PDA

View Full Version : making weak feats viable.



Geiger Counter
2010-04-20, 10:47 PM
You know them, toughness and those +2 to two skills.
How much would you increase them to be a viable option?

Sinfire Titan
2010-04-20, 10:49 PM
I've done a minor fix for Toughness, but the skill booster feats I've not touched yet.


One common fix for those is to have them make the skills class skills.

The Shadowmind
2010-04-20, 10:57 PM
There is also the option from some of them to turn them into skill tricks, instead of feats. Homebrews in this method are rarer though.

Ashram
2010-04-20, 10:58 PM
Protip: Check Pathfinder, which is essentially 3.75.

They combined 3.5's Toughness and Improved Toughness into just "Toughness" (Meaning when you take it you get 3 HP, and then each level after 3rd level you get an extra 1 HP), and the skill-specific feats (Stealthy, Deft Hands, Alertness, etc.) all increase from +2 to +4 for a specific skill once you have 10 ranks in that skill. (Say you have Alertness, and 10 ranks in Sense Motive. Your +2 bonus to Spot would stay the same, but your +2 bonus to Sense Motive would increase to +4).

The Cat Goddess
2010-04-20, 11:09 PM
You know them, toughness and those +2 to two skills.
How much would you increase them to be a viable option?

Use Improved Toughness from CW. I believe WotC even said that was "as intended".

Skill Focus is just as bad, giving +3 to one skill. Plus, most of the time if you get a feat like Athletic or Skill Focus, you've already got the skill(s) as class skills. UMD (and Magical Aptitude, for UMD) being the only real exceptions.

Those are "enabler" feats... the kind people typically only get because a PrC requires them.

I put Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes & Great Fortitude in there as well.

Aron Times
2010-04-20, 11:28 PM
My house rule for Iron Will, Great Fortitude, and Lightning Reflexes is that they turn a poor save into a good one. At level 1, they're almost identical to their original functionality, but they get better as the character gains levels.

The downside is that you gain nothing by getting Iron Will as a sorcerer, since you already have a good Will save.

Pluto
2010-04-20, 11:32 PM
One group I played with gave Skill Focus an extra +1/4 HD and the Alertness/Athletic-style feats an extra +1/6 HD.

I don't know if that's enough. I never had a problem with them as they were.

PhoenixRivers
2010-04-20, 11:36 PM
For +Skill feats:

Provide "grouping". Allow for the feat to be combined with another +Skill feat. For added kicks, have the bonus be "+2, and an additional +2 for every 10 ranks in the skill"

Geiger Counter
2010-04-20, 11:47 PM
My house rule for Iron Will, Great Fortitude, and Lightning Reflexes is that they turn a poor save into a good one. At level 1, they're almost identical to their original functionality, but they get better as the character gains levels.

The downside is that you gain nothing by getting Iron Will as a sorcerer, since you already have a good Will save.

I'd like people to tell me if this isn't overpowered.
Is this viable for BAB as well?

Telonius
2010-04-20, 11:55 PM
For the +2 to skills feats: I've considered allowing all characters to select one of these at first level as a bonus feat, to help with flavor.

Sinfire Titan
2010-04-20, 11:58 PM
I'd like people to tell me if this isn't overpowered.
Is this viable for BAB as well?

Not really. The most it does is open up some weird PrCs for classes that wouldn't normally have them. Changing BAB removes effort from some things (Gishes), and only makes the casters that much more powerful (Wizards give no **** about a good Fort or Reflex progression, but better BAB makes them happy).

TheMadLinguist
2010-04-20, 11:59 PM
My house rule for Iron Will, Great Fortitude, and Lightning Reflexes is that they turn a poor save into a good one. At level 1, they're almost identical to their original functionality, but they get better as the character gains levels.

The downside is that you gain nothing by getting Iron Will as a sorcerer, since you already have a good Will save.

I make them work as normal, but have a scaling benefit with BAB.

Zeful
2010-04-21, 12:11 AM
Protip: Check Pathfinder, which is essentially 3.75.

