they get because of it.

Examples of things you would take instead?

I honestly couldn't even imagine a fighter actually going into all this, especially given the Knowledge (ki) skill problem.

What Knowledge (ki) skill problem? My understanding is that this is only important for flying, and you only need 1 rank for that, yes?

The problem is what here? You can't use more than a single tactical option at a time.

So? Most feats define a single tactical choice and make you good at it. This feat defines four tactical choices and makes you good at all of them.

I'll put it this way: in a campaign WITHOUT all of your other feats, if I made a feat that allowed the fighter to shoot a 400-ft ranged touch attack that does 1d6 + 1/level, and did 1 point of non-lethal damage per shot, it would be a good feat. And if he took that feat, and some time passed, and then I said, "Oh, wait, you know what? Let me give you some bonus superpowers to go with that feat for free," would the feat be better balanced or worse?

I'm not talking about duels. I'm talking about adventures OR duels. The average damage my mounted archer takes because he has to be within a certain range to get a good chance of hitting is more than I would take in non-lethal form from this ability... and this ability would take me out of that range. What's more, I'd do more damage because it's a touch attack and I would hit more often.

I'm running a mounted archer right now. If I took this and Endurance, and dropped the feats he didn't need (Far Shot, Quick Draw, just off the top of my head), he would be the same except that he would have spent several hundred GP less on the bow, and he would DO MORE and TAKE LESS damage. His fight tactics would be identical. His methods would be identical. And he would be better at it.

Which is fine. I don't think that's too bad, because as an archer he's cooler, and if someone else played a Me Clone but with this feat, I'd focus on other aspects of the whole archer thing that he couldn't mimic, like hitting things at extreme ranges.

Of course, if the feat also provided the 400-ft range increment balls of energy, well, I guess I'm screwed there, too.

Um, if you look at all classes, the archer becomes an unviable choice regardless once you get to epic levels. Ammo just costs too much at that point for too little benefit.

Dunno about that. The most munchkin character I've ever built was an archer, and he had the same cost for ammo as every 1st level archer, just more arrows at a time.

The problem is that you made the critical error of testing something in a duel atmosphere.

Soften your tone, please. That was almost inflammatory.

1. The duel atmosphere was not to test the feat. If you read it again, I have faith that you will see that.

2. It was used to demonstrate that the ranged touch attack was, in fact, balanced.

3. I used the duel atmosphere to show that one little thing. That at different ranges, archery or ray were more efficient. That's a good thing - it means that one character can be good at one thing, and the other at another thing.

4. Repeat: The duel argues YOUR side of the argument.

5. My conclusion, however, was that the feat was balanced without the other powers. My additional comments were that a feat the provides multiple tactical choices, some of them unavailable to any other character, is not well balanced. This, however, had nothing to do with the duel, and everything to do with complete adventures, where this feat would function in multiple situations, whereas most feats only function in a small subset of situations.

I know that by my saying your feat is not balanced for normal D&D, I've probably touched on something sensitive. I apologize, but I ask that in responding to me, you respond to what I wrote, and not to whatever sensitive point I've touched on.

Also, repeatedly saying that "it works out in play" without giving even a hint of HOW it works out, will not persuade me. Telling me of a situation that demonstrates how it works out has a much better chance.

Edit: removed reference to 3.0 rule that Anubis was throwing out there .

-seasong

 

[Anubis]

Examples of things you would take instead?

Just about any other feat, actually.

What Knowledge (ki) skill problem? My understanding is that this is only important for flying, and you only need 1 rank for that, yes?

For the worst flight, which is almost useless in any given situation. You need more ranks and more feats to make better flight.

So? Most feats define a single tactical choice and make you good at it. This feat defines four tactical choices and makes you good at all of them.

No, this feat gives you options, but does not make those options powerful. The feat is designed to be able to be used by itself as a tactical weapon. Consider it a feat and weapon in one.

I'll put it this way: in a campaign WITHOUT all of your other feats, if I made a feat that allowed the fighter to shoot a 400-ft ranged touch attack that does 1d6 + 1/level, and did 1 point of non-lethal damage per shot, it would be a good feat. And if he took that feat, and some time passed, and then I said, "Oh, wait, you know what? Let me give you some bonus superpowers to go with that feat for free," would the feat be better balanced or worse?

Actually, like I said, the feats used to be seperate, and they were all worthless. There simply was not enough damage. What four feats does now required 11 feats before. The whole point of this is to make this a viable offensive path at low and high levels, not just at ultra-high levels. If they are all seperate feats, it would be Level 6 before a normal character could do what Energy Manipulation does now. At Level 6, Energy Manipulation is at best a minor form of offense.

I'm not talking about duels. I'm talking about adventures OR duels. The average damage my mounted archer takes because he has to be within a certain range to get a good chance of hitting is more than I would take in non-lethal form from this ability... and this ability would take me out of that range. What's more, I'd do more damage because it's a touch attack and I would hit more often.

