OP feats

[Bloodymango]

so i was just going through the forums in the past few days and i noticed some 1 allowed greenbound summoning in there campaign, As a DM a druid taking that feat a first level is a no-no in my book. so im just gonna rattle off the top of my head feats that i feel are broken, i encourage u to do the same

Greenbound Summoning: Benefit: All animals that you summon using summon nature's ally acquire the greenbound template (see page 173) for as long as the summoning spell lasts.


Leap Attack: it self isnt that broken but with a cavalier can kill pretty much anything in one hit.

Persistent Spell and DMM Persistent Spell: why not have an abjured champion walk around with 40 with no armor or a shield on at all.

natural spell: cast heal has a raven while flying past the fighter in the maw of a dragon

[HunterOfJello]

Leadership

Craft Wondrous Items is a feat that somewhat borders on being OP in my opinion. I love the feat and would take it when playing, but it often breaks WBL since it covers more than half the items your character will use.

Item Familiar

[Hiro Protagonest]

Persistent Spell and DMM Persistent Spell: why not have an abjured champion walk around with 40 with no armor or a shield on at all.

Persist spell is fine without DMM. Persistent Divine Power is a 10th level spell slot, and that's ok. With DMM, it's six less turning attempts and a 4th level spell slot, and it't not ok.

Where's the greenbound template?

Leadership: Hey look guys! I recruited this bear riding a bear shooting bears, but my CR is still the same! And later, I'm gonna have my cohort recruit a wizard or cleric! My CR will still be the same!

[HunterOfJello]

Where's the greenbound template?

Lost Empires of Fareun i think

~
I've heard a number of complaints about:
Touch of Golden Ice
Vow of Nonviolence
Vow of Poverty
Words of Creation

[Bloodymango]

Where's the greenbound template?



http://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/greenbound.shtml

[BillyBobJoe]

Item Familiar

Unless you're a Truenamer, in which case it is a crime not to have this feat.

[Greenish]

Persistent Spell and DMM Persistent Spell: why not have an abjured champion walk around with 40 with no armor or a shield on at all.I don't think Abjurant Champions bother to persist their AC bonus spells.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Persistent Spell in and off itself is not too bad. It takes a big ole +6 to spell level, meaning that by itself, at around ~16th level gishes will be popping their 8th level spell slots for all day wraithstrike... which is on par with actual 8th level spells, mind.

Given you example, any decent Abjurant Champion will have an AC between 30-40 all day just by being an Abjurant Champion.:smallcool:

[HunterOfJello]

Dragonwrought at 1st level for a 600+ year old kobold

Fell Drain can become OP if used by an Artificer on Sonic Snap/Magic Missle wands or by other classes using combinations.

Ocular Spell when optimized.

[Greenish]

Dragonwrought at 1st level for a 600+ year old kobold.That's not really OP. You start with one less feat for decent bonuses to mental stats. Humans, for example, sacrifice stat bonuses for an extra feat, and are considered one of the strongest races.

Now, Epic feat and Sovereign Archetype shenanigans are something else.

[Flickerdart]

Lost Empires of Fareun i think

~
I've heard a number of complaints about:
Touch of Golden Ice
Vow of Nonviolence
Vow of Poverty
Words of Creation
The first three are incredibly weak. Words of Creation just makes Inspire Courage good.

[erikun]

Leap Attack: it self isnt that broken but with a cavalier can kill pretty much anything in one hit.
Really? As I understand it, the only thing Leap Attack does is change Power Attack from 2x to 3x damage, and that is only with a charge and only if you make a jump during that charge. The ruling that you can ride a horse and then jump off its back for both Leap Attack and Mounted Combat bonuses seems to be the real problem.

Unless you are a centaur, but then again, the centaur is already giving up 4 HD in a questionable "class" and +2 LA for no benefit. I doubt that giving them Mounted Leap attacks would be that problematic.

[Siosilvar]

Metamagic reducers are fairly OP when stacked. I think they might be fairly easily fixed by limiting them to removing one level of metamagic per spell per reducer, such that an Arcane Thesis'd Easy Metamagic'd Incantatrix'd spell has only 3 levels of free metamagic instead of 1 + 2 per feat applied.


Greenbound Summoning: Benefit: All animals that you summon using summon nature's ally acquire the greenbound template (see page 173) for as long as the summoning spell lasts.I believe this was intended by the creator to be a +2 (or +4?) metamagic feat. I don't have a source for that though.


Persistent Spell and DMM Persistent Spell: why not have an abjured champion walk around with 40 with no armor or a shield on at all.Both the feats are fine. Stacking nightsticks to get an almost arbitrarily large number of turn attempts is the problem. Make nightsticks single-use (i.e. you get 4 turn attempts ever) and/or non-stackable (or just ban them entirely) and the problems are much alleviated. EDIT: You may need to limit DMM to spells of levels you could cast with the adjustment as well.

...also, why does your Abjurant Champion have turn attempts?

[Greenish]

...also, why does your Abjurant Champion have turn attempts?Because he's a sorcadin. :smalltongue:

[Elric VIII]

Because he's a sorcadin. :smalltongue:

You still can't persist arcane spells with DMM.:smallwink:

I think Reserves of Strength (Dragonlance) ranks up there with OP feats (even though it requires a junk feat).

[Drelua]

I want to say this is another example of a broken feat, but I'm not sure if I understand the terrible wording. From Pathfinder's Ultimate Combat:

Stealth Synergy (Teamwork)
Working Closely with an ally, you are able to move like twin shadows.
Benefit: While you can see one or more allies who also have this feat, whenever you and your allies make a stealth check, you all take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth.

Is it just me, or if there was a party of 5 adventurers, and two of them had this feat, and all of them had max ranks is stealth, would they all be practically invisible? Speaking of invisibility, if they were all invisible, that would give them something like +100 to their stealth (20 each), wouldn't it? say they're level 5, it's class for all of them, they have an average of +2 DEX, they're all wearing cloaks of elvenkind, and they're all turned invisible by, say, the bard. wouldn't they have +175 stealth with 5 chances to roll!?! Please tell me I'm misunderstanding this feat, I copied it word for word.