Myth: Pathfinder is some form of Fixed version of 3.5 (thus being 3.75 or some other decimal modifier above .5).
Status: False. Pathfinder has just as many problems as 3.5, most bugs just found a new section to nest in.

As for the topic: Add a new tag to all those kinda poor feats. Then add the following line to all feats you just modified in this way:
Special: This feat's benefit increases by +1 for each additional feat with the [insert tag here] property.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2010-04-21, 12:14 AM
We've implemented a 1/2 price feats house rule, so you get two feats at once when they're underpowered. The +2/+2 skill feats, Skill Focus, and Combat Casting are all included, as well as Great Fortitude, Iron Will, and Lightning Reflexes. Some feats we combined into one instead of making them half price, such as (Improved, Greater) TWF+TWDefense. Others were included because certain characters have to take them to be viable, such as Weapon Finesse. The only feat included which can be taken more than once with its effect stacking is Toughness, which taken two at a time still probably isn't worth a feat.

Rixx
2010-04-21, 01:10 AM
I personally like the way those particular feat / feat types are handled in Pathfinder much better. Of course, I like how Pathfinder handles a lot of things.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-04-21, 01:21 AM
Myth: Pathfinder is some form of Fixed version of 3.5 (thus being 3.75 or some other decimal modifier above .5).
Status: False. Pathfinder has just as many problems as 3.5, most bugs just found a new section to nest in.You could say the same about 3.0 --> 3.5, no?

Frosty
2010-04-21, 02:13 AM
I like having skill focus give the skill as a permanent class skill. The bonus should also increase from +3 to +6 at 10 HD.

JaronK
2010-04-21, 02:33 AM
I just sometimes give those feats out as roleplay or achievement awards. Actually spend time learning to be a sailor on the trip instead of hand waving it? Skill Focus: Profession (Sailor). I keep that rare enough that they won't do it for just that reason, but it can be a fun reward to through in.

JaronK

SpikeFightwicky
2010-04-21, 06:32 AM
I like having skill focus give the skill as a permanent class skill.

Heh, Skill Focus (Use Magic Device) would become the most popular feat ever.


The bonus should also increase from +3 to +6 at 10 HD.

And to +9 at level 20?

Amphetryon
2010-04-21, 06:50 AM
My 2cp:

Toughness grants 2 HP + class level at which it's taken. At 1st level, that's 3 HP. Ranger 6 would get 8 HP, and so would the character who takes it at 9th level for Rogue 3/Ranger 6 if a Ranger level was the 9th character level. It makes Toughness a bit more attractive as a mid-to-late game bonus feat for Fighters.

The various and sundry +2/+2 feats make the two skills affected class skills, and allow those who take them to always take 10 on the skills they boost, even if rules or circumstances would normally prevent them from doing so.

Runestar
2010-04-21, 06:50 AM
Again, what sort of feats or benefits are we using as a yardstick to decide what is balanced or not?

At one end, we have stinkers such as endurance and toughness which are not worth the paper they were printed on. On the other end, we have ridiculously overpowered feats which can pass for high-lv class features, such as uncanny forethought (lets a wizard spontaneously cast int-mod number of spells/day) and knowledge devotion (granted, it can be costly to use, but you are still looking at up to +5 to-hit/damage for a feat).

Others like whirlwind and great cleave appear useful at first glance, but are actually traps because it is so difficult to use them effectively. Then we have those such as shock trooper, robilar's gambit and certain reserve feats which seem to test the waters regarding what is acceptable.

Thoughts?

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-21, 07:33 AM
pathfinder >< 3.75.


Though i would just combine toughness and imprioved toughness, give 5hp+ 1 per HD.

as for the +2/+2 feats make em +3/+3 and get rid of skill focus.

Optimystik
2010-04-21, 07:35 AM
Myth: Pathfinder is some form of Fixed version of 3.5 (thus being 3.75 or some other decimal modifier above .5).
Status: False. Pathfinder has just as many problems as 3.5, most bugs just found a new section to nest in.