The problem is that with more nonlethal damage, using this feat becomes fatal for Level 1-3 characters. I know that the powers are very good, but I honestly do not believe that a character with this feat trumps characters with other feats, not automatically. For example, even with that range, you still need line of sight for the ranged attack and the ranged touch attack. Due to that very reasoning, I have on more than one occasion considered lowering the ranges due to the fact that the ranges were pointless anyway due to lacking line of sight. Range is a minor thing, though.

I'm running a mounted archer right now. If I took this and Endurance, and dropped the feats he didn't need (Far Shot, Quick Draw, just off the top of my head), he would be the same except that he would have spent several hundred GP less on the bow, and he would DO MORE and TAKE LESS damage. His fight tactics would be identical. His methods would be identical. And he would be better at it.

Which is fine. I don't think that's too bad, because as an archer he's cooler, and if someone else played a Me Clone but with this feat, I'd focus on other aspects of the whole archer thing that he couldn't mimic, like hitting things at extreme ranges.

Of course, if the feat also provided the 400-ft range increment balls of energy, well, I guess I'm screwed there, too.

Like I said, the range is almost pointless due to needing line of sight.

Dunno about that. The most munchkin character I've ever built was an archer, and he had the same cost for ammo as every 1st level archer, just more arrows at a time.

Soften your tone, please. That was almost inflammatory.

1. The duel atmosphere was not to test the feat. If you read it again, I have faith that you will see that.

2. It was used to demonstrate that the ranged touch attack was, in fact, balanced.

3. I used the duel atmosphere to show that one little thing. That at different ranges, archery or ray were more efficient. That's a good thing - it means that one character can be good at one thing, and the other at another thing.

4. Repeat: The duel argues YOUR side of the argument.

5. My conclusion, however, was that the feat was balanced without the other powers. My additional comments were that a feat the provides multiple tactical choices, some of them unavailable to any other character, is not well balanced. This, however, had nothing to do with the duel, and everything to do with complete adventures, where this feat would function in multiple situations, whereas most feats only function in a small subset of situations.

I know that by my saying your feat is not balanced for normal D&D, I've probably touched on something sensitive. I apologize, but I ask that in responding to me, you respond to what I wrote, and not to whatever sensitive point I've touched on.

Also, repeatedly saying that "it works out in play" without giving even a hint of HOW it works out, will not persuade me. Telling me of a situation that demonstrates how it works out has a much better chance.

Edit: removed reference to 3.0 rule that Anubis was throwing out there .

-seasong

Okay, basically if you use this in play, over the course of several encounters in a standard setting (which is indoors), a character using this will take lethal AND nonlethal damage. Healing may heal both, but the healing won't come usually until the lethal damage is taken or until nonlethal damage is giving a KO. As such, using this feat is risky, especially since you never know what you'll be facing next. You never know what might happen around the next corner.

 

[seasong]

Originally posted by Anubis

Originally posted by seasong
Also, repeatedly saying that "it works out in play" without giving even a hint of HOW it works out, will not persuade me. Telling me of a situation that demonstrates how it works out has a much better chance.

Okay, basically if you use this in play, over the course of several encounters in a standard setting (which is indoors), a character using this will take lethal AND nonlethal damage. Healing may heal both, but the healing won't come usually until the lethal damage is taken or until nonlethal damage is giving a KO. As such, using this feat is risky, especially since you never know what you'll be facing next. You never know what might happen around the next corner.

Okay, fair enough. I was fooled by the DBZ overtones, which is about 98% outdoors and long-range, and perhaps by my own campaign, which is also about 98% outdoors, and perhaps by the campaign I'm playing an archer in, which is about 75% outdoors.

In a campaign that was not at least 50% outdoors, I wouldn't play an archer. It's as simple as that, and in such a campaign, I also wouldn't take Energy Manipulation. So in that sense, I agree with you - both show off really well in ranged situations, and both suck in enclosed melee situations, particularly at low levels. My archer, for example, has found a great deal of use for his greatsword the 25% of the time we've been enclosed, simply because it is almost impossible to get a usable distance from the foe - flying wouldn't help much with that, either, due to the unfortunate presence of a ceiling .

However, the feat, as written, doesn't look like a dungeon feat. It's designed, ground up, for open air combat. In a campaign that is primarily underground, I can see it being balanced; aboveground, however, I still don't think it is.

And if you are going for the underground balance aspect, why not do this?

Energy balls: range increment 30 ft
Ranged touch: 100 ft range.
20-ft radius Fireball: 100 ft range.
Fly: 10 ft move (but allow double move & run).

That's still plenty of range for indoors, and you don't step all over the archer's schtick outdoors. You can still fly, but you can't get out of reach straight up in one move.

In short, if you've balanced it against indoor environments, why make it suddenly become better outdoors?

 

[Anubis]

Okay, fair enough. I was fooled by the DBZ overtones, which is about 98% outdoors and long-range, and perhaps by my own campaign, which is also about 98% outdoors, and perhaps by the campaign I'm playing an archer in, which is about 75% outdoors.

You guys play outdoors that much?!

In a campaign that was not at least 50% outdoors,

Which is most campaigns . . .

