Toughness - How many hit points to make it worthwhile?

[Roman]

How many hit points would the toughness feat have to give to make it a worthwhile feat? I mean a truly worthwhile feat, not a feat that is taken due to being a prerequisite and not a feat that has specific use for one time adventures for 1st level wizards.

I am making this a poll with options for various numbers of hit points. I am aware that there are other ways to deal with toughness, such as improved toughness method of 1hp/HD, but I am interested in the conversion ration between feats and hit points, so those options are deliberately missing from the poll.

 

[3d6]

I don't think there's a good answer. +10 hit points for a feat at 1st level would be far too good, but at 20th level, it would be a wasted feat. I don't think there's a value where that's not true.

 

[evilbob]

I agree. I think limiting it to a static number of hit points is exactly why no one ever takes toughness in the first place.

 

[Roman]

Yet there are plenty of feats that give bonuses that do not improve with level, including the various skill feats and saving throw improvement feats. While I agree that it would have been a better design philosophy to design feats that give per level bonuses that has not been the case so far. Perhaps we will see scaling feats take the dominant stage in 4E.

 

[evilbob]

Certainly a valid argument. However, those numbers all increase much more slowly than HP, and are generally balanced throughout a character's development so that a +2 to a save or a +3 to a skill is useful at level 1 and level 20 - it always makes you at least 1 or 2 levels better.

Having said that, toughness as a feat being +3 HP comes more into focus; the designers were probably trying to give an "average" amount of HP that would represent 1 additional level. Perhaps then the best way to abjucate toughness would be to go with +1 HD's worth of HP. Or, if you were trying to simulate 2 level's worth, perhaps you simply gain HP equal to your current class's hit die (fighters gain 10 HP, wizards gain 4 HP) - maybe even add in + your Con bonus. However it came out, however, this still isn't answering your OP's question - sorry.

If it had to be expressed in a static number, I'd say average the gain I just mentioned: since you can gain from 4 to 12 HP by looking at your HD, the average would be 8. So, 8 HP.

 

[Storyteller01]

Arcana Unearthed/Evolved has a feat that allows you to double your con bonus to hp for the level you take it. Their Warmain gains it at 1st level. Might be a worth while toughness replacement.

 

[trav_laney]

...but I am interested in the conversion ration between feats and hit points, so those options are deliberately missing from the poll.

I don't believe a conversion ratio exists between hit points and feats...different classes get different amounts of feats and different amounts of hit points at each level-up. It would be impossible to find a mathematical relationship between all classes, at all levels, with all possible feat slots, with their hit points...you would end up buffing wizards and nerfing fighters like mad.

Ya know, this thread might make a good WDYDF post...

 

[GreatLemur]

Yet there are plenty of feats that give bonuses that do not improve with level, including the various skill feats and saving throw improvement feats. While I agree that it would have been a better design philosophy to design feats that give per level bonuses that has not been the case so far. Perhaps we will see scaling feats take the dominant stage in 4E.

Total agreement on scaling feats. That really would be a nice design philosophy to see.

About those skill and save bonus feats, though: Aren't they generally thought of as "penalty" feats that exist largely to serve as prerequisites? I've often heard them thrown into the same category as Toughness.

 

[StGabe]

Yet there are plenty of feats that give bonuses that do not improve with level, including the various skill feats and saving throw improvement feats. While I agree that it would have been a better design philosophy to design feats that give per level bonuses that has not been the case so far. Perhaps we will see scaling feats take the dominant stage in 4E.

I disagree with this. I think you are looking at the numbers but not at how they are used. Unless a saving throw is either impossible or trivial, a +1 to your roll is always a 5% overall lower chance of getting hit. That scales just fine. In fact, saving throw bonuses are almost better when you have more of them. For example, if you have a +16 to a roll with a DC of 20 then you have a 15% chance of failing. +2 to your save lowers that to a 5% chance of failing or literally makes you 3 times less likely to fail. If only had a +9 you would fail on a 10 or lower (a 50% chance of failing) and a +2 bonus is only an overall 20% reduction in your chance to fail (50% -> 40%).

The saving throw feats are just fine. In fact they are quite good. The same comparison's work for skill in a lot of cases. As your skill increases you are just looking at even crazier things to do with crazier DC's and each point is still a 5% boost in your chances of success.

 

[el-remmen]

I voted that 3 hps are fine, but I have been playing with the idea of making it increase your HD one step instead. Thus taken at 1st level it gives you a definite bonus, and at the subsequent levels there is a bit of randomness thrown in - and if you choose "average" - you are getting a one or two point bonus.