This.

On topic, in addition to Sinfire's fix (the "skill" feats make them class skills for your character), I also merge some of the weaker feats - Dodge + Mobility, Combat Expertise + Combat Reflexes, Toughness + Imp. Toughness, etc.



as for the +2/+2 feats make em +3/+3 and get rid of skill focus.

This too, and merge Skill Focus: Concentration with Combat Casting.

Swooper
2010-04-21, 07:59 AM
We've implemented a 1/2 price feats house rule, so you get two feats at once when they're underpowered.
I do something similar in my houserules, but implemented differently. I give bonus feats for everyone at levels 1, 5, 10 and so on. These bonus feats are "background feats" and can only be used for feats regarded as crappy. Also, they can't be used to qualify for anything except, in some weird cases, more background feats.

Person_Man
2010-04-21, 08:42 AM
There are 3304 feats published in WotC books, and thousands more on the web and in 3rd party material. Why fix a feat, when you can just ignore it?

Optimystik
2010-04-21, 08:47 AM
There are 3304 feats published in WotC books, and thousands more on the web and in 3rd party material. Why fix a feat, when you can just ignore it?

Prereqs, mostly. :smallsigh:
Note: the sigh is directed at the concept of crappy feats to get into good classes, and not to the above poster.

Amphetryon
2010-04-21, 08:59 AM
There are 3304 feats published in WotC books, and thousands more on the web and in 3rd party material. Why fix a feat, when you can just ignore it?

In addition to prereqs, some campaigns/tables don't have access to more than the core books.

deuxhero
2010-04-21, 09:11 AM
1:Allow buying them for gold/give them as quest rewards (CSco)
2:Give them as bonuses for increasing in rank in organizations (various)
3:Give them as something separate from normal feats

Flickerdart
2010-04-21, 09:20 AM
Well, Iron Will comes from the Otyugh Hole and costs a pittance. Make equivalent holes for the rest (say, visit the Tomb of Horrors for Lightning Reflexes).

Kaiyanwang
2010-04-21, 09:28 AM
Myth: Pathfinder is some form of Fixed version of 3.5 (thus being 3.75 or some other decimal modifier above .5).
Status: False. Pathfinder has just as many problems as 3.5, most bugs just found a new section to nest in.


Every time someone suggests to take a look in pathfinder, even just to see how a particular thing is managed, people react this way.

Why shouldn't be someone just free to check in the Pathfinder SRD and steal an idea? Why so serious? :smalltongue:

Zeful
2010-04-21, 09:33 AM
Every time someone suggests to take a look in pathfinder, even just to see how a particular thing is managed, people react this way.

Why shouldn't be someone just free to check in the Pathfinder SRD and steal an idea? Why so serious? :smalltongue:

Because I dislike Pathfinder. If someone finds something useful in it, good for them. It doesn't change my opinion of the system (i.e. it's a bad one). Calling it 3.75 is insulting to D&D as a whole.

Optimystik
2010-04-21, 09:38 AM
Every time someone suggests to take a look in pathfinder, even just to see how a particular thing is managed, people react this way.

Why shouldn't be someone just free to check in the Pathfinder SRD and steal an idea? Why so serious? :smalltongue:

It's not about being "serious." People who claim that Pathfinder is "3.75" or "3e fixed" don't really understand Pathfinder at all. What Pathfinder is better at, is letting people play a great game of 3.5 with just one splat book instead of 8-20.

Saph wrote the Pathfinder Handbook - this quote is very relevant:



Q. Does Pathfinder fix the problems of 3.5?
A. No. Pathfinder improves a few things, but it's still basically the same game. Characters are still mooks at 1st-level and gods at 20th, you still have Linear Warriors Quadratic Wizards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards). The thing is, the problems with 3.5 are so integral to the system that you can’t fix them without effectively turning it into a different game - and in the process, throwing out most of the things that make people want to stick with 3.5 in the first place.

