PDA

View Full Version : Feat - Gain Stat



tdjewell
2010-04-02, 07:38 AM
A player proposed this, and I'm trying to see if there are any "gotchas".

Anytime you can take a general feat or a fighter feat, you can take a stat point instead.
Maximum stat value is 18, plus one every time you get a standard stat increase (levels 4, 8, etc).

It seems reasonable on the surface. Any thoughts?

BooNL
2010-04-02, 07:41 AM
These feats exist already, as Epic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#greatCharisma) feats.

tdjewell
2010-04-02, 07:43 AM
I know that. I mean as a regular, non-epic feat.

Kurald Galain
2010-04-02, 07:49 AM
I think it feels reasonable on the surface. Generally, it gives you +1 to hit, or +1 to some skills or some save. Given how few feats characters get, this does not seem overpowered.

Gnaritas
2010-04-02, 08:24 AM
I believe it is overpowered, My characters would defenitely take some.

For one, you get the opportunity to get rid of your odd ability scores.

But apart from that, let's say we have a Wizard lvl 9 and he has 24 int (base 18, +2 from lvls and +4 from item). For two of his feats he has chosen to improve his int to 26. This nets him:

- extra skill for all the levels to come, if he took it at level 1 and as a human feat, he already gets an extra 12 skillpoints.
- +1 to appraise, craft, decipher script, disable device, forgery, all knowledge skills, search and spellcraft
- +1 DC to all spells
- an extra 4th level spell slot (which expands to higher level spells as intelligence grows)

Sounds pretty good for 2 feats.

marjan
2010-04-02, 08:32 AM
I believe it is overpowered, i would defenitely take some.
For one, you get the opportunity to get rid of your odd ability scores.

But apart from that, let's say we have a Wizard lvl 9 and he has 24 int (base 18, +2 from lvls and +4 from item). For two of his feats he has chosen to improve his int to 26. This nets him:

- extra skill for all the levels to come, if he took it at level 1 and as a human feat, he already gets an extra 12 skillpoints.
- +1 to appraise, craft, decipher script, disable device, forgery, all knowledge skills, search and spellcraft
- +1 DC to all spells
- an extra 4th level spell slot (which expands to higher level spells as intelligence grows)

Sounds pretty good for 2 feats.

And compare that to one Metamagic feat + Sculpt Spell. Now he can mess up more enemies while avoiding his allies.

I'd only take those stat increasing feats after I ran out of good feats (highly unlikely).

Gnaritas
2010-04-02, 08:34 AM
Yes, sculpt spell is a cheesy feat, you wanna discuss if that feat is too powerfull?

CockroachTeaParty
2010-04-02, 08:36 AM
I don't think sculpt spell is cheesy... <_<

Kurald Galain
2010-04-02, 08:36 AM
But apart from that, let's say we have a Wizard lvl 9 and he has 24 int (base 18, +2 from lvls and +4 from item). For two of his feats he has chosen to improve his int to 26. This nets him:
Sure, but +1 to a bunch of skills is not exactly a big deal, especially not to rarely-used skills like craft or decipher, or to skills that need a rogue class feature, like search and disable device.

+1 to DC is pretty useful, but there is also the Spell Focus feat out there.

BobVosh
2010-04-02, 08:42 AM
I believe it is overpowered, My characters would defenitely take some.

For one, you get the opportunity to get rid of your odd ability scores.

But apart from that, let's say we have a Wizard lvl 9 and he has 24 int (base 18, +2 from lvls and +4 from item). For two of his feats he has chosen to improve his int to 26. This nets him:

- extra skill for all the levels to come, if he took it at level 1 and as a human feat, he already gets an extra 12 skillpoints.
- +1 to appraise, craft, decipher script, disable device, forgery, all knowledge skills, search and spellcraft
- +1 DC to all spells
- an extra 4th level spell slot (which expands to higher level spells as intelligence grows)

Sounds pretty good for 2 feats.
Rebuttal:

A player proposed this, and I'm trying to see if there are any "gotchas".

Anytime you can take a general feat or a fighter feat, you can take a stat point instead.
Maximum stat value is 18, plus one every time you get a standard stat increase (levels 4, 8, etc).

