Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5135970" data-attributes="member: 35909">Definitely not unbalancing.You're right, in regular 3.5 E6, Leadership is allowed and it was only changed to level 7 in PF by the feat realignment technicality, so the fair thing to do would be to allow it.  On the other hand, it's widely considered the most powerful feat in the game (in 3.5 at least).  So if you've been looking for an easy cop-out to ban it without having to explain why you think it's too strong to your players...there ya go.How powerful Improved Precise Shot is depends on whether a character in that game could ever hope to afford a +1 Seeking bow.  If that is possible and you ban/nerf IPS, every archr character with the wealth will get such a bow.  If it is possible and you leave IPS as an option and untouched, most will probably spend the feat over getting seeking, but a fair number might still opt for the magical enhancement.  As another note, Blindfight is available from level 1 for melee.Yeah, it's too strong.I don't mind the removal of the -2 penalty, that seems fine.  But on top of that, it also says to add your shield bonus to attack and damage with it, as if it were an enhancement bonus.  That means you're basically getting an automatic +2 attack/damage on top of the former benefit (heavy shield).  Also, shields cost half as much to enhance as weapons, so you most certainly would have a "+2" weapon in E6, while for most it could be too costly to pay 8000 gp, 4000 gp is absolutely do-able, especially since it's pulling double duty and adding to your AC as well.  Finally, feats that add to the shield AC synergize disturbingly well with this to further add +1 attack/damage.  If you want to strip the feat down to the TWF penalty removal, awesome.  As written, too strong.  Anyone who can do basic math would realize dual shields was the optimal way to TWF in such a system.Agreed.  Aside from helping to further break Shield Master, as above.Strike Back is an awful feat that should never even have been made a feat.  Anyone should be able to ready an action to strike at a creature's limbs as it attacks, at any character level.  So yeah, allow it.  Better yet, give it to everyone for free via houserule.  As for "think of the large creatures!" -- I do that by correcting the size modifiers to combat maneuvers from +/- 0/1/2/4/8 to a much more evenly distributed +/- 0/2/4/6/8.Tough call.  It can be qualified for by level 6 if not for the BAB requirement, so I'd be inclined to allow it.  But the damage might be too much.  As for the massive amount of required feats, they're all very useful ones for a TWF anyway.  A Fighter or Ranger could do this without burning all of their pre-epic feats.If you can't get 3 attacks all the time with your primary weapon, why on earth do you think it's ok to get a 3rd attack with the of-hand?  Not balanced.Notice the levels that these feats can be obtained coincide with when the full BAB classes get a new attack.  For example, you get a feat for double damage when you gain your second attack.  Definitely too good for E6 to allow either.  I'd also like a means for medium BAB classes like monk and rogue to have the ability to gain regular Vital Strike at some point in epic.I agree it would be fine.  Not sure I agree that it would make a great capstone feat for a fighter. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />It is a lot of feats, though on the other hand, they chain together nicely (Dazzling Display or regular Intimidate to leave someone shaken, Shatter Defenses on someone you scared to make them flatfooted to your attacks next turn, and then Deadly Stroke).  Bottom line, compared to the more easily accessible Vital Strike it's about identical, except requires a setup and does 1 constitution bleed.  I think it's balanced for E6.Probably so that Fighters are encouraged to spend their class feat on it to get it sooner (in other words, it's actually a 13th-level feat).  I think it might be too good for a level 6 game, though.Definitely too high up.</blockquote>

Verification