Worst feats in core?

[Zelkon]

What are they? What are the good and bad feats? What feats should be improved?

[Amnestic]

Skill Focus (Speak Language)

It is the definition of a useless feat.

[Dhavaer]

Toughness and the +2/+2 skills feats are generally among those called out as worst. Power Attack is certainly among the best if it fits your build. Improved Initiative fits equally well into almost all builds.

[Chilingsworth]

Skill Focus (Speak Language)

It is the definition of a useless feat.

Wow, yeah, that's the worst feat I've ever heard of. Skill focus in a skill that doesn't require checks, lol. I never would have even thought of that!

[Cranthis]

I'm gonna agree with the above, unless you are making someone entirely focused on a certain skill, which generally is a bad idea anyways.

The +2/+2 are only slightly better because it gives 2.

Improved initiative is probably the best feat in the entire game, since almost any build fits it in. Going first never hurts.

[Dienekes]

There are some very weak ones, Dodge, Toughness, Endurance, and Run are considered pretty weak. Spell Focus (Divination) and things that expand on it are useless in Core, but with more books it does something, still not very good.

The joke answer is Skill Focus (speak language). I'm not entirely sure if this actually works, but if it does it'd be useless.

[Yuki Akuma]

Skill Focus [General]
Choose a skill.

Benefit
You get a +3 bonus on all checks involving that skill.

Special
You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new skill.

Note how it says nothing about the skill actually requiring to to make checks. It totally works. And by that I mean it's a totally valid feat choice that literally does nothing.

[Wise Green Bean]

The bonuses to random skills in general suck pretty badly, with a few exceptions. Unless you desperately need an uber skill or must make a skill check by a certain level, meh.

[Amnestic]

Another contender might be Weapon Specialisation (Net), which gives you +2 on damage rolls for a weapon which does no damage.

[Phelix-Mu]

Hmm, well I vote for Toughness. In my campaigns, I run with everyone gets 90% max hp, and classes with d4 automatically get full hp. Monsters also get 90% or max, as it suits a specific encounter, and I want the players to not die everytime I throw a curveball (my favorite pitch).

Even if we go with 50-60% standard, Toughness is only good for a couple classes at low levels. I have edited the rules for my game to remove Toughness and instead make Improved Toughness count as Toughness for PrC pre-reqs and such. At least Imp. Toughness scales (though not very well).

Along similar lines, I allow people that have invested something as valuable as a feat in any feat in the form of Alertness (+2 to two skills) to count those skills as class skills for all classes. Not a terribly unbalancing change, since its main long-term effect is to open up more PrC to esoteric class combinations, something I fully approve of. I also rule that races that get bonuses to skills count those skills as class skills; halfling wizards are good at climbing, so what?

A lot of stuff operating at the bottom of the power curve can be tweaked to improve usefulness. This isn't half as problematic as the top end of the power curve, the feats that are made of pure cheese and seem designed for exploitation.

[Justyn]

The bonuses to random skills in general suck pretty badly, with a few exceptions. Unless you desperately need an uber skill or must make a skill check by a certain level, meh.

Heck, not even "desperately", a swordsage focusing in Diamond Mind finds the +3 from Skill Focus (Concentration) very very VERY useful.

[navar100]

Spell Focus (Abjuration)

Very few abjuration spells have a DC - Dismissal, Banishment, Prismatic Sphere.

[Venusaur]

Heck, not even "desperately", a swordsage focusing in Diamond Mind finds the +3 from Skill Focus (Concentration) very very VERY useful.

I think he means the +2/+2 ones, which are generally way worse.

[Flickerdart]

Spell Focus (Abjuration)

Very few abjuration spells have a DC - Dismissal, Banishment, Prismatic Sphere.
There are 79 Abjuration spells with DC entries other than "None" or "Harmless". Divination, by comparison, has 23.

[Cranthis]

There are 79 Abjuration spells with DC entries other than "None" or "Harmless". Divination, by comparison, has 23.

I am going to question how you know that.

[Zelkon]

I'm looking more for feats I should fix in houserules.

[Flickerdart]

I'm not sure if I am allowed to link the website, as it reproduces some closed content without WotC's permission (though it excludes the actual text of the spells), but it provides a tool for filtering through spells based on any number of criteria. After that, it's just a matter of counting them the old fashioned way.

[Eldariel]

There are some very weak ones, Dodge, Toughness, Endurance, and Run are considered pretty weak. Spell Focus (Divination) and things that expand on it are useless in Core, but with more books it does something, still not very good.

Honestly, Dodge isn't worthless. I mean, it's weak no doubt but it at least does something. Now, if you want a feat from that chain that's actually worthless, look at Mobility; basically only heavy armor people won't have the Tumble to make it irrelevant, but it just so turns out Heavy Armor people aren't likely to have the Dex to take it anyways.

And even if they do, having Mobility is no excuse to go around provoking AoOs willy-nilly. And it only works for AoOs from movement. And if enemy e.g. trips you with the AoO instead it's even fairly useless in its intended function, narrow though it may be.

Spring Attack is another pretty awful one simply because the "attack once"-mechanic is brokenly underpowered and it requires a lot of feats to get and BAB +4 which is pretty close where you kinda begin to want those full attacks anyways (Haste and the first iterative come on levels 5 and 6 respectively). And it requires two previously already listed-as-awful feats to pick.