It seems reasonable on the surface. Any thoughts?

My emphasis

I may implement this, seems nice.

Gnaritas
2010-04-02, 08:44 AM
I didnt read that part ;)

Runestar
2010-04-02, 08:46 AM
For one, you get the opportunity to get rid of your odd ability scores.


Then it just means the feat is most useful when taken the first time. I am also not sure if having an odd stat is a cost in itself, since it is generally quite cheap to raise a stat to 14.

Let's see...
For con, that means an extra +1hp/lv, +1fort and +1 to all con-based skills such as concentration. Definitely better than improved toughness. Worth roughly 1.5 feats.

Dex/int/str/cha/wis - the interesting thing is that while it may help even out an odd score now, it also means your next stat boost has no benefit (unless you spend another feat to boost your stat again).

Granted, it has its breakpoints. I suppose it can be a tad on the strong side, but not quite enough to be classified as overpowered.

All in all, I see no harm in allowing it as is (allowing the epic feats to be taken as regular feats). :smallsmile:

Everyman
2010-04-02, 08:48 AM
Sure, but +1 to a bunch of skills is not exactly a big deal, especially not to rarely-used skills like craft or decipher, or to skills that need a rogue class feature, like search and disable device.

+1 to DC is pretty useful, but there is also the Spell Focus feat out there.

I agree with Kurald overall. I might consider adding in a limit, such as "once you choose to exchange a feat for an ability score increase, you may not do so until the feat after your next". Even that might not be necessary, though.

marjan
2010-04-02, 08:48 AM
Yes, sculpt spell is a cheesy feat, you wanna discuss if that feat is too powerfull?

Try empower then. Put it on fireball and now you do 9d6 * 1.5 dmg, instead of 9d6 that 5th level damage spell (like Cone Of Cold) would do and you still have feat left. Even without cap on how much you can raise your stat it isn't something to get excited about.

Killer Angel
2010-04-02, 08:50 AM
These feats exist already, as Epic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#greatCharisma) feats.

As proposed by the OP, the non-epic version would be limited to a cap of 18 max., so it seems fair.
Powerful, for eliminating the odd scores, but not broken.

The question is: is a fighter-bonus feat?

Runestar
2010-04-02, 08:55 AM
Just curious - what other feats are we using as a benchmark? I ask because feats also come in so many differing scales of power level. You have toughness and endurance at one end, robilar's gambit / shock trooper somewhere in the middle and uncanny forethought near the other end?

Gnaritas
2010-04-02, 08:56 AM
Try empower then. Put it on fireball and now you do 9d6 * 1.5 dmg, instead of 9d6 that 5th level damage spell (like Cone Of Cold) would do and you still have feat left. Even without cap on how much you can raise your stat it isn't something to get excited about.

Ok, i tend not to take too many metamagic feats and any metamagic reducing abilities are banned when we play. I have on more than one occassion taken 2 different Spell Focus feats for my Wizard. And since +1 DC to all spells is already more powerful then this.....

That said, since when is a damage dealing wizard something to be excited about? ;)

tdjewell
2010-04-02, 09:01 AM
The question is: is a fighter-bonus feat?

I had imagined the Fighter feat had to be a stat in Str, Dex, or Con.

Killer Angel
2010-04-02, 09:09 AM
I had imagined the Fighter feat had to be a stat in Str, Dex, or Con.

Go for it.
Probably I'll try in my next campaign. :smallwink:

Mark Hall
2010-04-02, 09:19 AM
I had imagined the Fighter feat had to be a stat in Str, Dex, or Con.

I wouldn't restrict it for fighters, personally.

1) Fighters, as they stand, are highly sub-optimal.
2) Fighters can make great use of their other stats. If you start with a 12 in Int, adding a feat makes it 13, which opens up the Combat Expertise feat tree. Likewise, wisdom bonuses shore up their weak will saves and lack of passive sense skills as class skills. The only one that fighters don't make heavy use of is Charisma, but I'm of the opinion that Leadership should've been a fighter feat in the first place.

marjan
2010-04-02, 09:28 AM
Ok, i tend not to take too many metamagic feats and any metamagic reducing abilities are banned when we play. I have on more than one occassion taken 2 different Spell Focus feats for my Wizard. And since +1 DC to all spells is already more powerful then this.....