Kaiyanwang
2010-04-21, 09:39 AM
Because I dislike Pathfinder. If someone finds something useful in it, good for them. It doesn't change my opinion of the system (i.e. it's a bad one). Calling it 3.75 is insulting to D&D as a whole.


See, assume I don't like 4th edition. BUT some things in that edition, I think are good ideas (say, diseases).

If someone would ask ideas about disease mechanics in general, why should I say"4th edition is teh suxx?" let him see how that edition managed that particular thing...

BTW, core vs core (and there are people playing core only, like my old DM) pathfinder is nice. IMHO si full of good ideas. Not pefect, but still..


And Zeful, I've not intention to be harsh or similar things - If i seemed so, I apologize.


It's not about being "serious." People who claim that Pathfinder is "3.75" or "3e fixed" don't really understand Pathfinder at all. What Pathfinder is better at, is letting people play a great game of 3.5 with just one splat book instead of 8-20.

Well that could depend from what people think is an improvement. Keeping PCs sucky at level 1st and uber at 20 is what, as an example, made me like pathfinder. But I'm worried of derailment here, sorry OP.

Ernir
2010-04-21, 10:03 AM
My house rule for Iron Will, Great Fortitude, and Lightning Reflexes is that they turn a poor save into a good one. At level 1, they're almost identical to their original functionality, but they get better as the character gains levels.

How do you make that interact with multiclassing at your table?


(say, visit the Tomb of Horrors for Lightning Reflexes).

Eek! I'd rather fail my reflex save vs. a Lightning Bolt than visit the ToH. :smalltongue:

Gnaeus
2010-04-21, 10:37 AM
It's not about being "serious." People who claim that Pathfinder is "3.75" or "3e fixed" don't really understand Pathfinder at all. What Pathfinder is better at, is letting people play a great game of 3.5 with just one splat book instead of 8-20.

Saph wrote the Pathfinder Handbook - this quote is very relevant:

That quote is relevant, it just doesn't prove your point. Pathfinder doesn't "fix" 3.5 any more than 3.5 "fixed" 3.0. It is still the same game, with some improvements, and maybe a few things that are arguably worse.

However, as pathfinder is the only company publishing a wide range of D&D products, including core and supplements, running events at cons, etc, it IS 3.75. People don't have to like it better, some people like 3.0, or 2nd ed. It certainly has more of a right to be called D&D than 4th ed.

If people want to know about common houserules, it is worth including the most common set of houserules for 3.5 in existence, which are becoming more common as time passes and 3.5 core is out of print, and which are the rules that they are likely to be playing under if they want to play a 3.x game in big events like cons.

Gametime
2010-04-21, 10:58 AM
That quote is relevant, it just doesn't prove your point. Pathfinder doesn't "fix" 3.5 any more than 3.5 "fixed" 3.0. It is still the same game, with some improvements, and maybe a few things that are arguably worse.

However, as pathfinder is the only company publishing a wide range of D&D products, including core and supplements, running events at cons, etc, it IS 3.75. People don't have to like it better, some people like 3.0, or 2nd ed. It certainly has more of a right to be called D&D than 4th ed.


Unsubstantiated opinion presented as fact, awaaaaaaay!

That aside, I find the suggestions for improving skill and save feats to be quite helpful. Has anyone offered a suggestion for how to improve Weapon Focus and Specialization? I'm having trouble finding a middle ground between having too high a bonus at low levels and having an irrelevant bonus at higher levels. Some method of scaling is obviously needed, but I'm not sure where to put the numbers.

Zeful
2010-04-21, 10:59 AM
However, as pathfinder is the only company publishing a wide range of D&D products, including core and supplements, running events at cons, etc, it IS 3.75. People don't have to like it better, some people like 3.0, or 2nd ed. It certainly has more of a right to be called D&D than 4th ed.
No it doesn't.

4E was the natural progression from the realization that 3.5 was unfixable at it's core. No matter how you did it, you have to throw out everything 3.5 did and build the new edition from the ground up or you won't change anything. Any "Fixed" version of 3.5 would be just as different from 3.5 as 4e is.

