PDA

View Full Version : Purge Vulnerability, Overcome Deficiency [Feats, 3.5e]



Havvy
2010-12-28, 04:16 AM
Overcome Deficiency
Summary: Remove racial ability penalty.
Prerequisites: -2 or lower racial penalty to an ability score.
I trained away my stupidity.
Benefit: Pick one ability score that has a -2 or lower racial penalty. That penalty is removed.
Example: A dwarf sorcerer takes this feat to remove the charisma penalty.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times. Each time, you must choose a separate ability score.

Did this awhile ago. Should be useful to those who haunt around here.

Glimbur
2010-12-28, 11:45 AM
I was expecting a feat to remove, for example, the vulnerability [Fire] creatures have to cold damage. For this feat, I would call it Overcome Deficiency or something else.

Mechanically, it's not a feat that is worth taking. +2 to a stat you had a penalty to is mediocre and uninspiring. However, it isn't unbalanced or anything, and if anyone wanted to take it to make a concept work it shouldn't be a big deal. It's fine the way it is. Congrats.

Havvy
2010-12-28, 12:53 PM
Hmm, that name does suit it better. I haven't seen a feat to remove the energy vulnerability of a creature, but I don't see why one cannot be made.

Purge Vulnerability
Summary: Remove energy vulnerability weakness.
Prerequisites: Energy Vulnerability
Playing with fire isn't so dangerous anymore.
Benefit: Pick an energy type you are vulnerable to. You are no longer considered vulnerable to this energy type.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times. Each time, you must pick a different energy vulnerability.

kryan
2010-12-28, 01:19 PM
Seems like a trap to me. It's just weaker than a feat should be, which means the only people who will take it are those who are tricked by it.

Havvy
2010-12-28, 02:38 PM
The first feat is not a feat that comes into play very often. But if you have a -4 or -6 penalty to an ability score, and you don't want to completely suck at that ability. Most of the times it is better to choose a feat that helps you specialize, but when you need to shore up your weaknesses a bit, a feat like this is useful. Especially if you have a penalty in something like intelligence or constitution, in which case it is a bit stronger than gaining 1 skill point per level or taking Improved Toughness (with just the -2 penalty). When you do it to a race with a -4 penalty, it can be better than many other feats for the task it is for.

The second feat is not one I would ever take as a normal feat, but giving it at a bonus feat to certain monsters would work. Of course, I can think of at least one case in which I'd take this feat. If I was a troll that was vulnerable to fire. Otherwise, it is just a good thing to keep in mind.

Whether it is a trap or not depends on what you are building. For most builds, this feat is useless, but that is true for most feats already.

If you use the wiki rating system, the first feat is figher level (tier 4) and the second is monk (tier 5). Since these feats don't open up new options, by definition, they cannot be higher than tier 4.

Edit

I haven't read the text in awhile, didn't notice the penalty doesn't drop more than 2 points. I'm dropping that part of the feat, since it isn't unbalancing to take a penalty to -x and make it 0, since you wouldn't be able to turn it into a +y bonus anyways.

Popertop
2010-12-28, 03:17 PM
Seems like a trap to me. It's just weaker than a feat should be, which means the only people who will take it are those who are tricked by it.

and yet some people will still view it as overpowered

Fizban
2010-12-28, 08:49 PM
I like it as a way to deal with unfair stuff, like all the cha penalties for "ugly" races. I like it more, however, as a way to remove absolutely crippling penalties to make unlikely heroes. Normally it's like Spellcasting Prodigy, effectively a +1 to all save DC's (or attack rolls, or whatever). If it can remove any penalty, it's suddenly an extremely heroic and feat worthy thing to do. The strong Kobold. The smart Orc. The charismatic Mongrelfolk. These crippling racial weaknesses are the things heroes are supposed to overcome, and letting them do that with a feat is perfect.

boomwolf
2010-12-28, 09:33 PM
Yea....that's just gonna make them kobolds even nastier.

Now for real, its too strong.
Say you got a race that has amazing stats yet is draw back by a -4 penalty to something crucial to everyone, like Dex, or even worse-Con. is a single feat really worth that -4 penalty?

If we take Dex for example, at the very least (lets be "only" a -2 ok?) is +1 initiative, +1 reflex, +1 ranged attack an +1 AC. (an lots of skills) that ALOT for a feat, that not bad for two feats. heck, giving you a +1 ability score is an EPIC feat.