By same token, the superspecific Whirlwind Attack is fairly awful outside very specific circumstances and even there, you could often use Great Cleave with far less hassle.


Endurance, Toughness and Run have been mentioned. Run frankly isn't that useless again; Run-action allows moving really fast and Run makes it better. It's just the "straight line" requirement that ****s it over, and the fact that it means you're basically just moving. It's somewhat useful for airborne creatures since they're less likely to have to deal with obstacles during their movement. And Toughness is of course really good on level 1, it just peters out really quick as both, HP and average damage per action scale insanely fast while Toughness still gives those same flat 3 HP.

Shot on the Run has the same problem as Spring Attack (it's slightly better though as ranged kiting can actually be occasionally sensible if the whole party is built around it; still, super-niché and not very good even then) and many of the skill feats (notable exceptions being anything dealing with Use Magic Device, and build-specific skills).

Oh, and Combat Casting. The Almost Strictly Worse Than Skill Focus: Concentration With No Frills-thingy.

[Togath]

Ride-by attack is pretty weak(if I remember correctly) as well.

[Eldariel]

Ride-by attack is pretty weak(if I remember correctly) as well.

It's fairly useful since Spirited Charge with Lance actually does sufficient damage for one attack to be sufficient. Actually, I'm running a LotR-based game right now and the Rohirrim completely wrecked the orcs they faced (alongside the party) thanks to Spirited Charge + Ride-By Attack being amazing.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Isn't ride by attack a bit wonky by RAW? Mobility bonus against movement related AoO can be relatively useful if you combine it with Robilars's Gambit. Move provoking an AoO while in RG and "negate" the bonus your enemy gets when he attacks you, true an extremely niche use; but it does allows you to take Elusive Target.

[Phelix-Mu]

I just decided in the last campaign to homebrew Dodge and Mobility into one feat. Gotta decide if I need to tweak Spring Attack or the rest of that feat tree, but at least it makes a melee scout build more plausible (sans reach weapon, ofc).

[erikun]

I'm looking more for feats I should fix in houserules.
Dodge sucks, and Mobility is nice but not worth spending two feats. A single 'Mobility' feat that covers both would be handy, though.

Most people don't like Endurance (I do) and Diehard probably isn't worth the two feats put into it, but once again, merging the two together into a single Endurance feat would make it more attractive. You could probably toss the Run feat in as well without a problem.

Greater Two-Weapon Fighting is pretty much useless. Unless you have managed to turn all weapons into touch attacks, you won't be hitting with the -10 attacks reliably and unless you have some serious modifiers, it won't matter much if you do. Plus, it is the third feat in an already expensive and suboptimal feat tree. A common recommendation is to just grant Perfect Two-Weapon Fighter (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#perfectTwoWeaponFighting) for the price of a single feat.


Actually, a lot of feats can be classified as not bad but just not worth the cost of picking up the feat. Check out the Improved Sunder / Bullrush / Disarm feats, which aren't really bad for what they do but requiring two feats and a 13+ ability score don't make them attractive. The +2/+2 feats (Alertness) are handy if you're building a character for a specific skill but mostly useless to almost everyone else. Great Fortitude / Lightning Reflexes / Iron Will feel like they should be significant, but their bonuses are underwhelming and don't give any benefit beyond that.

[navar100]

There are 79 Abjuration spells with DC entries other than "None" or "Harmless". Divination, by comparison, has 23.

In Core? I know Spell Compendium adds two.

Combat Casting does not suck. It's mostly for clerics and druids who like to cast spells while in the midst of bad guys. Wizards, sorcerers, and spellcasting focused clerics and druids like to stay out of the way so don't need it as much. True, one can always 5 ft step away, but 1) opponent might have reach and/or 2) the spell you want to cast is an attack spell so you want to remain next to your opponent. 3) There's also the occasional buff or remove affliction spell you want to cast on a party member, but you can't reach a safe square for some reason.

Combat Casting + Skill Focus (Concentration) + 14 Con + maxing ranks = never failing the defensive casting roll for your highest level spell even on a roll of 1 starting from level 4. That can be important. It is resource intensive, two feats and skill point allocation, but the freedom of never provoking an AoO for spellcasting is worth it. Humans can take both feats at level one to be done with it. Take whatever feats you want from then on. Bonus skill point goes to Concentration.

[Rubik]

Hmm, well I vote for Toughness. In my campaigns, I run with everyone gets 90% max hp, and classes with d4 automatically get full hp. Monsters also get 90% or max, as it suits a specific encounter, and I want the players to not die everytime I throw a curveball (my favorite pitch).

Even if we go with 50-60% standard, Toughness is only good for a couple classes at low levels. I have edited the rules for my game to remove Toughness and instead make Improved Toughness count as Toughness for PrC pre-reqs and such. At least Imp. Toughness scales (though not very well).

Along similar lines, I allow people that have invested something as valuable as a feat in any feat in the form of Alertness (+2 to two skills) to count those skills as class skills for all classes. Not a terribly unbalancing change, since its main long-term effect is to open up more PrC to esoteric class combinations, something I fully approve of. I also rule that races that get bonuses to skills count those skills as class skills; halfling wizards are good at climbing, so what?