Pathfinder was a misguided program to comfort the minds of the people who did not figure the above out, or figured it out and deluded themselves into thinking otherwise.

3.5 is a flawed and broken system, at best.

Sinfire Titan
2010-04-21, 11:01 AM
Calling it 3.75 is insulting to D&D as a whole.

IIRC, they did somewhat fall short of their Backwards Compatibility claim, didn't they?


That aside, I find the suggestions for improving skill and save feats to be quite helpful. Has anyone offered a suggestion for how to improve Weapon Focus and Specialization? I'm having trouble finding a middle ground between having too high a bonus at low levels and having an irrelevant bonus at higher levels. Some method of scaling is obviously needed, but I'm not sure where to put the numbers.

You know feats like Short Haft? Fold those into the Weapon Focus tree. Weapon Focus (any Polearm) gives you Short Haft's ability for free. I'm currently working on that very idea for my Weapons Fix.

jiriku
2010-04-21, 11:50 AM
I'd like people to tell me if this isn't overpowered.
Is this viable for BAB as well?

Converting a Poor save to a good one is probably reasonable. It improves your save in some situations, but never to a level that's better than what many other characters of your level already have.

Improving base attack bonus with a feat is a bad idea. A strong base attack bonus is one of the few minor things that most melee classes have going for them, and if you commoditize that by making a feat of it, you're giving the casters (even easier) access to one of the last perks of the melee classes.

I actually go the opposite direction with my houserules and have a number of very powerful homebrewed feats with a +11 or higher base attack bonus requirements. These feats are available to full-BAB classes at middle levels, but mid-BAB classes don't qualify for them until late levels and poor-BAB classes can't get them at all. It's one small step in the direction of allowing melee to have nice things again.

If you're interested in doing the same thing yourself, you can also require 12 or more ranks in a skill that is rarely a class skill for casters, like Climb or Intimidate. This makes the benefit readily available for those who need benefits, and more difficult/expensive for those who already have plenty of toys.

Kaiyanwang
2010-04-21, 11:52 AM
You know feats like Short Haft? Fold those into the Weapon Focus tree. Weapon Focus (any Polearm) gives you Short Haft's ability for free. I'm currently working on that very idea for my Weapons Fix.

Another way could be take automatically the subsequent feat once you meet the prereqs. Examples:

TWF: once you get dex 17 and BAB + 6, you gain automatically ITWF. Once you get dex 19 and BAB +11, you gain GTWF.

Weapon focus: you get Specialization at fighter level 4, GWF at fighter level 8, GWS at fighter level 12.

Other ideas: add tricks. On the line of TWF:

TWF: you gain TW Defense as well

ITWF: you gain Two Weapon Pounce as Well

GTWF: You gain Dual Strike and Two Weapon Rend.

Just example, I don't think my ideas match every power level, I play not so optimized.


On PF and 3.5




3.5 is a flawed and broken system, at best.

You now, there are melodramatics fools, and I'm one of those, that had and have a blast with 3.5 even recognizing his, IMO, fixable or at least ameliorable flaws.

So, please, don't assume that a thing you cannot play, don't wan't play (a reasonable point of view, of course) is flawed and unplayable and every attempt to fix it, or every system similar, is not only bad for you (a matter of taste) but bad for everybody. Thanks.

jiriku
2010-04-21, 11:58 AM
Just example, I don't think my ideas match every power level, I play not so optimized.

I'd say this is a great idea at almost any power level. I have played a lot of D&D at many levels of optimization, and the only time casters have not dominated play is when the caster screwed up his build or unknowingly chose a dysfunctional prestige class.

Frosty
2010-04-21, 12:07 PM
Heh, Skill Focus (Use Magic Device) would become the most popular feat ever.



And to +9 at level 20?

And it *should* become a popular feat. Feats are supposed to be awesome and be as powerful as say...Power Attack.

I mean, how else will Monks reliably UMD anything at lower levels?