On the other hand, SF will qualify you you for Metamagic School Focus, Insightful Divination and its company and bunch of PrCs have one or more SFs as prerequisite. And SF is still not very powerful feat.

Runestar is right. Benchmark would make comparing this feat much easier.

PhoenixRivers
2010-04-02, 09:41 AM
I believe it is overpowered, My characters would defenitely take some.

For one, you get the opportunity to get rid of your odd ability scores.

But apart from that, let's say we have a Wizard lvl 9 and he has 24 int (base 18, +2 from lvls and +4 from item). For two of his feats he has chosen to improve his int to 26. This nets him:

- extra skill for all the levels to come, if he took it at level 1 and as a human feat, he already gets an extra 12 skillpoints.
- +1 to appraise, craft, decipher script, disable device, forgery, all knowledge skills, search and spellcraft
- +1 DC to all spells
- an extra 4th level spell slot (which expands to higher level spells as intelligence grows)

Sounds pretty good for 2 feats.

Maximum stat value is 18, plus one every time you get a standard stat increase (levels 4, 8, etc).
So, a level 9 wizard may have a maximum base stat of 20, with this.

Thus, the wizard that you suggested would be ineligible for the feat boost.


I had imagined the Fighter feat had to be a stat in Str, Dex, or Con.
Why not Int? After all, it's needed to qualify for the Expertise tree.

Evard
2010-04-02, 10:19 AM
Instead of 18 max maybe you should have it scale with the character like

Lvl 1-9 : Cap 20
Lvl 10-14: Cap 25
Lvl 15-20: Cap 28

?

Nidogg
2010-04-02, 11:05 AM
I think this could seriously muck up stuff. A lvl 1 fighter gains 18STR With human, fighter and 1st thats 21 str, with flaws, mabey much more. You would not like him when he's angry. But this would lead to Min/maxing complaints....

Mark Hall
2010-04-02, 11:09 AM
I think this could seriously muck up stuff. A lvl 1 fighter gains 18STR With human, fighter and 1st thats 21 str, with flaws, mabey much more. You would not like him when he's angry. But this would lead to Min/maxing complaints....

You missed that the max is 18 + 1 per 4 levels, right? So you can't get above 18 at 1st level?

The Rose Dragon
2010-04-02, 11:13 AM
Instead of 18 max maybe you should have it scale with the character like

Lvl 1-9 : Cap 20
Lvl 10-14: Cap 25
Lvl 15-20: Cap 28

?

It does scale with character level. At every fourth level, the cap increases by 1.

Riffington
2010-04-02, 12:11 PM
Allow it once per stat and you'd avoid the abuses

Kylarra
2010-04-02, 12:41 PM
I think it's probably fine personally. It's a rather bland option, but hardly an overpowered one with that cap.

HunterOfJello
2010-04-02, 01:12 PM
I would argue for more occasional stat increases by level than for setting up feats to give ability adjustments. I also wouldn't give an ability adjustment feat as a fighter feat. Otherwise every non-caster in existence would take 2 fighter levels just for that.

marjan
2010-04-02, 01:13 PM
I would argue for more occasional stat increases by level than for setting up feats to give ability adjustments. I also wouldn't give an ability adjustment feat as a fighter feat. Otherwise every non-caster in existence would take 2 fighter levels just for that.

They are already doing it, just not for stats.

the humanity
2010-04-02, 01:21 PM
well a good way to fix this up would be they are feats (name them even, to emphasize) and they don't stack with themselves. or even with some racial bonuses.
then make each a prereq for a feat at some later level, which increases the bonus to +2. at 10th level, it's not as huge.

Deepblue706
2010-04-02, 04:28 PM
This isn't that unbalanced. A player could potentially get three more attribute points at character creation in exchange for a feat (buying a 17 and just bumping to 18 with the feat). Beyond that, eh. Most people have better feats to be taking.