A lot of stuff operating at the bottom of the power curve can be tweaked to improve usefulness. This isn't half as problematic as the top end of the power curve, the feats that are made of pure cheese and seem designed for exploitation.Ooh. I'd totally pick human in your game, because those extra skill ranks immediately turn a skill into a class skill. Choose a new one every level, and voila! 23 new class skills.

And it's not like humans were already the second best at everything ever (right after kobold), right?

[~Nye~]

This is more or less me nit-picking at the core rules, but I feel precise shot/point blank shot are kinda useless. Precise shot is only in the game because you get a awful penalty for firing into melee in the first place. Archery feats and options are already limited or are very weak so I think as a fix, rolling point blank shot and precise shot into the same feat would help a lot for the weakness of early game archery on top of the expensive consumption of feat selection. I know a fighter dip can resolve this issue with a 1 or 2 lvls, but I just think there would be no harm in doing this because it doesn't make you overpowered, it just makes your character capable. "fear my 1d4 shortbow dmg!!" *halfling shakes fist in rage*:smallfurious:

[TypoNinja]

This is more or less me nit-picking at the core rules, but I feel precise shot/point blank shot are kinda useless. Precise shot is only in the game because you get a awful penalty for firing into melee in the first place. Archery feats and options are already limited or are very weak so I think as a fix, rolling point blank shot and precise shot into the same feat would help a lot for the weakness of early game archery on top of the expensive consumption of feat selection. I know a fighter dip can resolve this issue with a 1 or 2 lvls, but I just think there would be no harm in doing this because it doesn't make you overpowered, it just makes your character capable. "fear my 1d4 shortbow dmg!!" *halfling shakes fist in rage*:smallfurious:

Some of the archery feat prerequisites are just silly too, you can tell they were just fishing for a feat tax. Point blank shot and Farshot as prerequisites. Basically thematically opposites, but there they are together!

[Darth Stabber]

Some of the archery feat prerequisites are just silly too, you can tell they were just fishing for a feat tax. Point blank shot and Farshot as prerequisites. Basically thematically opposites, but there they are together!

Depending on what they are prereqs for it actually make some kind of sense. You have to be able to use your bow (xbow, javelin, ect) in a variety of situations instead of just sniping, or just point blank.

[Kasbark]

I've improved dozens of feats in my house rules, i try to do mostly simple changes like these:

dodge (use the pathfinder version, usefull and no bookkeeping)
mobility (no prereqs anymore)
Toughness (use pathfinder version)
Endurance (also gives 1 HP at every even level)
Two-weapon fighting (one feat gives the entire chain)
Point blank shot (removed, no longer a prereq for anything)
Weapon focus (select a damage type, such as piercing instead of one weapon)

There are plenty of bad feats in DnD, lots of opportunity for improvement!

[Eldariel]

Some of the archery feat prerequisites are just silly too, you can tell they were just fishing for a feat tax. Point blank shot and Farshot as prerequisites. Basically thematically opposites, but there they are together!

It comes from AD&D Proficiencies; basically, PBS was an extra range category you got for specializing in bows so that's why it's the first feat in that chain.


Isn't ride by attack a bit wonky by RAW?

Yeah, since you can't move through enemy square (without like...Overruning?) and it kinda tells you to.

[Runestar]

I am going to question how you know that.

My guess is using some online spell filter. :smalltongue:

For skill focus, I would assume the player in question would apply it to a skill he is genuinely in favour of improving, so we shouldn't see scenarios like 'language' or 'basketweaving'.

As for feats like alertness, I would personally just consolidate them all into one universal feat which gave +2 to 2 skills.

The whole weapon focus/spec feat tree is pretty weak as well, it's silly when a feat in PHB2 does more than 2 PHB feats, and you get it earlier, and the only reason is to qualify for weapon supremacy (which isn't a very strong feat itself).

I think it is safe to say that unless you are limited solely to core, I wouldn't pick most of them, unless they were prereqs for better feats.

[TypoNinja]

It comes from AD&D Proficiencies; basically, PBS was an extra range category you got for specializing in bows so that's why it's the first feat in that chain.


That sorta makes sense I guess.

I despise precise shot. It implies a level of incompetence that shouldn't exist.

PC's are heroic, literally. As heros they are the best at what they do, and do awesome things. By 5th level you've got more personal wealth than some towns, can lay waste to armies of mundanes thanks to AoE magic, all kinds of superhuman feats are achievable.

Other Feats PC's can pick up include truly effective abilities, Meta-Magcis, item creation, raising an army, but the Archer, someone who's entire thing is shooting a bow really well, needs to blow a rare feat on learning how to not shoot his allies.

[mattie_p]

Skill Focus (Speak Language)

It is the definition of a useless feat.


Another contender might be Weapon Specialisation (Net), which gives you +2 on damage rolls for a weapon which does no damage.

None of the metamagic feats have pre-requisites, meaning a barbarian can be running around with the otherwise extremely useful Quicken Spell feat.

[Cranthis]

None of the metamagic feats have pre-requisites, meaning a barbarian can be running around with the otherwise extremely useful Quicken Spell feat.

Not true. A few of them have "Any other Metamagic" as a pre-req. But yes, still quite useless. I like that for multiclass builds, for games that start at level 1 though. It is quite nice.

