Trying to make Toughness not such a junk feat

[Technik4]

Another Toughness variant:

You roll 1 higher die type for any class you are in (max d12). If you are taking this at first level, you get max hp in the higher die type.

For first level characters it is, strictly speaking, a downgrade (1 less hp than toughness would actually provide) but as soon as 2nd level you could see a difference, and by 3rd level you are statistically "tougher" than you would otherwise be.

Technik

 

[Norfleet]

Improved initiative is only of value when not every one has the feat.

That's like saying nuclear weapons are only of value if not everyone has them. Yes, you don't gain anything by having them, but try NOT having them when everyone else DOES.

 

[pyk]

That's like saying nuclear weapons are only of value if not everyone has them. Yes, you don't gain anything by having them, but try NOT having them when everyone else DOES.

No, wrong analogy, as improved initiative is only of severly limited value. It's like being the first batter in the order - only useful the first inning. The first four batters only matter for the fact they usually get to bat more often than the lower end of the order. After the first round, the particular order anyone is in does not matter. The relative order is then important. If having higher initiative was so important, why are there no other CORE feats that add to it? Yes, there are plenty of feats from other companies, but that's not the point.

Many feats are there to raise damage, attack, etc. Only one feat to raise init, and beyond that is only high Dex. So, you get to go first, what other benefit is to be had from high init, especially when higher levels the opponents usually last beyond that first round?

And if it had such importance, why do not more monsters in the MM, MMII, etc. have this feat? Especially high INT monsters?

 

[Cyraneth]

Funny how it seems like the general consensus is that classes with high BAB, Constitution, or Fortitude saves should be the ones benefitting the most from this feat. Isn't the feat meant for low-HD classes to let them reduce one of their weaknesses, or as a feat-eater for power PrCs like the Dwarven Defender?

Personally, I think the feat should grant the same bonus to all characters, regardless of class. To me, Grog's suggestion (3 +1/2 levels) seem fair. I use Toughness the way it's always been, but I'm tempted to change it into Grog's version.

- Cyraneth

 

[Al]

improved initiative is only of severly limited value

Evidently you don't play to high levels! Being able to cast Finger of Death on the opposing mage before he casts it in you is phenomenally useful. If the spell is extended to party-affecting spells such as Confusion, Mass Hold Person, Greater Command or Wail of the Banshee, the initiative roll can determine the whole combat.

Anyway,

Acrobatic, Alertness, Agile, Animal Affinity, Athletic, Deceitful, Deft Hands, Diligent, Investigator, Magical Aptitude, Negotiator, Nimble Fingers, Persuasive, Self Sufficient, Skill Focus, Stealthy--When you have 18 ranks in a skill, an extra +2 or 3 is nothing to get excited about

Not true. The difference between Toughness adding a flat number of HPs and the skill boosting feats adding a flat bonus to a skill is all down to percentages. In percentage terms, Toughness' value falls. If you would have had 6 hit points and take Toughness, your HP increase by 50%. If you would have had 60, the feat only increases your HP effectiveness by 5%. With skills, however, the mechanic is different. Since the DCs (usually) scale and/or the checks are opposed, the % increase will be more or less constant. A DC 20 is as difficult to someone with 5 ranks as a DC 30 to someone with 15, both needing a 15 to succeed (i.e. a 25% chance). A +2 skill feat raises that to a 35% chance, and raises your percentage no matter what level you are at.

Weapon Focus

Likewise. If you need a 15 with your +5 to hit against an AC 20, then Weapon Focus is just as useful as if you have a +15 to hit against an AC 30.

Diehard

Gives you 3x as many (albiet virtual) HPs as Toughness! You can make the argument that the increased lethality makes these HPs 'less useful', but in practice, any tactically-optimised opponents should kill any downed opponents to prevent healing.

Dodge

See Weapon Focus, but in reverse. In any case, Dodge is primarily useful as a 'gateway' feat to Mobility, Spring Attack etc. Toughness has no such 'gateway'.