I wouldn't play an archer. It's as simple as that, and in such a campaign, I also wouldn't take Energy Manipulation. So in that sense, I agree with you - both show off really well in ranged situations, and both suck in enclosed melee situations, particularly at low levels. My archer, for example, has found a great deal of use for his greatsword the 25% of the time we've been enclosed, simply because it is almost impossible to get a usable distance from the foe - flying wouldn't help much with that, either, due to the unfortunate presence of a ceiling .

My players get plenty of ranged attacks in indoors, usually to open the combat. Perhaps your caves are smaller than mine? Comabt is never ended at a range, though, at least not in my campaigns. Combat should never end before the two sides close into melee.

However, the feat, as written, doesn't look like a dungeon feat. It's designed, ground up, for open air combat. In a campaign that is primarily underground, I can see it being balanced; aboveground, however, I still don't think it is.

And if you are going for the underground balance aspect, why not do this?

Energy balls: range increment 30 ft
Ranged touch: 100 ft range.
20-ft radius Fireball: 100 ft range.
Fly: 10 ft move (but allow double move & run).

Well, the modified ranges would still work (probably), but I wouldn't change the flight. By doing that, you make the flight options utterly worthless. Remember, ki flight follows ALL rules for flight, including all turn angles, minimum flight speeds, etc. Reducing it that far would make it basically worthless.

Also, the ranges would still go up with the more advanced feats.

That's still plenty of range for indoors, and you don't step all over the archer's schtick outdoors. You can still fly, but you can't get out of reach straight up in one move.

In short, if you've balanced it against indoor environments, why make it suddenly become better outdoors?

I basically balanced this for the standard campaign, the average. I don't take extremes into consideration most of the time. A campaign that is 98% outdoors is most certainly QUITE extreme, and in the opposite direction of the core game at that.

I think I will change the range to 25 feet for energy ball and 100 feet for both ki blast and energy explosion. That should better balance it for extreme campaigns. I can't go further than that though . . .

 

[Anubis]

UPDATE!

Okay, I have decided to make some changes to some feats to balance them outdoors without nerfing them indoors. In addition, after reading over them, I noticed there were some pieces of text from the older versions of these feats that needed to be removed as well as some old numbers that needed to be changed that I forgot to put in the revision, so I added in some errata. Major changes here!

The following feats have undergone SUBSTANTIAL changes:

Energy Manipulation
Improved Energy Manipulation
Epic Energy Manipulation
Supreme Energy Manipulation

 

[seasong]

You guys play outdoors that much?!

Light Against the Dark is a campaign involving war between city-states and barbaric invaders in an open mountain setting, with long, soaring flights between cities, grandiose vistas, and running battles through the sky god's domain. There are occasional crawls, but they are always to some short-term purpose, and are reasonably rare.

The other campaign (the one my mounted archer is in) is set in and around a desert. Not much call for caves, there, and we've mostly been dealing with bandits. Of course, that also means bandit caves, which is why we've been 75/25 in that campaign. And it's likely to trend to 50/50 as the campaign progresses, so I'll probably have to start beefing up the melee side of things.

And like I said, I was strongly influenced by the DBZ setting this is inspired by, wherein time spent indoors is generally only about training.

My players get plenty of ranged attacks in indoors, usually to open the combat. Perhaps your caves are smaller than mine? Comabt is never ended at a range, though, at least not in my campaigns. Combat should never end before the two sides close into melee.

Yes, but whereas an archer is a valid choice in a non-specific (variable environment), one where the archery focus is only useful in the opening salvo doesn't make for much of a fun choice.

The caves are generally realistically designed. If you've spent much time spelunking (or looking at real life dungeon floor plans), a round of arrows is about as much as you can hope for. If that.

Well, the modified ranges would still work (probably), but I wouldn't change the flight. By doing that, you make the flight options utterly worthless. Remember, ki flight follows ALL rules for flight, including all turn angles, minimum flight speeds, etc. Reducing it that far would make it basically worthless.

Sure.

Also, the ranges would still go up with the more advanced feats.

Sure. Again, my primary concern was with getting it with a single feat.

I basically balanced this for the standard campaign, the average. I don't take extremes into consideration most of the time. A campaign that is 98% outdoors is most certainly QUITE extreme, and in the opposite direction of the core game at that.

Yeah - and I was thinking your standard for indoor/outdoor was DBZ. Once I realized you were building it with D&D dungeon crawls in mind, the disconnect became very clear .

-seasong

 

[Anubis]

ERRATA!

Doh! Right after the last update, I noticed that the listed level prerequisites of Tail Weakness Immunity and Control Oozaru Form were from the old versions of these two feats. Also, I thought some more prerequisites were called for. Changed!

Tail Weakness Immunity . . . Under prerequisites, "character level 9th+" has been changed to "effective character level 20th+", and "Great Fortitude" was added . . . Control Oozaru Form . . . Under prerequisites, "Character level 18th+" has been changed to "effective character level 30th+", and "Ability to shapechange into an Oozaru form" and "Iron Will" were added . . .

 

[Anabstercorian]

Sweeet. I like.

I'm visualizing a dwarven monk in conjunction with these.