I still stand by Improved initiative being the absolute best, and Skill focus Speak language/ Craft/Proffesion: Carbon Dioxide production.

[mattie_p]

Sorry, we are talking core, yes? None of the Core MM feats have pre-reqs. I should have specified, though.

[Eldariel]

That sorta makes sense I guess.

I despise precise shot. It implies a level of incompetence that shouldn't exist.

PC's are heroic, literally. As heros they are the best at what they do, and do awesome things. By 5th level you've got more personal wealth than some towns, can lay waste to armies of mundanes thanks to AoE magic, all kinds of superhuman feats are achievable.

Other Feats PC's can pick up include truly effective abilities, Meta-Magcis, item creation, raising an army, but the Archer, someone who's entire thing is shooting a bow really well, needs to blow a rare feat on learning how to not shoot his allies.

Everybody in D&D world uses the same rules tho; then it's necessary for feats like Precise Shot to exist. It also differentiates those who focus on archery (and can accurately shoot into melee) from those who just carry a bow and use it when the enemy cannot be reached with their sword (or those who focus on Rays as opposed to generalist Magi who have some Rays in their repertoire).

I think the bigger problem is feats are so rare and the archery tree is so bloated it just eats through character resources like no tomorrow.

[PetterTomBos]

Dodge. Others may very well be weaker, but I'd argue that dodge is the worst. Once per encounter (or more) of stating things, for +1 AC? Halting the game for a sentence every encounter til kingdom come for +1AC? Wouldn't you be better of doing other things?

I agree with the +2 to 2 skills thing, perhaps it should be part of skill focus (get +3 to one skill, +2 to to skills or +1 to 5 skills or something.) It's not like the +2/+2 skills would be overpowered if I could choose Handle Animal / spellcraft.

[nedz]

I always felt that the archery feats are expensive because archery is less risk than melee and so is less heroic. I could be wrong though — maybe its because you were meant to play fighters :smallsigh:

For the skill feats, I favour the feats making the skills always class skill. Though Skill Focus in a cross class skill is worth 6 skill points I suppose. Alertness is probably the best of the +2/+2 ones, but they are useful for characters who are skill based and who regularly make opposed rolls for those skills.
They are still not great choices though.

Why has no one mentioned the Two Weapon Defence tree ?

[mattie_p]

Let's see, core only game. I'll assume that means all other sourcebooks are out.

* Extra Turning. With DMM, extra turning is a huge feat. In a core-only game, turns are used for actually turning undead, which is pretty meh.

* Improved Turning. Turn as one level higher then you actually are. Yeah, that's awesome!

* Simple weapon proficiency. Become proficient with all simple weapons. Yes, this is a feat.

* Track. Wait, what? yup. If no one has the feat, does that mean the DM is going to let their plot go down in flames because you can't follow someone? I suspect not. The track DCs are ALWAYS what the plot requires.

[Eldariel]

I always felt that the archery feats are expensive because archery is less risk than melee and so is less heroic. I could be wrong though — maybe its because you were meant to play fighters :smallsigh:

I'm guessing it's just AD&D assumption that +1/+1 bonus is huge (which seems to be the intent in Core), so a feat like PBS was classified as superstrong.


Why has no one mentioned the Two Weapon Defence tree ?

Tree? There's only one in Core, and everybody forgot about it for obvious reasons :smalltongue:



* Track. Wait, what? yup. If no one has the feat, does that mean the DM is going to let their plot go down in flames because you can't follow someone? I suspect not. The track DCs are ALWAYS what the plot requires.

This seems really silly. I mean, is every game based around PCs succeeding certain skill checks and following railroad tracks? If PCs can't track they can't find the bandit encampment they'll have to find another way to locate it or give up the task and report they couldn't find it and failed.

If the PCs can't find the tomb, well they won't be looting said tomb. I mean, Track's only useless if you've got "quests" crammed down your throat and have no agency in exactly what you're doing. And even then, e.g. a lot of treasure can be missed without track. Or a lot of food.

[Zelkon]

Not core only, but I have naught the time nor resources to do a comprehensive overhaul.

[mattie_p]

This seems really silly. I mean, is every game based around PCs succeeding certain skill checks and following railroad tracks? If PCs can't track they can't find the bandit encampment they'll have to find another way to locate it or give up the task and report they couldn't find it and failed.

If the PCs can't find the tomb, well they won't be looting said tomb. I mean, Track's only useless if you've got "quests" crammed down your throat and have no agency in exactly what you're doing. And even then, e.g. a lot of treasure can be missed without track. Or a lot of food.

If they can't find it via track, they'll find it when the old man in the tavern tells them how to get there, or a local guide is introduced who takes them there, or a some other means, if it is essential for the DM's plot. For that matter, if you wander through the woods you might find the camp or cave anyway, if the railroad tracks are firm enough.

If it is a free-form campaign, where the DM is good enough to adapt to random actions of the PCs, track is unessential anyway - they'll just never take a job to track something/someone.

[Eldariel]

If they can't find it via track, they'll find it when the old man in the tavern tells them how to get there, or a local guide is introduced who takes them there, or a some other means, if it is essential for the DM's plot. For that matter, if you wander through the woods you might find the camp or cave anyway, if the railroad tracks are firm enough.