[Zergrusheddie]

You still can't persist arcane spells with DMM.:smallwink:


Southern Magician works around that though.

I'll give another boost to Leadership. It's a cool idea for a feat but is just insanely powerful. I wouldn't call Leap Attack broken, even with Pounce, just because melee can only do damage so they should be decent at it. Leap Attack is only a problem when you add all the other Power Attack ratio adders + Shock Trooper.

[Flickerdart]

I want to say this is another example of a broken feat, but I'm not sure if I understand the terrible wording. From Pathfinder's Ultimate Combat:

Stealth Synergy (Teamwork)
Working Closely with an ally, you are able to move like twin shadows.
Benefit: While you can see one or more allies who also have this feat, whenever you and your allies make a stealth check, you all take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth.

Is it just me, or if there was a party of 5 adventurers, and two of them had this feat, and all of them had max ranks is stealth, would they all be practically invisible? Speaking of invisibility, if they were all invisible, that would give them something like +100 to their stealth (20 each), wouldn't it? say they're level 5, it's class for all of them, they have an average of +2 DEX, they're all wearing cloaks of elvenkind, and they're all turned invisible by, say, the bard. wouldn't they have +175 stealth with 5 chances to roll!?! Please tell me I'm misunderstanding this feat, I copied it word for word.
You take their roll. Their modifiers don't matter.

[Drelua]

You take their roll. Their modifiers don't matter.

Are you just applying logic, or is that what the feat actually means? 'Cause the way I read the "take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth" part it sounds like they meant you all use everyone's modifiers together. if it said "you all add your modifiers", it would mean what you said, but you "add all your modifiers". Logic tells me I'm reading this feat wrong, but grammar seems to disagree. Obviously if I were DMing with this feat, I would rule that it works exactly like you said, but it seems to me like someone screwed up on the grammar of it. Also, am I right that only 2 people have to have the feat for it to work for a whole group? That part I'm really not sure about.

[molten_dragon]

Let's see, a couple broken feats that I can think of are:

Leadership
Earth spell (especially when combined with ScM)
Metamagic reducers (when you can stack them)
Arcane Disciple
Greenbound Summoning
Rashemi Elemental Summoning
Divine Metamagic (even without nightsticks it can be abused pretty heavily)

[Ernir]

Did we seriously get this deep into the discussion without Assume Supernatural Ability and Metamorphic Transfer being brought up?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Earth spell (especially when combined with ScM)

Not seeing the brokenness. You payed two feat slots for the privilege of +1 save DC and +1 to caster level checks. And not all of the time.

[Keld Denar]

I'd go so far as to say that Leap Attack is fine, the real offender is Shocktrooper. By removing the risk vs reward mechanism from PA, there is no reason NOT to PA for full on every attack. I mean, if you are gonna tank your AC down to 10, why not tank it all the way down to 0?

Without Shocktrooper, you can moderately control damage output from a player simply by tweaking AC up or down a few points. The higher you make the foe's AC, the less the charger will be comfortable PAing for while still ensuring a hit, and most players without knowing the exact target they are looking for tend to err on the side of caution.

Shocktrooper takes all of the metagame out of PA and simply turns the dial up to 11 and leaves it there.

Too bad that Heedless Rush has to ruin the party for the other two abilities. Directed Bullrush and Domino Rush are both kinda neat abilities.


Not seeing the brokenness. You payed two feat slots for the privilege of +1 save DC and +1 to caster level checks. And not all of the time.

Alone, I'd agree with you. This combo, however, is the backbone to the Killer Gnome Shadowcraft Mage build. Since you are using a 0th level spell (Silent Image with Gnome Illusionist ACF) and heightening it up to level X to emulate any Conjouration or Evocation spell with the Shadow Illusion ability, you are getting a free +X+1 CL boost, where X is the level of the spell you are casting.

Thus, if you are and 8th level Wizard5/ScM3, and you cast an Evard's Black Tentacles (spell level 4), you are at CL 8 + 5 = 13 for the spell. That means that your grapple check is +21 for the spell. At level 8. Thats...pretty badass.

[molten_dragon]

Not seeing the brokenness. You payed two feat slots for the privilege of +1 save DC and +1 to caster level checks. And not all of the time.

It's not +1 save DC and +1 to caster level checks.

The spell is treated as one level higher than the level that you heightened it to, and you add 1 to your effective caster level for the purposes of the spell for each level that you heightened it.

So if a fifteenth level wizard chooses to cast a first level spell heightened to 8th level (i.e. up 7 levels), the spell will be treated as a 9th level spell (despite the fact that the wizard doesn't have access to 9th level spells yet) and his caster level will be 22.

When combined with a shadowcraft mage's abilities, it gets even more ridiculous.

And the restrictions are easy to get around. Just fill your socks with dirt.

[Hiro Protagonest]

It's not +1 save DC and +1 to caster level checks.

The spell is treated as one level higher than the level that you heightened it to, and you add 1 to your effective caster level for the purposes of the spell for each level that you heightened it.

So if a fifteenth level wizard chooses to cast a first level spell heightened to 8th level (i.e. up 7 levels), the spell will be treated as a 9th level spell (despite the fact that the wizard doesn't have access to 9th level spells yet) and his caster level will be 22.

When combined with a shadowcraft mage's abilities, it gets even more ridiculous.

And the restrictions are easy to get around. Just fill your socks with dirt.

Alright, so he's better at bypassing SR with his Magic Missile, or the saving throw DC for Grease is higher. And you're comparing that to Maze and Polymorph Any Object.

[BillyBobJoe]

Are you just applying logic, or is that what the feat actually means? 'Cause the way I read the "take the highest roll and add all your modifiers to Stealth" part it sounds like they meant you all use everyone's modifiers together. if it said "you all add your modifiers", it would mean what you said, but you "add all your modifiers". Logic tells me I'm reading this feat wrong, but grammar seems to disagree. Obviously if I were DMing with this feat, I would rule that it works exactly like you said, but it seems to me like someone screwed up on the grammar of it. Also, am I right that only 2 people have to have the feat for it to work for a whole group? That part I'm really not sure about.

