Tough as Nails (Kalamar Feat)

This is a 3rd level feat (two feats as prereq) that makes the characters skin so hard that blunt weapons that hit the player do half the damage inflicted back on the weapon.

This unto itself sounds overpowered but it gets worse. Per the Kenzer errata this damage also applies when a Monk attacks a player with this feat with his unarmed strike. By this logic any attack you can figure is blunt in nature (ogre melee strike etc) would have the same effect.

So am I on crack or is the horribly overpowered as a feat?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I would tend to agree that this is an overpowered and poorly thought-out feat. I don't own the KoKPG to provide comparisons, but I remember sifting through it and deciding that many of the feats fell into this category (which is why I didn't buy it ;)).
 

Well the monk interpretation is out there. I suppose that lions, trolls and other creatures attacking with natural weapons take damage as well under that interpretation. Utterly ridiculous.

I remember thinking about this before (without that ludicrous interpretation) and deciding that it wasn't too bad; looking at it again (after having some more experience with level 8-10 characters, I've changed my mind. In practice, the feat would be ridiculously--not ridiculously overpowered, just plain ridiculous.

Let's take a couple examples (note--all of these examples assume a bull's strength--empowered in the last case; then again in my experience, that's pretty much standard play at level 6+):
Ftr 2/Wiz 6/Spellsword 1 using a +1 morning star against a barbarian with this feat. He hits for average damage: 10 points. (4.5+4str+1 enh). Tough as nails kicks in. The morning star takes 5 points of damage. No problem; it doesn't get past its hardness. Fealing cocky (and knowing that the barbarian doesn't have much in the way of AC), the character decides to power attack for 5. He hits. It's a crit! Dealing average damage, that's thirty points. Which means the morning star takes 15 points of damage. Goodbye morning star.

Now, that case was pretty much a best case scenario for the balance of this feat. The character is optimized for defense rather than offense. Now, let's see what happens in a different situation.

Ftr 4/Clr 3/Pal 2 using a +1 warhammer and divine might.
Round 1, he hits for average damage (4.5+5 str+3 Div Might+2 specialization+1 enh)=16 damage. The warhammer takes 8 points. Depending on whether you interpret warhammers as wood or metal hafted weapons, it may be starting to crack.
Round 2, he crits for 48 points of damage! The hammer takes 24 points and is toast even if it's a +3 metal hafted hammer.

But what about a worst case scenario?
Ftr 4/Bbn 2/Rog 3 using a +1 greatclub and raging
Round 1, he hits for average damage (5.5+13 (1.5 str)+2 spec+1 enh+3.5 sneak attack)=25 points of damage dealing 12 points of damage to the greatclub. If he hits agian with his second attack, his weapon has probably had it.
Round 2, Power attack (when you've a +9 strength bonus, it's not that hard to hit) and Crit! 61 points of damage. Massive damage save for the target and 30 points of damage to the greatclub. Bye bye weapon.

So the end result seems to be that any crit against a character with this feat is likely to destroy the weapon being wielded. However, high damage characters are likely to destroy their weapons within a couple of rounds even without crits. Fighter types facing enemies with this feat would justifiably be upset about losing the weapons they need in order to fight level-appropriate foes. And if PCs have this feat, NPCs with vulnerable weapons are likely to both have significantly less loot and pose much less of a challenge.
 

Magic weapons are not damaged, this has been clarified in the errata (though most have guessed it already).

You could argue that someone with Greater Magic Fang on himself could still damage magic weapons...

The feat may seem very tough, but it really applies only to critical hits.
 



Definitely has no place in standard D&D.

A 3rd level character can be so tough weapons break against him and he takes half damage from them, but a Barbarian needs to be what level to get DR 1?

For that matter, if you could find a campaign it'd be appropriate for, it really ought to give a set DR vs. blunt weapons, none of this half damage nonsense.
 
Last edited:

This feat just seems...dumb.

Here's my new feat:

Improved Tough as Nails [General]

Prerequisites: Con 13+, Tough as Nails

Benefit: You don't take any damage any more because you're just that tough.
 


Darklone said:
The feat may seem very tough, but it really applies only to critical hits.

Except, according to the first poster, any natural weapon blunt damage attack harms the attacker as well as the attacked. So a giant doing a slam attack will be hurting himself just by hitting the PC with the feat.

Utterly ridiculous, and confirms my opinion of the Kalamar feats in general. I thought this feat was overpowered without the natural weapon errata (a blunt weapon fighter hope NOT to get a crit...stupid), but with the errata it is just over the top, and up the next hill and over the top.

:)
 

Remove ads

Top