Wizards won't really care because while +1 DCs is nice, they're not getting any new metamagic options. Fighters won't really care because they're not getting any tactical options (plus, they could probably just as easily take Weapon Focus and fail to notice much a difference in play).

nargbop
2010-04-02, 04:40 PM
There's a reason it's an Epic feat in core : increasing your basic ability score is powerful. A powergamer will abuse it, to make the game less interesting.
I would suggest a feat like this :

Gain Constitution
Prerequisite : You may only use this feat if Constitution is not your highest ability score.
Benefit : You Constitution increases by 1 point.
Special : You may take this feat multiple times. Its effects stack. You may continue taking this feat until your Consitution scour equals your highest ability score.

Mark Hall
2010-04-02, 04:46 PM
You know, I think I'd bring the restriction on the Epic feat to this one, instead of the other. It means that people can't pump their main stat... just ancillaries.

Smiling Knight
2010-04-02, 04:48 PM
But what class would want to take it?
Clerics are feat-starved, wizards want meta-magic, fighters want their feat trees, etc.

Gnaritas
2010-04-02, 05:20 PM
Am i really the only one that takes only a few Metamagic Feats.
At level 12 i have never had more than 3, with one exception which was a Metamagic Focused build.

Also an example when using 22 point buy, wizard.
Optimization is usually INT 18, CON 14, rest 8.

With the Great Intelligence feat i could go:
INT 16, CON 15, DEX 14 and then take Great Intelligence as a feat twice.
Now the 2 feats have netted me 1 Con and 6 Dex.

Lycanthromancer
2010-04-02, 05:31 PM
The only time I'd ever bother with taking the +1 stat feat would be if I didn't have any other feats I'd want to take.

I've had, maybe, 1 character who would ever have elected for this out of all the characters I've ever had, and that was just because his stats were abysmal and his concept was excessively feat-lite.

Seriously, there are far better feats out there. It's not overpowered at all, even without restrictions and if multiple uses stack.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-02, 05:45 PM
Honestly, this sounds like a trap. It looks good, maybe, on the surface, but it's honestly really weak and 90% of the time it's a horrid waste of a feat. I wouldn't allow it just because I wouldn't want a player falling into that trap.

Superglucose
2010-04-02, 05:51 PM
I would argue for more occasional stat increases by level than for setting up feats to give ability adjustments. I also wouldn't give an ability adjustment feat as a fighter feat. Otherwise every non-caster in existence would take 2 fighter levels just for that.
Even if this were true (and "this feat as fighter bonus would replace all other feats taken by builds splashing fighter 2" isn't necessarily true even in the slightest) who cares? Non-casters could use the help.

absolmorph
2010-04-02, 05:53 PM
Assuming you remove the limitations and allow it to stack:
Fighter 20
Starting Strength: 18 (+4 modifier)
+5 from levels
+17 from feats
+5 from Wish
+6 from item
End Strength: 51 (+20 modifier)
The other stats are pretty low, and he can't do anything well.
Feats are the most cost-heavy part of a build, +1 to a stat isn't very good compared to the other options.

EDIT: Dropping the last feat and taking Power Attack instead, he can now use a two-handed weapon and deal an extra 40 damage (on top of the extra 30 from strength). So, with a Falchion, his routine with full Power Attack would be +20/+15/+10/+5 (2d4+70).
It doesn't need the limitations. He can deal 156 damage on a crit with max damage. Compare that to an uber-charger.

Gnaritas
2010-04-02, 06:08 PM
It depends on what you are comparing it to.

An ubercharger (in it's most extreme form) would not even be allowed in my games, neither would a Metamagic reduced Incantatrix and no, Pun Pun does not need those feats either.

Coidzor
2010-04-02, 06:13 PM
Well, a tripper might not be able to have a high enough strength to reliably beat him, but a intimidate-lock barbarian? Oh yeah.

Koury
2010-04-02, 06:14 PM
Pun Pun does not need those feats either.

Well duh, because he already has them :smallbiggrin:

Plus he gave himself the ability Moar Stats (Ex): Every time you think about what Pun Puns stats are, he gains +100 to every stat permanatly. The act of adding these new points triggers this ability again.