If it is a free-form campaign, where the DM is good enough to adapt to random actions of the PCs, track is unessential anyway - they'll just never take a job to track something/someone.

Point being, you will probably miss loot and have to put a whole lot more effort into finishing some quests without Track so to me it looks to be the definition of "useful" outside super closed railroad tracks.

Like, you go out in the wilderness to figure out why Orc activity in the area has increased substantially in the past; Track can be used to locate individual patrols and engage on your terms, to locate camps and figure if they are too strong for you to approach directly or to even find out where said Orcs are coming from and go actually solve the question at the source. Without it, you'd have to bumble around and try to interrogate the grunts you run into (who may or may not know anything) or apply at least 4th level spells (at which point mundane abilities become kinda irrelevant anyways).

That bandit group you beat up? Well, you won't be able to loot their hideout unless you can locate it.

[Yuki Akuma]

Yes but you still find the plot hook anyway. Feat slots are precious, so taking a tiny bit of extra effort (that will mostly occur off screen anyway) is better than wasting a feat on Track.

And if refusing to take a feat means you end up with less treasure... then your DM isn't following the WBL guidelines anyway and will just give you whatever treasure he feels like whenever he feels like it.

[nedz]

Track can be used pro-actively to set up an ambush, or to acquire information about creatures who live in an area, but it's unusual for anyone but a ranger to have it.

It can also be used to track a, now dead, wandering monster back to it's lair in order to recover it's treasure. You do have wandering monsters ? Well perhaps you don't ?

Are divination spells a plot feature ?
Is the school of divination just a plot feature too ?

What about that Long Sword ?
The parties melee characters are just plot features too, otherwise there would be no hand to hand combat encounters.

[Eldan]

I like track as a feat. When one of my players has it, I usually write two plot directions, one if the players chase the bad guy quickly (track, divination spell) and one if they have to ask around for a few hours first. There are advantages to going the first way. You catch the bad guy on the way, instead of back at his fortress. You shoot the lone survivor of an attack before he goes back to warn his friends. The enemies haven't healed up yet from the last encounter.

[Drelua]

Dodge. Others may very well be weaker, but I'd argue that dodge is the worst. Once per encounter (or more) of stating things, for +1 AC? Halting the game for a sentence every encounter til kingdom come for +1AC? Wouldn't you be better of doing other things?

I'm gonna have to agree with the first half of this, but I've never found the latter half to be a problem. I don't think I ever once remembered to pick a target for dodge with any one of my 3.5 characters. I'd always end up writing across the top of the character sheet I HAVE DODGE and I'd still somehow manage to forget.

Now time for a hopeless attempt to bring this thread in line with the OP's intent! I'm going through every core feat I see a problem with and recommending a solution. If I didn't list it, it either falls under another similar feat or I don't see a problem with it (which certainly doesn't mean there isn't one :smallsmile):. Spoilered for length and... relevance? :smallwink:

Acrobatic, Alertness etc: Makes the skills class skills, as someone else said. I had this same idea years ago, and I think it makes the feat actually useful. Maybe make it just one feat that can be used for any set of two skills, and can be taken multiple times, with the player selecting two different skills each time.
Combat Casting: Bonus applies to all casting related Concentration checks.
Combat Expertise: How about a 2:1 ratio?
Improved Feint: Well, feinting mostly sucks, I know that much. What I don't know is how to change this feat to fix that. Would making it a swift action be over-powered?
Whirlwind Attack: This feat seems powerful at first, but I think without huge reach WotC hugely overestimated it. I'd say just drop Wizards' Favourite Feat Prereqs, Dodge and Mobility, as well as a few other feat requirements and you're good.
Dodge: Always on, maybe a scaling bonus.
Mobility: 20% miss chance?
Spring Attack: Pounce?
Endurance: Is also Diehard.
Great Fortitude and friends: Gives a bonus equal to a poor save progression plus 1 or minimum 2?
Improved Turning: Bigger bonus?
Deflect Arrows: Miss chance vs. ranged?
Snatch Arrows: Works whenever missed due to Deflect Arrows.
Stunning Fist: Give players some reason they might take it as anything but a monk, maybe level/2 uses. Lower BAB prereq.
Martial Weapon Proficiency: Use weapon group rules.
Mounted... okay, I have no idea about anything to do with mounted combat. In five years of gaming, I have never played with anyone that used it. Help?
[B]Precise Shot: I just had this idea, and it might be terrible, but what if you could treat the target as flat-footed for the first shot in a round by using your ally as a distraction? If this works, should it be your first attack a) that round, b)against that target this encounter, or c) against that target this round? C could let rogues throw around a lot of damage, but I'm not sure if this is good or bad.
Shot on the Run: Full attack?
Quick Draw: Allow AoOs to be made while your weapons aren't out by drawing and attacking. Like an immediate action, but it doesn't take your swift.
Run: Give a 5 or 10 foot bonus to speed. It's not much, but just being faster than the majority of people can be all it takes if your'e chasing or being chased.
Skill Focus: Make it scale, like in Pathfinder.
Toughness: +1 hp/level, as I believe others have said.
Two-Weapon Fighting: Combine with Improved and Greater.
Two-Weapon Defense: I got nothing.
Weapon Focus Tree: Give some sort of other bonus, like +X vs. anything targeting your weapon, where X = (2*bonus to attack) + bonus to damage?
Item Creation Feats: Mostly fine, but I might lower some level pre-reqs, particularly ring.

