PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Toughness Change



Hague
2010-06-23, 06:43 PM
I feel that the +3 hitpoints that toughness offers is rather wimpy. Do you think it would be unbalanced if I changed Toughness to add +1 hp per character level with an extra point added each level thereafter?

Mr.Moron
2010-06-23, 06:44 PM
That feat already exists, it's called "Improved Toughness" (Complete Warrior). It's OK, better than toughness at least. It's not the world's greatest feat though, certainly balanced in the sense of "Not too strong".

Eldariel
2010-06-23, 06:48 PM
3 + 1/level is a good place where it actually has some use. Though it's still only a filler feat at best, and there's generally little place for those if you are building something powerful.

Faleldir
2010-06-23, 06:52 PM
That feat already exists, it's called "Improved Toughness" (Complete Warrior).
There are prestige classes that require Toughness, so it still needs to be changed.

Mr.Moron
2010-06-23, 06:55 PM
There are prestige classes that require Toughness, so it still needs to be changed.

Only in the most RAW sense. It's the sort of thing that most reasonable DMs would just give you. If they're so uptight they won't let you take improved toughness over toughness, they're not going to allow an updated better version of toughness.

nedz
2010-06-23, 06:57 PM
The PF version is 1/lvl or 3, whichever is the higher.

Its a useful feat for some characters, but only if their low HPs are an issue.
There are generally better options.
Ed: I'm talking about Imp Toughness here, obviously

cZak
2010-06-23, 07:02 PM
I house ruled a combination of Toughness + Imp Toughness + Endurance

The three are less than desirable singly in and of themselves, but combined seem pretty 'synergetic' while not being overly powerful.

Mongoose87
2010-06-23, 07:09 PM
There are prestige classes that require Toughness, so it still needs to be changed.

I believe that Improved Toughness says that it can be used to qualify for feats or classes requiring Toughness.

Hague
2010-06-23, 09:29 PM
Ah, I didn't even see that. Nice one :P I figure I'll replace all the monster entries with Improved Toughness then... :smallwink:

Arbitrarity
2010-06-23, 09:32 PM
I house ruled a combination of Toughness + Imp Toughness + Endurance

The three are less than desirable singly in and of themselves, but combined seem pretty 'synergetic' while not being overly powerful.

That seems good enough for a feat. Or close, at least. Also, it makes Steadfast Determination easier to get, which is nice.

Akal Saris
2010-06-23, 11:50 PM
I believe that Improved Toughness says that it can be used to qualify for feats or classes requiring Toughness.

I never knew that!

Defiant
2010-06-23, 11:54 PM
I feel that the +3 hitpoints that toughness offers is rather wimpy. Do you think it would be unbalanced if I changed Toughness to add +1 hp per character level with an extra point added each level thereafter?

As has been said, Improved Toughness exists for that good HP gain.

Leave Toughness as it is, as a "feat price" for entry into various prestige classes, similarly to Dodge or Skill Focus.

Mr.Moron
2010-06-23, 11:57 PM
As has been said, Improved Toughness exists for that good HP gain.

Leave Toughness as it is, as a "feat price" for entry into various prestige classes, similarly to Dodge or Skill Focus.

Right. Because the martially-oriented classes that generally need something like Dodge or Toughness are so often the one powerful enough to warrant a feat-tax.

Lysander
2010-06-24, 12:15 AM
What if in addition to +3hp it also granted one point of DR?

Knaight
2010-06-24, 12:18 AM
It doesn't help much, Improved Toughness is still better.

Defiant
2010-06-24, 12:25 AM
Right. Because the martially-oriented classes that generally need something like Dodge or Toughness are so often the one powerful enough to warrant a feat-tax.

Blame the classes, not the feat system. The system was obviously designed with the idea that some more-powerful prestige classes will require a weak feat as a feat-tax to enter... regardless of the tiers of the classes in question.