AmberVael
2010-04-02, 06:18 PM
Even if you just allow a standard SRD wizard not even focused on blasting, you can get that wizard to deal 70 damage on average, and 120 at a max roll. This is without calculating feats, without taking items into consideration- anything other than 20 CL and 1 spell (Polar Ray- touch attack, deals damage, the end).

156 max damage from a build with all its feats spent, significant wealth spent, on a fighter with no options- that is so far from impressive that it is pathetic. A single ability of a single classed character with no thought in it at all can nearly match it.

I would play a well built monk over that fighter.

absolmorph
2010-04-02, 06:33 PM
Well, a tripper might not be able to have a high enough strength to reliably beat him, but a intimidate-lock barbarian? Oh yeah.
Level 13 Samurai. Inimidate optimized. Without these feats.
It would take a while, but the Samurai would win.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-04-02, 07:00 PM
You might want to amend the feat's restrictions to apply to the base stat instead of the stat, which includes magical and other enhancements.

For instance, take a level 1 barbarian with 15 starting con, who takes this feat to bump his con to 16. Now suppose he rages. His constitution temporarily gets a +4 bonus, but since his con is now above 18 he no longer qualifies for his feat, dropping his con from 20 to 19. This seems unnecessarily restrictive.

Even with that amendment the feat is weak, but relative weakness is fine. It'll still work in some builds (omg powergaming, oh noes), and at worst you have to warn against its "trap" nature as DM. Just because it was an epic feat doesn't mean it's powerful; just take a look at how poorly designed the ELH is in general.

Lycanthromancer
2010-04-02, 07:07 PM
There's a cap on the feat, you can't take it for an ability that is equal to or greater than 18 + 1 per 4 levels. Putting points from levels into strength means you can never take the feat.Uh...check out the text you quoted again.

Runestar
2010-04-02, 07:16 PM
Why do you even need a cap again?

So a fighter takes the feat twice to get +1 to-hit/damage. Wow! Weapon focus and specialization does the exact same thing! :smallconfused:

Lycanthromancer
2010-04-02, 07:19 PM
Why do you even need a cap again?

So a fighter takes the feat twice to get +1 to-hit/damage. Wow! Weapon focus and specialization does the exact same thing! :smallconfused:Agreed. This wouldn't be at all broken even without the caps. In fact, except for very specific instances (probably the only ones you'd actually even take them), they're not even that good.

Even if they stacked.

tcrudisi
2010-04-02, 07:22 PM
You might want to amend the feat's restrictions to apply to the base stat instead of the stat, which includes magical and other enhancements.

For instance, take a level 1 barbarian with 15 starting con, who takes this feat to bump his con to 16. Now suppose he rages. His constitution temporarily gets a +4 bonus, but since his con is now above 18 he no longer qualifies for his feat, dropping his con from 20 to 19. This seems unnecessarily restrictive.

I would like to call everyone's attention back to the original post. At least a couple of people haven't really comprehended what the original feat was.

With the way he worded the feat, you can get the equivalent of a starting 18 in an ability score. You start with 15? Well, you can get this feat 3 times and raise it to 18. If you Rage and add 4, no biggy. If you put on +6 amulet? No biggy. If you put 3 points in because of level? No biggy. You can do all that and still grab the feat 3 times. The only thing this feat cares about is what your starting scores were. Subtract each starting score from 18 and you've got the number of times you can take this feat.

Personally, I do think it's a bit underpowered as well. And here's why:


Why do you even need a cap again?

So a fighter takes the feat twice to get +1 to-hit/damage. Wow! Weapon focus and specialization does the exact same thing! :smallconfused:


I understand what Runestar is trying to say, but I think it's incorrect. This feat will give you +.5 to hit and +.5 to damage, as well as to some skills or some save (which just makes it even worse!). Sure, you'll typically grab it when it's an odd stat and you are making it even. But even then, you've only delayed until 4 levels later. If you want to keep that stat even, you will have to burn 3 out of every 4 feats you get. That's a steep price just to keep your primary stat even.