It would only apply to people who have this feat, and you only use your modifier for the roll. If all five people took it, they would get five chances to roll total, and only the highest modifier would apply for each individual person. It's complicated. I got a headache trying to work out the exact way it interacts with everyone, but it's significantly weaker than you think.

[Ryu_Bonkosi]

Mindsight eliminates almost all chances of ambushing the party. Also any form of Leadership (Normal, Undead, or Dragon) is just broken.

[awa]

craven is awfully powerful even with the penalty against fear

[BillyBobJoe]

craven is awfully powerful even with the penalty against fear

Craven isn't OP. :smallconfused: Craven is actually a decent feat. (which instantly makes people think it's OP anyways, because they compare to things like toughness and weapon focus.) Plus, it has a drawback.

[Drelua]

It would only apply to people who have this feat, and you only use your modifier for the roll. If all five people took it, they would get five chances to roll total, and only the highest modifier would apply for each individual person. It's complicated. I got a headache trying to work out the exact way it interacts with everyone, but it's significantly weaker than you think.

Ahh. So it isn't an overpowered feat, just a horribly worded one. I suspected as much. It looks like it could easily be interpreted in a lot of different ways, but that makes the most sense of all the various ways that occurred to me.

[BillyBobJoe]

Ahh. So it isn't an overpowered feat, just a horribly worded one. I suspected as much. It looks like it could easily be interpreted in a lot of different ways, but that makes the most sense of all the various ways that occurred to me.

How is it badly worded? It very specifically states that you add +your level to your attack when making a sneak attack.

Edit: *facepalm* I'm an idiot.

[thompur]

I can't believe nobody has mentioned Toughness! A human monk that takes toughness twice would be almost unkillable!

I won't even go into the brokenocity of nimble fingers!

[Drelua]

How is it badly worded? It very specifically states that you add +your level to your attack when making a sneak attack.

I meant stealth synergy, hence the quote. The one that gave you and me both a headache. Anyway, enough time has been spent on this feat.

[Bloodymango]

i will take a -2 to fear effects, for say around +80 dmg on a full round at 20, that doesnt include any weapon dice enhancements str, magic, or sneak attack

[Hiro Protagonest]

i will take a -2 to fear effects, for say around +80 dmg on a full round at 20, that doesnt include any weapon dice enhancements str, magic, or sneak attack

You still have a d6 hit die. You aren't exactly a melee beast.

Also, you're assuming the attack at -10 hits.

[Cadian 9th]

Versatile Spellcaster is pretty OP for a wizard with Spontaneous Divination (Complete Champion).

Psi-crystal Affinity can get pretty silly.

Cloudy Conjuration acts as a +2 save DC for Conjuration often and provides excellent disruption, even to higher levels.

Insane Defiance (Elder Evils/Exemplars of Evil) can get you not only immunity to most offensive spells, you can hit it on the caster.

To be honest most feats aren't actually that bad, it's just in combination with (normally a powerful) options; e.g. Versatile Spellcaster with Spontaneous Divination, or Aberrant Wild Shape with the Divine Minion template.

[LaughingRogue]

I don't think craven is broken, I just think it should be part of some sort of chain or maybe have a prereq that isn't optimal.

[Thurbane]

I'm detecting a theme - with the exception of Leadership* and one or two others, almost all of the OP feats are metamagic, metamagic reducers, or otherwise tied to spellcasting. i.e. It doesn't take much for anything related to casters to be OP.


*Time for my rant, again. The OP-ness of Leadership is entirely based on how the DM (and player) runs it. If it is treated as 1 feat = 2nd PC, then yes, it is OP. If the DM runs the cohort, and as a loyal follower, but not a suicidal automaton, there is nothing inherently OP about it. Not to mention that you can attract followers, hirelings and cohorts without even using the feat...

[LaughingRogue]

I'm detecting a theme - with the exception of Leadership* and one or two others, almost all of the OP feats are metamagic, metamagic reducers, or otherwise tied to spellcasting. i.e. It doesn't take much for anything related to casters to be OP.


*Time for my rant, again. The OP-ness of Leadership is entirely based on how the DM (and player) runs it. If it is treated as 1 feat = 2nd PC, then yes, it is OP. If the DM runs the cohort, and as a loyal follower, but not a suicidal automaton, there is nothing inherently OP about it. Not to mention that you can attract followers, hirelings and cohorts without even using the feat...

I also think that it's not overpowered if it's run as a second PC that in a party that is one short of players (let's say they are running a premade game and it's made of 5 characters and they only have 4) or if they are short on healing and need a cleric...

[Malimar]

Dragonwrought at 1st level for a 600+ year old kobold

A 600+ year old kobold would be dead. Your maximum age stays the same, you just don't take any penalties before you hit it.

Venerable dragonwrought is an incredibly dangerous use of the feat in games that go old-school and use lots of aging effects.

[BillyBobJoe]

A 600+ year old kobold would be dead. Your maximum age stays the same, you just don't take any penalties before you hit it.

Venerable dragonwrought is an incredibly dangerous use of the feat in games that go old-school and use lots of aging effects.

Dragonwrought raises the age categories of a normal Kobold. Yes, you would be dead at 600, but that was a generalization. The point is, you can have any age of dragonwrought kobold, so you can get +3 to all mental stats with no penalties, plus other assorted goodies due to being a dragon.

[Vladislav]

*Time for my rant, again. The OP-ness of Leadership is entirely based on how the DM (and player) runs it. If it is treated as 1 feat = 2nd PC, then yes, it is OP. If the DM runs the cohort, and as a loyal follower, but not a suicidal automaton, there is nothing inherently OP about it. Not to mention that you can attract followers, hirelings and cohorts without even using the feat...
Ah, YAPLR (yet another pro-leadership rant)

Do you know what the definition of broken is? Something is broken if it requires fixing. And Leadership fits the bill perfectly. Would anyone ever say something like "the OP-ness of Rapid Shot is entirely based on how the DM runs it" ? Of course not. Rapid Shot is not broken. Thus it doesn't require fixing. It can be run just as it's printed in the book - additional ranged attack, with -2 to all attacks.