I'm just saying it makes sense from a consistency point of view. Just like base saves should be "0,0,1,1,1,2,... or 2,3,3,4,4,5,..." regardless of whether the class in question is a weak melee class or a strong caster class.

mabriss lethe
2010-06-24, 12:27 AM
the only use I've ever really found for Toughness involved a Deepspawn and an Illithid savant

holywhippet
2010-06-24, 12:44 AM
Generally speaking toughness is most useful for a level 1 sorcerer/wizard or any other class with a d4 hit die. It's there to push your HP high enough that a single hit isn't likely to take you out of the fight. Of course, a single critical hit is still likely to put you out - possibly for good.

Tavar
2010-06-24, 12:53 AM
Blame the classes, not the feat system. The system was obviously designed with the idea that some more-powerful prestige classes will require a weak feat as a feat-tax to enter... regardless of the tiers of the classes in question.
I'll blame both, thank you. Feats are two weak and specific for how much of an investment they represent, and classes, well, they're messed up as well.

Defiant
2010-06-24, 12:59 AM
I'll blame both, thank you. Feats are two weak and specific for how much of an investment they represent, and classes, well, they're messed up as well.

Personally, I think there should be more feats awarded to a character. Based on the sheer available feat options, it seems kind of lame how feat-scarce most characters are.

It's just that I feel that the system should maintain consistency, and would likewise disagree with a dialogue that went like this:

"So this melee fighter class (admittedly weaker than just about any caster class) will have all saves as 2,3,3,4,4,5... etc."
"Oh, it will have all saves like that, not something stronger like 4,5,6,7... because melee can't have nice things and is too overpowered, right?"

Hague
2010-06-24, 01:11 AM
I dunno, if you had a fighter that did nothing but take Improved Toughness up to level 20 they'd have what, roughly 490 hp?

Edit: Assuming no con bonuses.

Tavar
2010-06-24, 01:11 AM
Saves have a definite pattern. Good are 2+1/2 level. Poor are 1/3 level. I see no such pattern in feats. As such, what do you mean by consistency?

Defiant
2010-06-24, 01:17 AM
I do not believe Improved Toughness can be taken more than once.


Saves have a definite pattern. Good are 2+1/2 level. Poor are 1/3 level. I see no such pattern in feats. As such, what do you mean by consistency?

The consistency (and pattern) of powerful prestige classes necessitating a weak feat for entry, while not-so-powerful prestige classes being easy to enter.

Take caster classes. The so-and-so PrCs are easy to get into. The powerful PrCs have a feat tax.

It is the same with melee classes. The same pattern, it's just that the overall power level is systematically lower. But when we evaluate the local power level, it's the same.

It is my opinion that a prestige class that is significantly more powerful than the class it is based off should include a feat tax. (although the reason I like it like that is already shot down because of just the sheer inbalance of it all, but oh well)

The Cat Goddess
2010-06-24, 01:23 AM
I dunno, if you had a fighter that did nothing but take Improved Toughness up to level 20 they'd have what, roughly 490 hp?

Edit: Assuming no con bonuses.

11 Fighter Bonus Feats.
7 Character Feats.

That's +360 hp.

Purely average hitpoints: 115 (10 + 5.5*19).

Superglucose
2010-06-24, 01:25 AM
How about +1d4 HP, maxed at 1st level? :smallwink: I think that'd be a fun feat, changing your HD to, say, 1d4+1d10.

Or if you take all 11 fighter feats as toughness! "My hitdice are 11d4+1d10+con."

EDIT: The above was a joke but this is not:

What if Toughness increased your hitdice by one step? You could use the weapon damage table... 1d4->d6->d8->d10->d12->3d6->4d6->6d6->8d6?

lsfreak
2010-06-24, 01:26 AM
Even if you did take all that Improved Toughness, you'd have almost no ability to deal damage, thus no threat, and thus the downfall of most other defense builds: no one ever hits you, because they have no reason to.

EDIT: Many of us here dislike rolling for hit points in the first place. It's complete chance as to whether you roll high or low, and it tends to hurt melee more (as almost everything else in the system).