Now you want Con? at LEAST +1 hp for level an +1 fortitude. (and concentration if you need it) gain, more then a feat's worth.

Str? you want +1 melee attack an damage, alot of carrying capability and alot of decent skill bonuses for a mere feat?

Int? +1 skill per level (an 4 for first), plus a given bonus to a few skills.

The only 2 ability scores that won't gain much from it are Wis an Cha, an that's because Wis only governs Will saves an a handful of skills, an Cha even less.

And with this feat, you can be happy with you -6 Dex or Con race, knowing you are about to override that flaw.


So yea, I'd NEVER allow it into my game.


As for Purge Vulnerability, something similar already exist in official source books (and I say similar because I THINK its exactly the same, but not quite sure.)

Popertop
2010-12-29, 02:26 AM
you could make it more situational.
only overcome certain aspects of the deficiency.

Havvy
2010-12-29, 05:41 AM
you could make it more situational.
only overcome certain aspects of the deficiency.

Feats already exist for that. For example, Improved Toughness basically removes a -2 Con penalty for HPs.


Yea....that's just gonna make them kobolds even nastier.

Now for real, its too strong.
Say you got a race that has amazing stats yet is draw back by a -4 penalty to something crucial to everyone, like Dex, or even worse-Con. is a single feat really worth that -4 penalty?

If we take Dex for example, at the very least (lets be "only" a -2 ok?) is +1 initiative, +1 reflex, +1 ranged attack an +1 AC. (an lots of skills) that ALOT for a feat, that not bad for two feats. heck, giving you a +1 ability score is an EPIC feat.

Now you want Con? at LEAST +1 hp for level an +1 fortitude. (and concentration if you need it) gain, more then a feat's worth.

Str? you want +1 melee attack an damage, alot of carrying capability and alot of decent skill bonuses for a mere feat?

Int? +1 skill per level (an 4 for first), plus a given bonus to a few skills.

The only 2 ability scores that won't gain much from it are Wis an Cha, an that's because Wis only governs Will saves an a handful of skills, an Cha even less.

And with this feat, you can be happy with you -6 Dex or Con race, knowing you are about to override that flaw.


So yea, I'd NEVER allow it into my game.


As for Purge Vulnerability, something similar already exist in official source books (and I say similar because I THINK its exactly the same, but not quite sure.)

The epic level handbook contains the worst idea of what epic truly is. A +1 to an ability score is not worth a feat slot. It was made by designers who probably didn't even understand how high-level non-epic play works. Altogether, the solution to epic levels is extremely simple. And it is known as E20 (which is E6 but at 20th level).

Also, note that for every feat you use to remove a penalty, that is one less feat you could be using to strengthen a strength or add new abilities (The gain a spell/power/maneuver/stance feats for example). This feat allows character concepts to exist without creating huge penalties for them. Dwarf clerics for example.

As for the races with a -6 ability score modifier, I rarely see them outside of savage species, and it is already a known fact that races from monsters are weaker than normal races, so giving them a boost is only fair.

Also, if the feat only took away a part of your penalty, you would still be penalized, and still not use that race for that build. One feat for making a race viable for the abilities is an acceptable cost. Two feats are not. Not when you only get seven.

So no, I do not believe this feat is overpowered. I believe its power is proper. Yes, it is stronger than [Insert Feat Here] that gives a benefit as if an ability score was +2 higher for that statistic, but at the same time, it will only let you be at where you would have been if you picked a different race. In the end, picking a different race and getting [Insert Feat Here] would net you a higher total for that stat.

I can see many many NPCs having this feat. Like pretty much every dwarf cleric or elan sorcerer that my players would run across, would I be the DM.


I like it as a way to deal with unfair stuff, like all the cha penalties for "ugly" races. I like it more, however, as a way to remove absolutely crippling penalties to make unlikely heroes. Normally it's like Spellcasting Prodigy, effectively a +1 to all save DC's (or attack rolls, or whatever). If it can remove any penalty, it's suddenly an extremely heroic and feat worthy thing to do. The strong Kobold. The smart Orc. The charismatic Mongrelfolk. These crippling racial weaknesses are the things heroes are supposed to overcome, and letting them do that with a feat is perfect.

Actually, I'd rather have the players play with the crippling penalties to make unlikely heroes. If you train away a deficiency, you don't really have it, do you? You must have the deficiency to overcome it. But those who roleplay deficiencies like they are a fun thing end up dying in DnD.