As a DM, you don't have to meddle with the way Rapid Shot works. You don't have to announce "oh, I'm actually going to make it a -3 penalty", or "Rapid Shot is only usable up to 30' range" and so on. The player simply takes the Rapid Shot feat and gains its benefits.

With Leadership, things are entirely different. The DM has to constantly be on the lookout, constantly meddle. "No, your cohort won't do this because it's against his alignment, he won't do that because he's not suicidal, and don't even get started about your cohort follow you there..." and so on.

The DM has to constantly work to fix Leadership - a sure sign it's broken.

[Philistine]

I'd go so far as to say that Leap Attack is fine, the real offender is Shocktrooper. By removing the risk vs reward mechanism from PA, there is no reason NOT to PA for full on every attack. I mean, if you are gonna tank your AC down to 10, why not tank it all the way down to 0?

Without Shocktrooper, you can moderately control damage output from a player simply by tweaking AC up or down a few points. The higher you make the foe's AC, the less the charger will be comfortable PAing for while still ensuring a hit, and most players without knowing the exact target they are looking for tend to err on the side of caution.

Shocktrooper takes all of the metagame out of PA and simply turns the dial up to 11 and leaves it there.

Too bad that Heedless Rush has to ruin the party for the other two abilities. Directed Bullrush and Domino Rush are both kinda neat abilities.
I'd go so far as to say that Shock Trooper is fine, the real offender is the failtastic encounter design of unimaginative DMs. Heedless Charge is just further developing the basic idea of the charge - trading defense for offense. As such, it's as tactically interesting as you make it. You don't even have to resort to any of the many ways to completely forclose the charge - just give the Charger's player situations where tanking his AC is actually a risk, and/or where the ability to hit a single target for Over 9000! damage isn't especially relevant.

The kicker is that the kinds of things you'd add to an encounter to keep it interesting for a Shock Trooper also make encounters more interesting for everyone else. So it's not even a matter of "the DM having to work around the character," because things like multiple opponents, or opponents with reach, ought to be showing up across the gaming table whether or not a player takes Shock Trooper.

[MammonAzrael]

I believe this was intended by the creator to be a +2 (or +4?) metamagic feat. I don't have a source for that though.

Sourced! (http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-legacy-discussion/128424-what-have-i-missed-about-greenbound-summoning-4.html#post2195156) It was supposed to be a +2 metamagic.

[Greenish]

I'd go so far as to say that Shock Trooper is fine, the real offender is the failtastic encounter design of unimaginative DMs. Heedless Charge is just further developing the basic idea of the charge - trading defense for offense. As such, it's as tactically interesting as you make it.If AC was worth something at higher levels, sure, but keeping it on a level where it's relevant is more effort than it's worth. Miss chances don't suffer that problem.

[NNescio]

i will take a -2 to fear effects, for say around +80 dmg on a full round at 20, that doesnt include any weapon dice enhancements str, magic, or sneak attack

You also can't be Mindblanked.

(Well, you can, but you lose the benefits of the feat for the duration of the spell.)

[Philistine]

If AC was worth something at higher levels, sure, but keeping it on a level where it's relevant is more effort than it's worth. Miss chances don't suffer that problem.
Seems like that cuts both ways, though: if AC isn't a viable defense anyway, it's hard to make a case for AC-beating feats being OP.

[Yukitsu]

I generally run leadership on every character I play, and encourage my players to do so as well. I view it as a feat tax for an ability that any "legendary" (level 11+) character should have had for a while. It's only broken when only one guy takes it, and the DM wasn't expecting it.

[Big Fau]

Really? As I understand it, the only thing Leap Attack does is change Power Attack from 2x to 3x damage, and that is only with a charge and only if you make a jump during that charge. The ruling that you can ride a horse and then jump off its back for both Leap Attack and Mounted Combat bonuses seems to be the real problem.

Which is actually TO territory, as the DM can rule either way on that one (and has to). Simply saying "no" to that stops the Ubercharger, but still enables a normal Shock Trooper Charger.

[tyckspoon]

Seems like that cuts both ways, though: if AC isn't a viable defense anyway, it's hard to make a case for AC-beating feats being OP.

Depends on what you mean by 'viable defense'. At high levels, you won't get enough AC to be reliably missed by enemies unless you are investing in ways to get AC outside of the usual channels. However, you do want some AC, because it means you won't get Power Attacked into the ground. If you know your first three attacks are almost certain to hit, and conversely the enemy's first few attacks are most likely going to hit you, it becomes a question of maximizing your damage output and minimizing theirs. Which is primarily a question of how much Power Attack can be used while still maintaining good hit rates- and feats like Shock Trooper throw those calculations all the way to the extremes.

[Keld Denar]

Greenish ment for PCs. AC for monsters is easy...its whatever the DM wants it to be, +/- a bit of tweaking. A Balor, for example, has a naked AC of 39 with Unholy Aura up. It wouldn't take much to push that into the high 40s with a little bit of gear. He starts from a much higher place.

A PC, on the other hand, without going into extreme speciliazation, its tough to get AC out of the high 20s or low 30s without spending exorberant amounts of money. Some builds can manage it, especially stacking various stats to AC (like +Con to AC), but most builds cap out at 10 + 8 armor + 5 enhancement to armor + 2 shield + 5 enhancement to shield + 5 natural +5 deflection +1 dex = 41, assuming you dropped around 1/3 of your WBL on your AC, and most often much less than that. If you wanted to go with light armor (class reasons), the highest base armor you could get is a Mith BP, which lowers that upper limit to 38. A Ring of Protection +5 is 50,000g, and an Amulet of NA +5 is another 50,000g, so thats 100,000g on defenses that could be better spent elsewhere.

Just saying, it gets prohibitively expensive to keep up with AC. If you are gonna be Shocktroopering anyway, the difference between a 10 AC (down from base 30), and a 0 AC (down from base 20) is minimal. If you aren't gonna focus on your AC, why even bother?

[Philistine]

To keep your Charge target's buddies from connecting with all their iteratives despite PAing for full, maybe? One PC for one monster isn't usually going to be a good trade.

