Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Schmoe" data-source="post: 883585" data-attributes="member: 913">That's not a bad idea for a feat, and I could see adding such a feat with a pre-req of Improved Overrun.  However, I'm trying to come up with something that rewards either fighters, or those dedicated to a single course of combat, by providing powerful options that weren't previously available.  I think that creating strong feats with significant pre-requisites is one way of achieving this.  Consider, a non-fighter won't be able to take this feat until at least 12th level (if human), and would have to sacrifice any other flexibility in feats to do so.  Even a fighter will have to devote a significant portion of his feats to achieve this path.  Does that balance the feat?  I guess that, when considering a true fighter, the feat can be achieved as early as 4th level (if human).  That does seem to be a little too early, so it probably needs a BAB prerequisite.  What would you suggest?  I'm leaning toward BAB of +12.Is it really too strong to allow a high-level fighter to be able to do this?  Remember, you are likely going to incur AoO yourself for your charge if you do this.Your suggestion makes the feat a little more powerful.  Consider the following scenario:  Fighter Chuck is in combat with archers A and B.  On his round, Chuck charges A.  A then tries to take a 5' step to move back from Chuck.Under my rules, if Chuck uses Followthrough to maintain his threat against A, on his next round he can't move at all.  If A is still allive and kicking, that's fine, as Chuck can take a full attack to bring A down.  If A is dead for whatever reason, Chuck can't move.Under your suggestion, if Chuck uses Followthrough to maintain his threat against A, on his next round he can again move as normal.  He is, in essence, being granted a "free" 5' of movement.  If A is dead or not there for whatever reason, Chuck is free to charge B and repeat the process.I'm not sure which one I like better.  The second option is clearly the more powerful, and the first presents an interesting tactical decision.</blockquote>

Verification