Superglucose
2010-06-24, 01:30 AM
Isfreak, so just take average. It ads 2.5 hp/level instead of 1 hp/level. In any case, +1d4/level is better than +1/level, so this version of the feat is still better than the most commonly used idea, +1 hp/level. And it's all moot anyways, even non-casters are dealing like 700 damage/hit.

And yeah, from a pure balance standpoint random HP isn't such a good idea, but who cares? I know someone who always plays a blaster sorc because, and I quote, "I like rolling fistfulls of dice." He knows how to make a Batman wizard, he knows how to trip-chain fighter, and he knows how to play a Cleric.

He picked Half-Vistani so he could roll 1d20+1d10-1d4 for his initiative, for crying out loud.

The Cat Goddess
2010-06-24, 01:31 AM
Even if you did take all that Improved Toughness, you'd have almost no ability to deal damage, thus no threat, and thus the downfall of most other defense builds: no one ever hits you, because they have no reason to.

EDIT: Many of us here dislike rolling for hit points in the first place. It's complete chance as to whether you roll high or low, and it tends to hurt melee more (as almost everything else in the system).

Use my Houserule: Minimum hitpoints = Con Bonus (or max die roll, if it is lower). Thus, if you're a Fighter with a Con of 20, then your minimum hit points is 10 (5 from Con, minimum 5 from die roll). If you're a Wizard with a Con of 20, then your hitpoints per level will always be 9 (5 from Con, Maximum 4 from die roll).

sofawall
2010-06-24, 01:40 AM
For example, my level 6, d6 HD, with 12hp. I had a +4 con bonus, so it was really 36, but still, wtf.

Hague
2010-06-24, 01:51 AM
You could alter the dice rolling rules: For instance, 1d4 = 2d2, 1d6 = 2d3, 1d8 = 2d4, 1d10 = 2d5, 1d12 = 2d6. Of course, these each still count as only one hit die even thought hey are technically 2 hit dice.

Good rule for stacking Improved Toughness would be to allow multiples up to your base Fort save bonus/2. So +6 fort saves means you can have 3 copies of Improved Toughness.

lsfreak
2010-06-24, 02:47 AM
Use my Houserule: Minimum hitpoints = Con Bonus (or max die roll, if it is lower). Thus, if you're a Fighter with a Con of 20, then your minimum hit points is 10 (5 from Con, minimum 5 from die roll). If you're a Wizard with a Con of 20, then your hitpoints per level will always be 9 (5 from Con, Maximum 4 from die roll).

That potentially inflates the uselessness of blasty spells and encourages casters to focus even more on save-or-sucks, which is not really a good thing. It also overall favors low-HD classes, which they rarely need, and makes Con an even more worthwhile stat than it already is. I'd much prefer average every level - it keeps the playing field level(er) (along with point-buy) instead of purely up to chance, without stat inflation.

Zaq
2010-06-24, 02:51 AM
Toughness isn't THAT bad. You can always find a use for a bonus point of essentia. It's only good as a prereq, but come on, you always need more essentia.
You DO take Azure Toughness instead of the normal one, right? RIGHT?

Cadian 9th
2010-06-24, 02:57 AM
Generally speaking toughness is most useful for a level 1 sorcerer/wizard or any other class with a d4 hit die. It's there to push your HP high enough that a single hit isn't likely to take you out of the fight. Of course, a single critical hit is still likely to put you out - possibly for good.

Yeah, I was going to say that. Basically, a 1st level character really notices the +3 hp from toughness. However, normally you retrain it at level 4 for improved toughness. A good feat is Psionic Body, a feat granting +2 hp/psionic feat. When you have 2 flaws and a bons human feat+ class bonus feat, you can end up with a very nice HP bonus of perhaps (erudite) +12 hp at 1st level, in addition to psicrystal, and 3 other psionic feats. This could be what Toughness should be?

Dante