Wow, that took longer than expected. Critiques and suggestions for other feats are welcome. Especially caster feats, since never play casters and don't really know which if those need fixing. If this goes well maybe we could compile it all later, and someone else can make into a nice pretty chart! :smallbiggrin:

[erikun]

I still stand by Improved initiative being the absolute best, and Skill focus Speak language/ Craft/Proffesion: Carbon Dioxide production.
I have always wanted to run a wizard or bard with Craft: Illusion or Perform: Illusion, myself. The skill probably won't amount to much of anything, if that, but it does sound like a fun idea.


* Track. Wait, what? yup. If no one has the feat, does that mean the DM is going to let their plot go down in flames because you can't follow someone? I suspect not. The track DCs are ALWAYS what the plot requires.
I cannot help but think that people are playing with some incredibly railroady DMs when this comment comes up. Why is being able to follow somebody when they have run away insignificant? Why is being able to find out where someone lives pointless?

Why is it that, every time this comes up, there is this expectation that everything will be handed to the PCs on a silver platter in pristine condition, even if they do nothing? I don't know about most DMs, but when I run a game, being able to sneak up to a stronghold without alerting anyone and scouting out various entryways will make upcoming fights and moving around much easier. Simply marching up to the front door after letting several guards escape and alert everyone is a quick way to get the whole stronghold attacking you in the entryway.

[Rubik]

Yeah, since you can't move through enemy square (without like...Overruning?) and it kinda tells you to.Overrune: When normal Explosive Runes aren't enough.

[Amnestic]

Does Spell Focus (Conjuration) have any use in Core besides as a feat tax for Augment Summoning?

[Rubik]

If you need access to the Track feat, get a wolf or some other animal that has it. Wasting a feat on it is wasting a feat.

I'd make Two Weapon Defense give you a 10% miss chance rather than a sucky AC bonus. (Of course, I'd do the same for shields, as well.)

I'd consolidate the TWF feats into one and grant a bonus on attack and damage rolls rather than just partially mitigating the horrific penalty that shouldn't exist to begin with.

There are lots of things I'd do if I were redesigning 3.5, but...there's just SO MUCH of it that needs doing.

[Flickerdart]

Does Spell Focus (Conjuration) have any use in Core besides as a feat tax for Augment Summoning?
Grease, Glitterdust, Web, Sepia Snake Sigil, Stinking Cloud, Cloudkill, Planar Binding line, Wall of Stone, Wall of Iron, Plane Shift, Incendiary Cloud, Trap the Soul.

[Ravens_cry]

Spell Focus (Abjuration)

Very few abjuration spells have a DC - Dismissal, Banishment, Prismatic Sphere.
Those are nice spells to have high DC's for though.
Dodge is just . . .annoying, both from a usefulness perspective (ooh, +1 to AC from one target) but also annoying from an actual meta-gameplay perspective, having to take the time to remember to do so.
Worse, it's a feat tax for several things that are pretty nifty, so, unlike some useless feats, it will actually be taken likely.

[Amnestic]

Grease, Glitterdust, Web, Sepia Snake Sigil, Stinking Cloud, Cloudkill, Planar Binding line, Wall of Stone, Wall of Iron, Plane Shift, Incendiary Cloud, Trap the Soul.

More than I thought! Fair enough, not as useless as I thought.

[Eldariel]

More than I thought! Fair enough, not as useless as I thought.

It's actually probably the best Spell Focus. It has a lot of really strong spells that offer saves and they target every saving throw. Glitterdust, Web, Grease, Stinking Cloud and Plane Shift are particular standouts. Wall of Stone is a great spell but the save component isn't very important.

[nedz]

Spell Focus (Conjuration) is not so good for Druids though, at least in core:
Fire Seeds, Storm of Vengeance, Wall of Stone, Wall of Thorns.
Druids do make good summoners but this is quite a feat tax.

[Big Fau]

I'm going to reiterate an earlier comment on Combat Casting. Skill Focus completely outclasses it in any situation (save for one) where you need to make a Concentration check.

Yes taking Combat Casting allows you to use the cast defensively action automatically 4 levels before your Concentration skill should normally allow, but it doesn't help against literally every other effect that requires a Concentration check, of which two can occur even while you are casting defensively (ongoing damage and being struck by an attack, thanks to readied actions).

[erikun]

I'm going to reiterate an earlier comment on Combat Casting. Skill Focus completely outclasses it in any situation (save for one) where you need to make a Concentration check.

Yes taking Combat Casting allows you to use the cast defensively action automatically 4 levels before your Concentration skill should normally allow, but it doesn't help against literally every other effect that requires a Concentration check, of which two can occur even while you are casting defensively (ongoing damage and being struck by an attack, thanks to readied actions).
There is one other feature of Combat Casting: It can stack with Skill Focus. Much like the applications of the skill, the times where it matters are slim. However, that +7 to checks against a readied attack can help the times you do find yourself taking a hit from a high-damage attack.

