Stegyre
2010-12-17, 04:10 PM
tl;dr: in E6, using fractional BAB and saves, I'm contemplating adding two new feats -- "round up BAB" and "round up saves" -- which do just what you might expect. PEACH: too good or comparable with other good-but-not-to-die-for feats?
Long version
I'm contemplating some E6 houserules and am definitely committed to fractional BAB and saves. See UA at 73 (not sure why that info isn't in the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/index.htm), but I suspect experienced players are readily familiar with it).
I've thought of adding two new feats, which for discussion purposes, we can call "round up BAB" and "round up saves." They would do just like the name says on the label: whenever a character with "round up BAB" has a fractional BAB score, it always rounds up instead of down.
I want to know whether playgrounders feel these feats would be "too good" or "good." I really don't care if people consider them "poor," as "poor" feats (imo) do not lead to any balance issues: players just don't take them. :smallwink:
These are my subjective criteria for the three categories, with examples:
A feat is "too good" when everyone should take it, and you would be foolish not to, assuming that it applied to the character's situation (for example, full BAB classes would never take "round up BAB," because it would never benefit them).
Example: DMM(Persist) -- sure, you don't have to have it; only clerics can use it; and you can have very good cleric builds without DMM, but it's hard to argue against the conclusions that DMM (Persist) is a high-powered feat, and there are very few builds capable of using it (i.e., cleric) that cannot be improved by using it.
A feat is "good" when it's worth taking, depending upon the character's build. Some characters will take it; some won't.
"Poor" feats probably don't need much description. These are the feats that good players will avoid as the waste of a feat. Most of the skill feats fall into this category, or feats that really seem made for NPCs, like Ballista Proficiency.
Thus, a character with 3/4 BAB progression:
{table]Class Level|Fractional BAB|Normal|With Feat
1|3/4|0|1
2|1 1/2|1|2
3|2 1/4|2|3
4|3|3|3
5|3 3/4|3|4
6|4 1/2|4|5[/table]
(With multi-classing and mixing full, 3/4, and half BAB classes, multiple variations are possible, but I think you get the idea.)
Saves would work similarly:
{table]Class Level|Frac. good|Normal|With Feat|Frac. bad|Normal|With Feat
1|2 1/2|2|3|1/3|0|1
2|3|3|3|2/3|0|1
3|3 1/2|3|4|1|1|1
4|4|4|4|1 1/3|1|2
5|4 1/2|4|5|1 2/3|1|2
6|5|5|5|2|2|2[/table]
(Note: wrt Saves, I only allow the +2 bonus once in each good save category, so a Fighter 1 / Cleric 1, would have a Fort. save of 3 (2 1/2 + 1/2), not 4 or 5.)
Analysis:
I feel fairly comfortable with "round up BAB." This feat will never give a character more than a +1 to hit (akin to Weapon Finesse, but usable with any weapon). It may help the partial BAB classes qualify for feats or PrCs more readily, but again, no one would be able to do so any faster than a full BAB class can, and generally this is a minor benefit. Finally, characters that do not dip too heavily into the low-BAB classes may make use of this feat to achieve that magical +6 BAB at level 6 and have an iterative attack. That's better than Weapon Focus, and any character with a fractional BAB over 5 should definitely take this feat, but I don't feel that it's overpoweringly good. Playgrounders?
As for "round up saves," at its best, this feat grants three +1s -- one to each save category. In the long run, I expect that most characters that take it would end up with only two +1s, while the third save would be a whole number. That makes this feat comparable to, or slightly better than, the save feats (Great Fortitude, et al). Those are generally regarded as low-powered feats, although I think their value in an E6 campaign is somewhat higher. Again, this strikes me as a feat that would be useful without being "too good." Your opinions?
Long version
I'm contemplating some E6 houserules and am definitely committed to fractional BAB and saves. See UA at 73 (not sure why that info isn't in the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/index.htm), but I suspect experienced players are readily familiar with it).
I've thought of adding two new feats, which for discussion purposes, we can call "round up BAB" and "round up saves." They would do just like the name says on the label: whenever a character with "round up BAB" has a fractional BAB score, it always rounds up instead of down.
I want to know whether playgrounders feel these feats would be "too good" or "good." I really don't care if people consider them "poor," as "poor" feats (imo) do not lead to any balance issues: players just don't take them. :smallwink:
These are my subjective criteria for the three categories, with examples:
A feat is "too good" when everyone should take it, and you would be foolish not to, assuming that it applied to the character's situation (for example, full BAB classes would never take "round up BAB," because it would never benefit them).
Example: DMM(Persist) -- sure, you don't have to have it; only clerics can use it; and you can have very good cleric builds without DMM, but it's hard to argue against the conclusions that DMM (Persist) is a high-powered feat, and there are very few builds capable of using it (i.e., cleric) that cannot be improved by using it.
A feat is "good" when it's worth taking, depending upon the character's build. Some characters will take it; some won't.
"Poor" feats probably don't need much description. These are the feats that good players will avoid as the waste of a feat. Most of the skill feats fall into this category, or feats that really seem made for NPCs, like Ballista Proficiency.
Thus, a character with 3/4 BAB progression:
{table]Class Level|Fractional BAB|Normal|With Feat
1|3/4|0|1
2|1 1/2|1|2
3|2 1/4|2|3
4|3|3|3
5|3 3/4|3|4
6|4 1/2|4|5[/table]
(With multi-classing and mixing full, 3/4, and half BAB classes, multiple variations are possible, but I think you get the idea.)
Saves would work similarly:
{table]Class Level|Frac. good|Normal|With Feat|Frac. bad|Normal|With Feat
1|2 1/2|2|3|1/3|0|1
2|3|3|3|2/3|0|1
3|3 1/2|3|4|1|1|1
4|4|4|4|1 1/3|1|2
5|4 1/2|4|5|1 2/3|1|2
6|5|5|5|2|2|2[/table]
(Note: wrt Saves, I only allow the +2 bonus once in each good save category, so a Fighter 1 / Cleric 1, would have a Fort. save of 3 (2 1/2 + 1/2), not 4 or 5.)
Analysis:
I feel fairly comfortable with "round up BAB." This feat will never give a character more than a +1 to hit (akin to Weapon Finesse, but usable with any weapon). It may help the partial BAB classes qualify for feats or PrCs more readily, but again, no one would be able to do so any faster than a full BAB class can, and generally this is a minor benefit. Finally, characters that do not dip too heavily into the low-BAB classes may make use of this feat to achieve that magical +6 BAB at level 6 and have an iterative attack. That's better than Weapon Focus, and any character with a fractional BAB over 5 should definitely take this feat, but I don't feel that it's overpoweringly good. Playgrounders?
As for "round up saves," at its best, this feat grants three +1s -- one to each save category. In the long run, I expect that most characters that take it would end up with only two +1s, while the third save would be a whole number. That makes this feat comparable to, or slightly better than, the save feats (Great Fortitude, et al). Those are generally regarded as low-powered feats, although I think their value in an E6 campaign is somewhat higher. Again, this strikes me as a feat that would be useful without being "too good." Your opinions?