Make the encounters more interesting than "PCs vs. a solitary sack of HP in an open field," and suddenly STing away all your AC isn't such a gimme.

[kestrel404]

Minor Shapeshift - At-will swift action to gain your HD in temp HP (polymorph based reserve feat)
Arcane Thesis - All unlimited metamagic reducers can be broken, but this one is the worst offender.
Versatile Spellcaster - Is responsible for more early-entry shenanigans than any other feat I can think of (except Precocious Apprentice, but that's because no one pays attention to the FAQ).

[nyarlathotep]

The solution to uberchargers is for ever enemy team to have a chain tripper. Chain trippers as far as the eye can see.

[Greenish]

To keep your Charge target's buddies from connecting with all their iteratives despite PAing for full, maybe?Miss chances are better.


no one pays attention to the FAQFor the simple reason that FAQ is wrong just about as often as it's right.

[rubycona]

My take on leadership is that the feat doesn't exist, but the benefits do, for everyone... the difference is, players aren't entitled to squat all. No, this NPC doesn't "belong" to you because you took the feat... he likes you because you saved his family and he believes in your cause. Don't piss him off, because he knows where you sleep.

It's a strictly roleplay thing, it ups the party level, the NPC takes his part of the XP, and if he's pulling his weight, he's going to expect a fair share of the loot, too. If they want to try to rally an entire army to fight with them, they can have at it. Diplomacy and/or bluff checks, good charisma... fun times.

One of the most fun games I ever had (actually, it was the most fun), more than half of the party was NPCs that we'd swayed to our side. And while we did get the best stuff, we invested tons of resources into keeping them on par. They weren't just cookie cutter NPCs... we got to know them, and cared about them. When one was captured and nearly killed, man, we flipped out. One of the best sessions ever, running through, just barely getting to him in time, having to try to keep him alive during the BBEG fight... and you know the DM would have killed him if we'd delayed, or not made his survival a high enough priority.

We ended up leading an entire rebellion by force of charisma (yay, Sorc :D) with lots of bluff and diplomacy checks. NPCs fighting along with us, NPC contacts in powerful positions, NPCs doing us favors when we needed a hand, and our party going out of the way to be people worth following...

Leadership (the concept, not the feat) is absolutely awesome - if you have to work for it and earn the benefits.

[TwylyghT]

I'd go so far as to say that Shock Trooper is fine, the real offender is the failtastic encounter design of unimaginative DMs. Heedless Charge is just further developing the basic idea of the charge - trading defense for offense. As such, it's as tactically interesting as you make it. You don't even have to resort to any of the many ways to completely forclose the charge - just give the Charger's player situations where tanking his AC is actually a risk, and/or where the ability to hit a single target for Over 9000! damage isn't especially relevant.

The kicker is that the kinds of things you'd add to an encounter to keep it interesting for a Shock Trooper also make encounters more interesting for everyone else. So it's not even a matter of "the DM having to work around the character," because things like multiple opponents, or opponents with reach, ought to be showing up across the gaming table whether or not a player takes Shock Trooper.

A caster with Hold the Line feat and a held charge of Plane Shift(or any other fun touch spell) can be a hilarious hello to a reckless charger who lacks reach. An occasional Hold the Line on its own on a fighting type can at least keep an awareness in their minds.

[Cadian 9th]

Minor Shapeshift - At-will swift action to gain your HD in temp HP (polymorph based reserve feat)
Arcane Thesis - All unlimited metamagic reducers can be broken, but this one is the worst offender.
Versatile Spellcaster - Is responsible for more early-entry shenanigans than any other feat I can think of (except Precocious Apprentice, but that's because no one pays attention to the FAQ).

I'd disagree on the first two and add another reason why versatile spellcaster IS an OP feat.

Minor Shapeshift takes up your feat slot and to get your Temporary Hit Points you're spending a swift action each round to get it; which should be reserved for Celerity or quickened spells or Evoke Magic etc. It's not that bad in terms of a caster.

Arcane Thesis only applies to the total adjustment; It's said this way in the FaQ, which makes sense; so if your DM doesn't use the FaQ (Fair enough) they're wanting you to use it in that way. Then sure, it's quite powerful. Still, one spell only. The only spells that benefit from the broken non-FaQ function are burn spells, which, lets be honest, you're a pretty meh caster if you're pumping resources into damage boosting metamagic and spending actions to blow stuff up really well. Your average uberchargers outdamage you without trying, and that's the only thing they really do in combat well, so I see no reason to limit your build to annoy the charger and invalidate his character. Concentrating on the finer aspects of being a caster, such as utility, is often a better bet.

Early entry with Versatile Spellcaster I maintain is not a broken option. You spend feats and have to be spontaneous to get it, then you have to actually KNOW higher levels spells (It says " that you know "), which takes up nearly all your feats and resources.

The early entry is often only useful for multi-classing casters because of skill rank pre-reqs; and it only gets you in (on average) 2 levels earlier. Unless the PrC is hideously broken, your benefit from getting in earlier is less than the loss of one of the most precious things in DnD: Feat Choices; and the fact that you had to take a spontaneous class to get one of those feats, and you have to get ANOTHER feat to learn a higher level spell.

Versatile Spellcaster is broken when you give it to a prepared caster (say, by the Spontaneous Divination ACF for Wizards in Complete Champion), because they just became able to cast any of the vast array of spells they know at any time they wish.

[Keld Denar]

Arcane Thesis only applies to the total adjustment; It's said this way in the FaQ, which makes sense; so if your DM doesn't use the FaQ (Fair enough) they're wanting you to use it in that way. Then sure, it's quite powerful. Still, one spell only. The only spells that benefit from the broken non-FaQ function are burn spells, which, lets be honest, you're a pretty meh caster if you're pumping resources into damage boosting metamagic and spending actions to blow stuff up really well. Your average uberchargers outdamage you without trying, and that's the only thing they really do in combat well, so I see no reason to limit your build to annoy the charger and invalidate his character. Concentrating on the finer aspects of being a caster, such as utility, is often a better bet.

Errata. Not FAQ. And Errata states that its "per metamagic", not "per spell".