[Eldariel]

There is one other feature of Combat Casting: It can stack with Skill Focus. Much like the applications of the skill, the times where it matters are slim. However, that +7 to checks against a readied attack can help the times you do find yourself taking a hit from a high-damage attack.

Combat Casting doesn't apply to checks against readied actions (or the damage you take from a readied attack). It's only Defensive Casting, Casting While Grappled and Casting While Pinned. That's why the feat is so awful.

Most of the time you can avoid even having to defensively cast by 5' stepping, tumbling and correctly positioning anyways on the low levels. And in Grapple or Pin, the check is really your smallest worry (though of course, it's key if you do have something appropriate available; but Dimension Door is really the first good anti-grapple spell and that's so late the check isn't really difficult anymore).


EDIT: By the time you get +23 Concentration, Combat Casting is 100% useless (outside defensively casting epic spells I guess, requires 1 more point). And that's actually stretching it 'cause the DC to defensively cast a 9th level spell is 24, so you need +23 only by level 17.

Once you hit +19 Combat Casting is more or less useless since it's unlikely you'll be quite casting high enough level spells to make it useful yet, and you autohit all the flat DCs affected by Combat Casting at that point.

It's worth noting items exist that boost Concentration, among other things. Those make the breakoff point even earlier (not to even mention Pathfinder where you get it based off your casting stat).

[Amphetryon]

Spell Focus (Conjuration) is not so good for Druids though, at least in core:
Fire Seeds, Storm of Vengeance, Wall of Stone, Wall of Thorns.
Druids do make good summoners but this is quite a feat tax.

It would feel like a worse Feat tax if the Druids were hard-pressed for Feats to do their job(s) effectively. Since that's not the case and Druids need so little support from Feats to shine, it's not especially painful, IMO.

[Draz74]

Combat Casting is pretty bad, but ... short of feats that are actually useless, I'm going to vote for Improved Overrun as "worst in Core." I mean, have you ever seen anyone make an Overrun attempt? And if you have, should they have? Or would a bull rush or Tumble check or something have been stronger, even with the Improved Overrun feat? Yuk. :smallyuk:

Even Boulder Roll, the Tome of Battle maneuver that is a much better Overrun compared with Improved Overrun, is a weak maneuver. (So no one ever takes it, and even if they got it for free, it would seldom be worth using.)

[Eldariel]

Combat Casting is pretty bad, but ... short of feats that are actually useless, I'm going to vote for Improved Overrun as "worst in Core." I mean, have you ever seen anyone make an Overrun attempt? And if you have, should they have? Or would a bull rush or Tumble check or something have been stronger, even with the Improved Overrun feat? Yuk. :smallyuk:

Well, Overrun is somewhat useful for big monsters to get past the meatshields to rip up the threats (casters). Of course, the stupid part is you can't avoid the AoO (and no, Mobility does not help against it of course) with the Improved-feat, which makes the maneuver vastly less useful. And, y'know, the whole "running at somebody requires a standard action and deals no damage unless you're being ridden by somebody with the Trample-feat" part.

Okay, let me rephrase: Overrun would be useful if the rules about it weren't so senseless. But yeah, Improved Overrun is pretty awful.

[juicycaboose]

Combat Expertise: How about a 2:1 ratio?


I feel like combat expertise doesn't need a boost as large as that, it's quite useful as it is.
Although I do think it's silly that it's capped at 6, I would personally probably roll Combat Expertise and Improved Combat Expertise into one feat and just have it capped at the characters BAB.



Quick Draw: Allow AoOs to be made while your weapons aren't out by drawing and attacking. Like an immediate action, but it doesn't take your swift.


Quick Draw is another one that i feel shouldn't really be in a list of the "worst feats in core" sure it's not the best feat you could choose but it can still be pretty useful, drawing/sheathing a weapon as a free action is great in my book.

[Draz74]

Okay, let me rephrase: Overrun would be useful if the rules about it weren't so senseless. But yeah, Improved Overrun is pretty awful.

I knew you'd see it my way eventually. :smallamused:

Incidentally, in my own system I'm having a bit of a quandary with how the rules should work for when a bigger creature just plain attempts to run through a smaller creature's space, finesse be damned. It's really hard to avoid the consequences being overpowering, without making it so that it's unrealistically easy for a human to stop a charging horse (or even elephant).

[Eldariel]

I knew you'd see it my way eventually. :smallamused:

Incidentally, in my own system I'm having a bit of a quandary with how the rules should work for when a bigger creature just plain attempts to run through a smaller creature's space, finesse be damned. It's really hard to avoid the consequences being overpowering, without making it so that it's unrealistically easy for a human to stop a charging horse (or even elephant).

Why not have it be overpowering? Big creatures are supposed to have a fairly significant physical advantage over smaller creatures. 3.5 really has fairly good rules for it aside from the actions used.

The way I run it in my games depends on the size difference. If the creature is big enough to actually trample over the other participant (difference being 2+ size categories):
- AoO
- Reflex to dodge if desired
- Strength-check with size categories; if trampler wins, the trampled is knocked prone and dealt Natural Weapon damage (Hoof if applicable, Slam if not; if it has neither, 1d6 medium base with strength and size as modifiers). Obviously you can't trample someone to ground while airborne.

It's worth noting that some creatures as written do have proper Trample (e.g. Elephant) which works fairly similarly. I also use similar rules if something simply bodydrops or tries to step on its enemies (I've had giants do this for instance).