Zeful
2010-04-21, 02:38 PM
You now, there are melodramatics fools, and I'm one of those, that had and have a blast with 3.5 even recognizing his, IMO, fixable or at least ameliorable flaws.

So, please, don't assume that a thing you cannot play, don't wan't play (a reasonable point of view, of course) is flawed and unplayable and every attempt to fix it, or every system similar, is not only bad for you (a matter of taste) but bad for everybody. Thanks.

That is not what I said. Some flaws can be fixed within the current system (mundane not having nice things, monks, and lack of awesome to take a base class 20 levels). Others can't (a caster that focuses on summoning can play an entire party on his own, and shatter action economy over his knee, wishes being able to grant more wishes. Polymorph. Lack of definition between spell schools putting everything in conjuration and transmutation) with out an extensive rebuilding of the entire system (There is no fix for polymorph without either making it so weak as to be unusable or not fixing the problem it causes (casters being better fighters than most fighters)).
That is why I claim that 3.5 is flawed and broken system at best rather than a flawed or broken system. This is also why pathfinder has no business being called D&D 3.75. You can play the game and have fun doing so fixing the flaws you come across, but that doesn't make the system any less broken.

Kaiyanwang
2010-04-21, 02:51 PM
That is not what I said. Some flaws can be fixed within the current system (mundane not having nice things, monks, and lack of awesome to take a base class 20 levels). Others can't (a caster that focuses on summoning can play an entire party on his own, and shatter action economy over his knee, wishes being able to grant more wishes. Polymorph. Lack of definition between spell schools putting everything in conjuration and transmutation) with out an extensive rebuilding of the entire system (There is no fix for polymorph without either making it so weak as to be unusable or not fixing the problem it causes (casters being better fighters than most fighters)).
That is why I claim that 3.5 is flawed and broken system at best rather than a flawed or broken system. This is also why pathfinder has no business being called D&D 3.75. You can play the game and have fun doing so fixing the flaws you come across, but that doesn't make the system any less broken.


Wishes for wishes is debatable even in 3.5. Polymorph - pathfinder changed it, and does not seems to me unusable. About Conjuration and Transmutation you are - FLAT RIGHT, if one think to, say, orb spells.

Overall, I think that you are right - in an extent. I simply don't consider so broken almost everything you said with enough care and with the assumption that in a complex system like 3.5, you cannot always allow everything. And a lot of things are better now in pathfinder.

We shoul probably agree to disagree.

cenghiz
2010-04-21, 03:06 PM
Well, Iron Will comes from the Otyugh Hole and costs a pittance. Make equivalent holes for the rest (say, visit the Tomb of Horrors for Lightning Reflexes).

Even if the reward in question was 'epic spellcasting', my character would think thrice.

Zeful
2010-04-21, 04:40 PM
Wishes for wishes is debatable even in 3.5.[quote]
Not really. For the spell it just costs more to make a magic item (like a scroll of wish), which is reasonable. But why bother casting wish, when spells like Planar Binding, exist and there are creatures with Wish as an Spell-like ability which costs no XP to use (thus giving free infinite wishes simply by using the wish to wish for more wishes of some fashion (scroll, ring of wishes, scroll of gate or planar binding).

[quote]We should probably agree to disagree.
Yeah we should.

Anxe
2010-04-21, 07:13 PM
I assumed the weak feats were around to balance PrCs with base classes. A lot of PrCs need to take some weak feats to qualify for the PrC. Thus the PrC gets some class feature power over the base class in exchange for some bad feat selection.

deuxhero
2010-04-21, 09:52 PM
Even if the reward in question was 'epic spellcasting', my character would think thrice.

I don't know, the 3.5 version is horribly nerfed IIRC.

Thurbane
2010-04-21, 10:01 PM
I've mooted a couple of times about a "feat tier" system, where feats would be assigned a point value, and that a character gains "feat points" to spend, rather than 1 feat each 3 levels. Means you could buy a lot of weak feats, or save up to buy fewer, but more powerful, feats.