[Cadian 9th]

Errata. Not FAQ. And Errata states that its "per metamagic", not "per spell".

...I realised Arcane Thesis was in PHB2, not CArc. Then, I check the Arcane Thesis entry in the PHB2 Errata and see no such mention, only that the feat can't reduce the level below the spell's original level. Could you link me the version you have?

[Big Fau]

Errata. Not FAQ. And Errata states that its "per metamagic", not "per spell".

However, they also said it does not reduce costs below 0.

[tyckspoon]

However, they also said it does not reduce costs below 0.

No, they said it does not reduce the total spell level adjustment below zero. That does not invalidate individual metamagic adjustments going below zero.

@Cadian: this is the relevant errata- it installs a per-metamagic example as part of the official updated rules of the feat.


Page 74– Arcane Thesis [Substitution]
Should read, “When you apply any metamagic fea
other than Heighten Spell” Thus if you were to
prepare an empowered maximized magic missile
(assuming magic missile is the spell you choose f
your Arcane Thesis), it would be prepared as a 4th
level spell (+1 level for empowered, down from +2
and +2 levels for maximized, down from +3).

The difference is the original text example only had a single metamagic feat applied/mentioned, which left vagueness as to how it worked with more than one.

[TwylyghT]

Page 74– Arcane Thesis [Substitution]
Should read, “When you apply any metamagic feats
other than Heighten Spell” Thus if you were to
prepare an empowered maximized magic missile
(assuming magic missile is the spell you choose for
your Arcane Thesis), it would be prepared as a 4th
level spell (+1 level for empowered, down from +2;
and +2 levels for maximized, down from +3).

The errata in question, and I'm fairly certain official errata trumps faq in the grand scheme of things. There's a bit floating around somewhere of the feats author favoring the errata version as intended too.

I don't see it as a *huge* problem, and most of the problems I ever have with it involve its combination with specific spells and stacked -x shenanigans.

**edit** ninja'd by the spoon lol

[molten_dragon]

Alright, so he's better at bypassing SR with his Magic Missile, or the saving throw DC for Grease is higher. And you're comparing that to Maze and Polymorph Any Object.

As I've mentioned twice now, it doesn't really enter broken territory until you pair it with shadowcraft mage abilities. Because then you're not casting first level spells. You're casting spells at whatever your highest level is (if not higher) and still reaping all the benefits of it.

[Cadian 9th]

Ah, stupidity, I missed the paragraph above... Okay, that directly conflicts with the FaQ, lol. Errata... wow.

Still, I don't really see it as awesome unless you pump feats into damage metamagic. Which is fairly meh, in my honest opinion, as damage is pretty much the only thing most non-casters can do, so let them do that, they do it pretty well.

I think we can all agree the most universaly solid use of metamagic is buffing and quickening, for example Chaining, Occular'n, Persisting; and Twinning self spells such as Celerity, and Quickening spells. All of which are good with many spells, each of which you'd have to select a seperate Arcane Thesis feat for each.

[Lateral]

Supernatural Transformation (http://www.realmshelps.net/cgi-bin/featbox.pl?feat=Supernatural_Transformation) is pretty damn borked when you use it to make a psion's psionic powers supernatural.


Really? As I understand it, the only thing Leap Attack does is change Power Attack from 2x to 3x damage, and that is only with a charge and only if you make a jump during that charge. The ruling that you can ride a horse and then jump off its back for both Leap Attack and Mounted Combat bonuses seems to be the real problem.

Wait, that actually works? I thought it was ruled against.

[Big Fau]

Supernatural Transformation (http://www.realmshelps.net/cgi-bin/featbox.pl?feat=Supernatural_Transformation) is pretty damn borked when you use it to make a psion's psionic powers supernatural.

That doesn't work. Like, at all.

[erikun]

Supernatural Transformation (http://www.realmshelps.net/cgi-bin/featbox.pl?feat=Supernatural_Transformation) is pretty damn borked when you use it to make a psion's psionic powers supernatural.
Psionic powers gained through class features are neither innate nor spell-like.


Wait, that actually works? I thought it was ruled against.
For me, as a DM? I would not allow it. It seems rather obvious that you are either mounted and not jumping or jumping and no longer mounted.

Most TO builds tend to assume it will work, under the "there is no errata specifically against it" logic.

[Big Fau]

Most TO builds tend to assume it will work, under the "there is no errata specifically against it" logic.

That's why TO exists really. Those builds assume the DM is drunk off his rocker, so to speak. Some of them are just thought experiments though.

[Coidzor]

That's why TO exists really. Those builds assume the DM is drunk off his rocker, so to speak. Some of them are just thought experiments though.

...I don't think there's any TO builds that aren't thought experiments, except for the few times they've decided to see how TO builds would compare against one another. But then, even that's a thought experiment...


Versatile Spellcaster - Is responsible for more early-entry shenanigans than any other feat I can think of (except Precocious Apprentice, but that's because no one pays attention to the FAQ).

Most early entry tricks are relatively mild in terms of shenaniganery and true brokenness, since it's less about when one gets access to the class and more about if one gets access to the class.

[Philistine]

Miss chances are better.

If you have to choose just one, then yes. Miss chances layered on top of moderate AC are better yet, though - it doesn't take that much investment to drastically cut the odds of 3rd and 4th iteratives hitting - especially if the opponent is PAing.

[LordBlades]

On the Shock Trooper issue: the main offender IMHO here isn't the feat itself, but rather the fact that AC is worthless unless you invest very heavily in it and you're a caster.

If you're a non caster, wielding a two-handed weapon and charging, your AC already hovers around the (almost) autohit area of most level appropriate monsters. Dropping it even further has for all intents and purposes no consequences.

[Thurbane]

Ah, YAPLR (yet another pro-leadership rant)

Do you know what the definition of broken is? Something is broken if it requires fixing. And Leadership fits the bill perfectly. Would anyone ever say something like "the OP-ness of Rapid Shot is entirely based on how the DM runs it" ? Of course not. Rapid Shot is not broken. Thus it doesn't require fixing. It can be run just as it's printed in the book - additional ranged attack, with -2 to all attacks.

