Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scion" data-source="post: 1185803" data-attributes="member: 5777">Sorry, but I feel that you are way off base with your assumption about it being anymore more than marginal at best.It wont work if you are surprised, does a greatly reduced amount of effect if you happen to have more than one enemy and guess wrong as to which might attack you, and, if nothing else, the sheer amount of bookkeeping sucks. I could go through all of the counter examples to what you have said, but I believe I've seen you in posts that have done so before, if people who can explain better wont convince you then the feat must be fine in your campaign.Now, if it just granted a straight +1 dodge bonus all of the time whenever you had your dex bonus then sure. At that point I would love the feat, but as is it is nearly worthless.Perhaps your campaign is with 25 point buy or lower and armor is hard to come by, that could be true, and it is fine. As you get to higher levels in any campaign though it loses any edge it had.Dodge is one of those feats that is 'overbalanced', make it +1 ac dodge bonus whenever not denied dex and I'd love it to no end. Currently, just having to remember and specify drops it by a lot, and the sheer lack of usefulness kills the rest of it for me.Yes, I do realize what I am comparing to, thanks for asking.I understand your points, but they have been gone over on so many other threads as to be pointless to discuss again ;/A +2 to 2 different skills gives a character more options and could potentially effect the campaign more than a +4 to one spell. Whoever wins initiative has probably won the battle, or at the very least has a huge advantage over the other side. If you dont even get to cast your spell because you lost initiative which feat would you have rather had?Guy is immune to charm or resistant? problably not to diplomacy. Casting a spell on someone without permission is generally considered a hostile act. You want to make armor/weapon/item faster and better, +2 to various skills will help much more.I am guessing you are more worried about combat though. +2 tumble gets the character closer to not needing to roll to tumble past any enemy, this is a big combat boost.Sorcerers get very few spell choices per level anyway and in order to gain maximum use out of this feat they just signed away around 10 spells off of that. This is a serious hit. Especially if some are spells that are rarely, if ever, useful to the particular caster.Again, use this feat or not whatever, but if anyone is going to use it the dm will have to do his bit as well. What is wrong with a feat that will enhance the campaign and very likely do little harm to it? If it is hurting your campaign then you obviously werent thinking clearly when you picked the spells, or your player is doing a great job.You seem like a guy who has reasoned things out, we both have our reasons for liking or disliking certain things in the game. All in all, this feat seems hard to break unless the dm lets it be broken. That is the only real problem.</blockquote>

Verification