All it really does is save a little bit of gold. Now instead of buying a +1 tome to even out your stats, you can buy a feat. Ouch. Or your stat was already even, so you buy this feat once to make it odd and then buy the +5 tome. Regardless, as others have said, this feat is most likely a trap, which is kind of a pity.

As a question to others, would you take it if it increased 3 of your stats by +1 and there was no limit on it? Or would you continue to take metamagic or other really powerful feats? Basically -- how much would this feat have to give to make it acceptable? +1 to two stats, +2 to one stat, +1 to all six stats?

absolmorph
2010-04-02, 08:08 PM
Personally, I've gotten a bit fond of scaling by BAB.
My fixes for the Weapon Focus tree (which is currently is going to push things beyond "rocket tag" to "interplanetary superweapon tag", since I haven't buffed HP to match the damage) are scaled on BAB. The feat grants the effect again for every 5 BAB you have. For example, Weapon Focus grants a total of +5 for 20 BAB.
And, now that I think about it, I should really work on buffing AC to match the attack bonuses (which can get up to +35 without ability modifiers)...
I do a lot of balancing for my own game, which consists mostly of "How do I make melee beat everyone down better?"

Runestar
2010-04-02, 08:54 PM
Perhaps we should list out all the possible scenarios so as to make a more informed decision.

Con - I see the use if you start with an odd con score, with a feat granting an extra +1hp/lv, +1fort save. Contrast with improved toughness, which only grants the extra hp. This is the most useful because people don't usually spend their bonus stat points smoothing out a secondary stat, preferring instead to rely on tomes (which come fairly late in the game).

Str - +1 to-hit/damage (possibly +2 damage if your str mod is an odd number and you wield a 2-handed weapon). Though as mentioned, this makes your next str boost less useful unless you spend yet another feat improving your str.

Dex: +1 reflex/initiative/AC, assuming your dex is odd and you don't plan on improving it any further with stat boosts.

Int - you may get an extra skill point/lv, and wizards get +1DC and possibly bonus slots. Again, they face the problem of their next int boost being only marginally useful unless they take the feat a 2nd time.

Same for wis and cha.

So it seems the feat is useful only for evening out an odd stat which you otherwise would not bother boosting at all, likely some secondary stat. Even in the case of spellcasters, you are possibly only front-loading a benefit.

Say I am a wizard with starting int16. I can take the feat at 3rd lv to get +1 int, and add another +1 at 4th lv. But this also means my int boost at 8th lv is useless until I reach lv12, or if I spend another feat to further improve my int at either 6th or 9th lv. And the vicious cycle continues at lv12, 16 and 20.

I don't see it as game-breaking, but it does seem to result in some strange compulsion where people find themselves "having" to keep taking said feat just to continue benefiting (ie: making the best out of a bad situation, in that since I have an odd stat, may as well take the feat to even it out). I am not sure if it is healthy for the game though. :smallannoyed:

IonDragon
2010-04-02, 09:08 PM
I would agree that this feat is not over powered. In one build I may take it at level 14 or so on, but only because I've run out of other feats to take. Then again, I may not.

And, as it's been said before I never would on a full caster, which really is the measure. If it buffs non major casters, even if quite powerful then that's a good thing.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-04-02, 09:14 PM
I would like to call everyone's attention back to the original post. At least a couple of people haven't really comprehended what the original feat was.You mean this original post?

A player proposed this, and I'm trying to see if there are any "gotchas".

Anytime you can take a general feat or a fighter feat, you can take a stat point instead.
Maximum stat value is 18, plus one every time you get a standard stat increase (levels 4, 8, etc).(Emphasis mine)

Maybe I just don't comprehend it well enough, but maximum stat value sounds like, I dunno, the maximum stat value.

Coidzor
2010-04-02, 09:28 PM
Maybe I just don't comprehend it well enough, but maximum stat value sounds like, I dunno, the maximum stat value.

It's just easily enough inferred that it's disregarding bonuses and talking about the natural stat, especially since most of the conversation has been going on with such being implied. Though, you've shown that it is necessary to actually say the natural stat if one were to write it out for reals.