As a DM, you don't have to meddle with the way Rapid Shot works. You don't have to announce "oh, I'm actually going to make it a -3 penalty", or "Rapid Shot is only usable up to 30' range" and so on. The player simply takes the Rapid Shot feat and gains its benefits.

With Leadership, things are entirely different. The DM has to constantly be on the lookout, constantly meddle. "No, your cohort won't do this because it's against his alignment, he won't do that because he's not suicidal, and don't even get started about your cohort follow you there..." and so on.

The DM has to constantly work to fix Leadership - a sure sign it's broken.
I might be missing something, but does it actually say anywhere in the Leadership feat that the player has total control of the cohort, including it's build and running it as a 2nd PC? If not, there's no "fixing" involved, merely interpretations of rules that are not specifically spelled out. (Or correction of common assumptions).

I honestly believe Leadership gets a far worse rap on internet forums than it has actually earned in real life games. Like so, so many areas of the 3.5 rules, it can be an issue for newer DMs, but that's why it is listed in the DMG with fairly lengthy warnings that including it as an option requires DM judgment...

My take on leadership is that the feat doesn't exist, but the benefits do, for everyone... the difference is, players aren't entitled to squat all. No, this NPC doesn't "belong" to you because you took the feat... he likes you because you saved his family and he believes in your cause. Don't piss him off, because he knows where you sleep.
I've also played in games that run along this general rule, and it works quite well.

[Coidzor]

The principle problem with leadership is that there's no real good guidelines for it, and so it's utterly pointless to cost a feat considering it's usually going to be of either so much more than a feat or so much less than one, due to the inherent difficulties of hitting a target that isn't defined.

[Thurbane]

The principle problem with leadership is that there's no real good guidelines for it, and so it's utterly pointless to cost a feat considering it's usually going to be of either so much more than a feat or so much less than one, due to the inherent difficulties of hitting a target that isn't defined.
Now that is a solid argument, I must admit.

[Coidzor]

Sorry. Leadership kind of drives me batty, as I have no idea where to put it and I don't think the devs did either x.x

[Thurbane]

Psionic powers gained through class features are neither innate nor spell-like.
I'm far from an expert on psionics, but I read a post here once that in one of the psionics books, there is a poorly worded passage that pretty much says all psionic (class) powers are psi-like abilities. I can't cite a source, however.

[Lateral]

That doesn't work. Like, at all.


Psionic powers gained through class features are neither innate nor spell-like.

They're technically psi-like abilities, which qualify for feats that modify your spell-like abilities. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177889) Yeah, it's a dirty, rotten trick, and it's complete and total abuse, but it does work.

[erikun]

They're technically psi-like abilities, which qualify for feats that modify your spell-like abilities. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177889) Yeah, it's a dirty, rotten trick, and it's complete and total abuse, but it does work.
Yeah, that is so clearly non-RAI that it isn't even funny. Even ignoring the fact that psionic powers are psionic powers, not psi-like abilities, remember that a creature with psi-like abilities does not pay for these abilities with power points and does not pay any XP cost (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/overview.htm#psiLikeAbilities), which would mean that any character with any powers and a single power point could manifest all day without restriction. Oh, and they can't be counterspelled.

The idea that spending a feat to use one as a supernatural ability is perhaps they least borked implication from that interpretation. It's stretching even my TO-believability limits. :smalltongue:

[Lateral]

Yeah, that is so clearly non-RAI that it isn't even funny.

That's kind of the point. It technically works by RAW, but it's guaranteed to get you a DMG to the face.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Minor Shapeshift - At-will swift action to gain your HD in temp HP (polymorph based reserve feat)

How is that overpowered? It's like gaining 1 or 2 temp HP at first level.

[Gnaeus]

How is that overpowered? It's like gaining 1 or 2 temp HP at first level.

Agreed. Its effects are easily duplicated with magic items (like an amulet of tears). It requires a feat, a level 4+ spell slot, and your swift action any round when you are using it. If you are a wizard with level 4+ spells, adding HP is not the strongest thing you can do with your swift actions.

I do use that feat on my chameleon sometimes as his floating feat, because
1. he is kind of a gish, so extra hp help him.
2. he has less spells than a wizard, so less swift action spells.
But the fact that it isn't worth blowing a permanent feat on suggests to me that it is not broken. A feat is so good it is broken when it is clearly superior to most/all other options. Natural Spell or Leadership may be broken. Minor Shapeshift, not so much.



Arcane Disciple

Huh? Why? There are only a few classes/builds that even make this worth a feat. You add a couple of spells to your class list at the cost of a feat, skill ranks, and making yourself MAD. It is solid for Beguilers, Warmages and DNs (because they actually add those spells to their options, instead of having to replace other spells with them), but even there it is hardly overpowered compared with other options.


Southern Magician works around that though.


Extend spell, Persist spell, DMM, Southern magician? You do realize that the more feats you have to burn to make this combo legal the less it is worth, don't you? I am pretty sure I could find a lot of more broken things to do with 4 feats than Persist a couple of spells a day.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

How is that overpowered? It's like gaining 1 or 2 temp HP at first level.

Probably because of how swing-y love levels can be. At third level, assuming just straight wizard with a 14 Con has a whopping 15 HP on average. If enemies are swinging for 2-7 (Shortsword, +1 str mod) per hit, well, given one hit, even a good roll feels like less than that. Sure, monsters could be hitting harder or there could be a lot of mooks, but the healing option of Minor Shapeshift can add up.

Personally, I like it for making low levels less swing-y, but I can see why someone would call that "overpowered" or even "broken."

[Hiro Protagonest]

Probably because of how swing-y love levels can be. At third level, assuming just straight wizard with a 14 Con has a whopping 15 HP on average. If enemies are swinging for 2-7 (Shortsword, +1 str mod) per hit, well, given one hit, even a good roll feels like less than that. Sure, monsters could be hitting harder or there could be a lot of mooks, but the healing option of Minor Shapeshift can add up.

Personally, I like it for making low levels less swing-y, but I can see why someone would call that "overpowered" or even "broken."

It's not available at low levels.