Sean K Reynlods posted something similar on his page/blog, but after reading it, I strongly disagree with the point value he assigned to most of the core feats...

Of course the issue with this is assigning a point value to the massive amount of feats out there, and that assigning a point value would be hotly debated. Only thing I could think of would be a massive poll, where EVERY feat is listed, with a voting form to assign it a vlaue. Like I said, a HUGE task.

Evil the Cat
2010-04-22, 11:14 AM
It wouldn't be a feat tax if people actually wanted to get them.

I've always held that some feats are better than others for a reason. The worst feats are often prerequisites for good feats, or good PrCs. You want to be a Sacred Exorcist, you need skill focus Religion.

Really, it's slightly nicer than "pay X feats" as a requirement.

Mastikator
2010-04-22, 11:40 AM
Skill focus could be turned into giving +4 skill and making it a class skill always.
And it's a prerequisite for improved skill focus, which allows you two rolls and you pick the higher. If you for any reason already get this from another source, you roll thrice and pick the highest. If you roll twice and take the less for any reason, you now only roll once.

Dual skill bonuses could be improved to give a third bonus.
Acrobatic for example could also give a +1 reflex save bounus.
Athletic a +1 fort. (stacks with great fort)
Alertness +1 initiative (stacks with improved init)
Animal affinity +1 on wild empathy checks (if avaliable).
Deceitful give +2 bluff checks
Deft hands bonus increased to +3
Diligent gives a 25% chance to know you don't know when you fail a check that would otherwise leave you thinking you have true information when you don't (when using appraise and decipher script)
Endurance gives +4 *fatigue points instead
Great fort halves ability damage (when a fort save is made to resist it)
Lightning reflexes lets you take 1/3rd instead whenever you otherwise take 1/2 from a successful reflex save. If you have evasion this improves to a +3 bonus, if you have improved evasion this also lets you take only 1/3rd instead of half on a failed check
Iron will reduces duration of enchantment by half (when a will save is made to resist it)
Investigator gives a 25% chance of your gather information check to not create suspicion.
Magical Aptitude gives a 25% chance to have no negative consequences of failing to use magic item.
Negotiator lets you bribe your opponent to give a +1 circumstance bonus per ever 100gp per hitdie of your opponent
Nimble fingers gives a +1 circumstance to hit when flanking an opponent with a light weapon
Persuasive also gives +2 diplomacy
Self-sufficient gives an extra +4 circumstance bonus on heal when you're healing yourself, and when using survival when alone (which stacks with the +2 bonuses you originally and still get)
Stealthy increases sneak movement by +25% to a maximum of full.


Gentlemen, I declare these feats: NOT GARBAGE.
Sure, they're not always gonna be useful. The +2/+2 skill feats aren't supposed to be focused, but now they give a larger range of small bonuses, which may be useful if depending on how your character works.


*
Fatigue points is a system where instead of simply fatigue being a status, there's points for it. Each time you're hit with what would otherwise render you fatigued you take 1d6 fatigue point damage, exhausted is 2d6. And things that remove fatigue heals 1d6, things that remove exhausted heals 2d6.
Your total fatigue is your con mod + your level * class hit die / 20, if you have multiclass, calculate separately, include fractionals. After the final calc is done you round down.
(example, a Fighter5/barbarian5 with 18 con gets 5*10/20+5*12/20+4=9.5 (rounded to 9). A wizard10 with 16 con gets 10*4/20+3=5)

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-04-22, 12:16 PM
I've always held that some feats are better than others for a reason. The worst feats are often prerequisites for good feats, or good PrCs. You want to be a Sacred Exorcist, you need skill focus Religion.

It may have been intentional, but it was a really bad idea. Most characters get a grand total of 7 feats over their entire career. A feat should be really frickin' amazing, not a piddly little +2/+2 to two skills. If you have a PrC good enough to require you to waste 2 or 3 feat on it, chances are you should tone down the PrC rather than making useless feats.