Godskook
2010-04-02, 09:37 PM
@Op, I'm in my first game as a DM, and I'm allowing players to spend xp to directly increase their point-buy(capped at 30 + ECL), and then was less generous on re-rolls. This allows for a more organic game-start, but doesn't shoe horn players over long gameplay due to an unusual stat-roll.

Haven't gotten to a point where the players can actually use the option yet, but its there.

Coidzor
2010-04-02, 09:39 PM
Godskook: What sort of XP cost is this, now?

Lycanthromancer
2010-04-02, 09:43 PM
Godskook: What sort of XP cost is this, now?He misspelled it. It's expy. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Expy)

It's for frequently killed PCs.

Godskook
2010-04-02, 09:44 PM
Cost is current point-buy squared, or if point-buy < 4, 10 xp. A player going from 20 point-buy to 21 point-buy would spend 400 xp to do so. You can't gain point-buy unless you immediately allocate it, so point-buy 20 wanting to improve a 17 to an 18 would have to pay 400 + 481 + 564 = 1445xp.

Coidzor
2010-04-02, 10:05 PM
So... How do you get the second two costs on that, again?

Godskook
2010-04-02, 10:15 PM
So... How do you get the second two costs on that, again?

Going from 20 point-buy to 21 point-buy is 20^2, or 400.
Going from 21 point-buy to 22 point-buy is 21^2, or 481.
Going from 22 point-buy to 23 point-buy is 22^2, or 564.

Assuming I did the squares right.

Add them together if you want to advance from 20 to 23 point-buy.

magic9mushroom
2010-04-03, 07:42 AM
It depends on what you are comparing it to.

An ubercharger (in it's most extreme form) would not even be allowed in my games, neither would a Metamagic reduced Incantatrix and no, Pun Pun does not need those feats either.

If what you're comparing it to is a Fighter with feats all over the place giving him too many options all of which are bad, then yes, it looks alright.

But if you think about it, it's actually a feat which goes against the grain of min-maxing (which is where the real power is) - you're getting a lesser bonus to a lot of things rather than a large bonus to one.

There are certainly more "broken" feats around, even for mundanes. (And I think your definition of "broken" is most of our definition of "useful"...)

Coidzor
2010-04-03, 02:59 PM
Going from 20 point-buy to 21 point-buy is 20^2, or 400.
Going from 21 point-buy to 22 point-buy is 21^2, or 481.
Going from 22 point-buy to 23 point-buy is 22^2, or 564.

Assuming I did the squares right.

Add them together if you want to advance from 20 to 23 point-buy.

Ahh. I knew I had parsed that wrong somehow. I had thought that all three costs you listed were for advancing a 17 in a stat to an 18 as an additional cost in addition to the cost for going from 20 to 21 point buy

Godskook
2010-04-03, 06:18 PM
Ahh. I knew I had parsed that wrong somehow. I had thought that all three costs you listed were for advancing a 17 in a stat to an 18 as an additional cost in addition to the cost for going from 20 to 21 point buy

Going from 17 to 18 in a stat is +3 point-buy, keep in mind.

Milskidasith
2010-04-03, 06:23 PM
Why are your players starting at a 20 point buy anyway? That's incredibly low, on the low end for even gritty campaigns.

Godskook
2010-04-03, 06:24 PM
They're rolling stats, not using point-buy.

Gnaritas
2010-04-04, 04:44 AM
@Op, I'm in my first game as a DM, and I'm allowing players to spend xp to directly increase their point-buy(capped at 30 + ECL), and then was less generous on re-rolls. This allows for a more organic game-start, but doesn't shoe horn players over long gameplay due to an unusual stat-roll.

Haven't gotten to a point where the players can actually use the option yet, but its there.




Going from 20 point-buy to 21 point-buy is 20^2, or 400.
Going from 21 point-buy to 22 point-buy is 21^2, or 481.
Going from 22 point-buy to 23 point-buy is 22^2, or 564.

Assuming I did the squares right.

Add them together if you want to advance from 20 to 23 point-buy.

This seems confusing then.

PhoenixRivers
2010-04-04, 05:04 AM
This seems confusing then.

Basically, they roll stats, and then have the option of spending XP to increase stats, according to the point buy that they rolled.