[The Glyphstone]

Minor Shapeshift has a prerequisite of 4th level spells - you can't even take the feat until level 7 minimum, level 9 without somehow gaining an early bonus feat.

EDIT: ka-swordsaged.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

It's not available at low levels.


Minor Shapeshift has a prerequisite of 4th level spells - you can't even take the feat until level 7 minimum, level 9 without somehow gaining an early bonus feat.

EDIT: ka-swordsaged.

Derp.

Hmm, it still is possible to get it earlier than 7th, but that requires either sanctum spell, Illumian glyph nonsense, or a combination thereof to get it online at 6th level or sooner.

[Doug Lampert]

If you have to choose just one, then yes. Miss chances layered on top of moderate AC are better yet, though - it doesn't take that much investment to drastically cut the odds of 3rd and 4th iteratives hitting - especially if the opponent is PAing.

That Dragon who makes every one of his 7 attacks at full bonus or -2 at worst is currious about why you think he'd miss.

Then the Hydra wants a word with you.

After that are the Xill and the Marilith (just to add some weapon users).

Then we can go to all the other monsters.

Worry about itteratives is a PvP problem. The fact is that most fights are against monsters, even if you're playing high op most fights are against monsters because high op allows lots of ways to get expendable monster minions.

And monsters don't make one of their attacks at -15 (or if they do they're like that marilith who hits with 6 attacks, then 2 more, and then finally gets down to one at -15).

Additionally, plenty of shock trouper builds kill EVERYONE within weapon reach of the final square, and they do so with enlarge and a reach weapon, which means that your foe probably can't full attack anyway.

Iteratives can't be the ballance factor since they don't apply to many of the possible encounters. For that matter a horde of lower level foes means they are APL-6 or so, and AC starts to drop seriously in value at level 10 or so, how many itteratives do even humanoids have at CR 4?

You can't count on itteratives missing as the balance factor for PC AC.

DougL

[Greenish]

You do realize that the more feats you have to burn to make this combo legal the less it is worth, don't you?He was just pointing out that it is technically possible to use it as an arcane caster.

[Gnaeus]

He was just pointing out that it is technically possible to use it as an arcane caster.

Possible, yes. OP, no.

[2xMachina]

Could have Incantatrix persisting all spells.

Need to cheese out Spellcraft, and also grab a Schism casting. Cast spell, schism persists it.

[erikun]

That's kind of the point. It technically works by RAW, but it's guaranteed to get you a DMG to the face.
I guess the thing at this point is how unimpressive it is.

Consider: If psionic characters are capable of manifesting any power they have as much as they want, all day, without cost, without counterspells - in some cases, literally casting Wish multiple times a round every round - then they may use a feat to turn a single power into SR: No. This is, of course, instead of using that feat for Quicken Power or Expanded Knowledge.

On the other hand, if psionic characters are limited to PP and standard XP costs, then Supernatural Transformation doesn't apply.

So either you have one RAW interpretation where the feat doesn't work, or you have another RAW interpretation where they feat just isn't impressive. In either case, I'm not sure that "weaker than Expanded Knowledge" should be considered overpowered.

[Lateral]

I guess the thing at this point is how unimpressive it is.

Consider: If psionic characters are capable of manifesting any power they have as much as they want, all day, without cost, without counterspells - in some cases, literally casting Wish multiple times a round every round - then they may use a feat to turn a single power into SR: No. This is, of course, instead of using that feat for Quicken Power or Expanded Knowledge.

On the other hand, if psionic characters are limited to PP and standard XP costs, then Supernatural Transformation doesn't apply.

So either you have one RAW interpretation where the feat doesn't work, or you have another RAW interpretation where they feat just isn't impressive. In either case, I'm not sure that "weaker than Expanded Knowledge" should be considered overpowered.

No, that's not how it works. Psionic characters' psionics is a psi-like ability that require expenditure of PP, XP et al. to use. Turning them into supernatural abilities turns them into supernatural abilities, which explicitly are not affected by dispellings and SR in the feat text, and also do not have XP costs. That's a massive bonus for the expenditure of one feat. Yeah, it's ridiculous, but that's not the point here.

[erikun]

No, that's not how it works. Psionic characters' psionics is a psi-like ability that require expenditure of PP, XP et al. to use.
This is what confuses me the most about Theoretical Optimization. They claim that their personal idea is supported "by RAW" because it "isn't disallowed", but when you point out that neither the psionic classes description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/classes/index.htm) nor the Psion base class (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/classes/psion.htm) say anything about expenditures or payment, they turn around and claim that it is "obvious" what is "intended". :smallannoyed:

Apparently it isn't so obvious, because they seem to blank on the implications of their own conclusions. (And sorry for harping on you about this; I know you're just reporting on what you've seen elsewhere.)

[PlzBreakMyCmpAn]

Anything that helps mundanes.

Toughness on a wizard? totally fine.

Toughness on a fighter? Incredibly O

[Hiro Protagonest]

Anything that helps mundanes.

Toughness on a wizard? totally fine.

Toughness on a fighter? Incredibly O

What's that? Toughness helps wizards more because they have less HP in the first place? Blasphemy!

[Thrawn183]

Persistent Spell and DMM Persistent Spell: why not have an abjured champion walk around with 40 with no armor or a shield on at all.

Mage armor is not an abjuration spell.

[sreservoir]

Derp.

Hmm, it still is possible to get it earlier than 7th, but that requires either sanctum spell, Illumian glyph nonsense, or a combination thereof to get it online at 6th level or sooner.

not too hard to qualify by first, with two flaws. a cleric with planning and that domain with alter self. takes versatile spellcaster, sanctum spell, and improved sigil (krau). can cast alter self as a 4th-level spell!

what, you expected to actually have the feat? no, this only qualifies you.

having the feat by third is almost trivial: wu jen, take some metamagic, sanctum spell, and improved sigil (krau). take alter self as one of your spells.

[Greenish]

Mage armor is not an abjuration spell.Luminous Armour is.

[Coidzor]

Mage armor is not an abjuration spell.

Indeed, it's quite sad and the number one reason why Abjurant Champions have a higher number of good individuals per capita than any other non-alignment restricted PrC.