 

[pyk]

Evidently you don't play to high levels! Being able to cast Finger of Death on the opposing mage before he casts it in you is phenomenally useful. If the spell is extended to party-affecting spells such as Confusion, Mass Hold Person, Greater Command or Wail of the Banshee, the initiative roll can determine the whole combat.

Yeah, not to mention trying to stabilize when the enemy rogue zaps you with a crossbow at 25 ft with all those sneak attacks. Especially an elf rogue, with a shortbow...zap, zap, zap. Where's ypur improved initiative then? See, limited usefulness.

Or the fighter gets in your face looking to full round zap you, and getting good AoOs when you try to cast, which makes you fail that concentration check, heh heh heh.

Once everyone gets Improved Initiative, it becomes worthless. Period. And anyone saying Imp Init is useful to be the first in line, has never fought a rogue before.

 

[Technik4]

Once everyone gets Improved Initiative...

Characters get a minimum of 7 feats (barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, sorcerors). Are one of those necessarily going to be Improved Initiative? No. Therefore, since it is statistically unlikely that the rest of the party AND every foe you face will have improved initiative, it is a good feat for those that wish to compete for high initiative. Does this mean a good rogue facing off against an evil rogue scenario makes both of their improved initiatives "useless"? Not really, the use it has is in cancelling the other's bonus, without it you are more likely to lose initiative and then the zapping begins.

Technik

 

[pyk]

Characters get a minimum of 7 feats (barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, sorcerors). Are one of those necessarily going to be Improved Initiative? No. Therefore, since it is statistically unlikely that the rest of the party AND every foe you face will have improved initiative, it is a good feat for those that wish to compete for high initiative. Does this mean a good rogue facing off against an evil rogue scenario makes both of their improved initiatives "useless"? Not really, the use it has is in cancelling the other's bonus, without it you are more likely to lose initiative and then the zapping begins.

Technik

And still, this proves out the limited usefulness of Improved Initiative. It is useful for one round of combat, the very first. Is it useful for Wizards? Only for the first few levels. Then the smart Wizards puts bonuses in INT, while Rogues put bonuses in DEX. In fact, it really only has benefits at low levels. As the levels go up, and bonuses to DEX go up, then the usefulness of that particular feat are diminished.

Not all feats need to have usefulness at all levels.For there to be balance, then there should be different feats useful at different levels. And, partly being that the ability to get these feats are spread throughout the levels. Does getting a feat at low level that is not useful at high levels make that feat not worth getting? No, not anymore than a feat that is only useful at high levels.There are feats that the usefulness extends at higher levels, and these are quite powerful.

 

[Al]

Yeah, not to mention trying to stabilize when the enemy rogue zaps you with a crossbow at 25 ft with all those sneak attacks. Especially an elf rogue, with a shortbow...zap, zap, zap. Where's ypur improved initiative then? See, limited usefulness.

Or the fighter gets in your face looking to full round zap you, and getting good AoOs when you try to cast, which makes you fail that concentration check, heh heh heh.

Once everyone gets Improved Initiative, it becomes worthless. Period. And anyone saying Imp Init is useful to be the first in line, has never fought a rogue before.

Hang on a sec. You've just asserted that initiative is unimportant, and then say that it is unimportant because the elf rogue can zap you- erm, presumably because he beat you on Initiative. If you beat him on initiative, you can zap him (Finger of Death) before he zaps you (sneak attacks). If you have Improved Initiative, you're more likely to beat him on initiative, irrespective of whether he has Improved Initiative or not. If he has II and you don't, you're better off with II, since you're *more* likely to beat him (though not necessarily more than 50% if he has high Dex). If he doesn't have II and you do, you're more likely to beat him. The usefulness of II does not vary whether or not other people have it- either way, it makes you more likely to win initiative.

As for 'never fought a rogue before', just how is the rogue going to unleash those sneak attacks? By winning initiative. 'nuff said.

 

[Al]

Oops...double post.