One size category larger and equally large creatures can try to knock their opponents aside with strength checks as a part of their movement to toss enemies aside (of course larger creatures can too but they usually don't need to).

[Spuddles]

Ooh. I'd totally pick human in your game, because those extra skill ranks immediately turn a skill into a class skill. Choose a new one every level, and voila! 23 new class skills.

And it's not like humans were already the second best at everything ever (right after kobold), right?

Cool trick. Other than wasting skill points, what are you going to achieve?


This is more or less me nit-picking at the core rules, but I feel precise shot/point blank shot are kinda useless. Precise shot is only in the game because you get a awful penalty for firing into melee in the first place. Archery feats and options are already limited or are very weak so I think as a fix, rolling point blank shot and precise shot into the same feat would help a lot for the weakness of early game archery on top of the expensive consumption of feat selection. I know a fighter dip can resolve this issue with a 1 or 2 lvls, but I just think there would be no harm in doing this because it doesn't make you overpowered, it just makes your character capable. "fear my 1d4 shortbow dmg!!" *halfling shakes fist in rage*:smallfurious:

I've been playing in games where at least one player is archery spec for like a year and a half. One the one hand, I feel like archery gets hosed for all the reasons you outlined. Buy kiting is also super powerful when the rest of the party goes along with it. Like, insanely powerful at low levels. At mid levels your archery damage becomes dependent on full attacks and younhave to sit and shoot until greater many shot comes online.

With kiting, you can get through encounters with very few resources lost, esp. considering the preponderance of melee bruisers in the monster manual.

[Teron]

I feel like combat expertise doesn't need a boost as large as that, it's quite useful as it is.
Although I do think it's silly that it's capped at 6, I would personally probably roll Combat Expertise and Improved Combat Expertise into one feat and just have it capped at the characters BAB.
It's capped at 5.


Quick Draw is another one that i feel shouldn't really be in a list of the "worst feats in core" sure it's not the best feat you could choose but it can still be pretty useful, drawing/sheathing a weapon as a free action is great in my book.
Quick Draw doesn't let you sheathe as a free action, and anyone with at least +1 BAB can draw a weapon as a free action while moving, making Quick Draw extremely situational unless you use throwing weapons.

[nedz]

It would feel like a worse Feat tax if the Druids were hard-pressed for Feats to do their job(s) effectively. Since that's not the case and Druids need so little support from Feats to shine, it's not especially painful, IMO.

You make a fair point but the benefits of the feat itself are marginal — which is the question asked.

[TypoNinja]

Lets be honest, aside from the obvious item creation and meta-magic goodies, and the really useful stuff like power attack, almost all core feats are pretty lackluster compared to the rest of the game.

And its all the fighters fault. He gets lots of feats, so most feats that aren't aimed at casters suck because melee can't have nice things. (terrible game design decision, lets make a class who's whole basis is feats! Lets also make sure all the feats SUCK!) Feat tax chains like Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, were clearly made with the idea that Fighters can spare feats to blow paying the tax.

[Rubik]

Cool trick. Other than wasting skill points, what are you going to achieve?I play high-Int characters, and the Int-SAD classes (aside from factotum) tend to have horrible skill lists.

[Draz74]

Why not have it be overpowering?

Mostly because I want big creatures (dragons, for example) to sometimes make normal attacks rather than overrunning. :smallsmile: So if overrunning is too good, it will take over their strategy.

[Eldariel]

Mostly because I want big creatures (dragons, for example) to sometimes make normal attacks rather than overrunning. :smallsmile: So if overrunning is too good, it will take over their strategy.

Well, it'll never match full attack in terms of damage or come even close. Really, the primary function of overrunning is to get past some people and to knock them prone.

[ericgrau]

It depends what you mean. Every single feat that isn't a pre-requisite for splatbook feats becomes obsolete outside of core. And those that are pre-requisites are only useful if you take the feats they are required for. Including power attack. Then all of the below is moot and you shouldn't waste your time. Just tell people "don't bother with core feats unless you need them for non-core builds" and bam done.

If we put core on an island and ignore other books, or if the DM curbs any power creep in other books, then every single feat can be useful but some are much more situational than others. Even toughness and the skill feats can be useful in the right builds. The worst offenders are probably the proficiency feats where a dip is usually better, but that might not always be the case.

What the core feats really need are to be better reorganized and explained what situations they are useful in. They need many more categories than 3; heck even having a "general" category is horrible. The proficiency feats (except exotic) are such extreme corner cases that I think they may be abolished altogether and I doubt 99.5% of builds will suffer, but I would keep the rest. The way it is now the designers throw everything at you in a big list and let the reader figure out when to use what. Once the feats are better categorized and explained I think that will resolve most issues. Besides explaining when to use what, allowing retraining may also help some feats that are more useful at lower levels than later levels. That way they aren't restricted to short campaigns.

I believe Mike Mearls complained about this being one of the big mistakes in 3.5 in general which creates a steep learning curve and rewards veterans. A steep learning curve is not something you should have in a social game like D&D. Only 1v1 tournaments if anything. This issue is not to be confused with intentionally underpowered options which also appears in some other games. But D&D is flexible enough where there are in fact gaming groups where everybody says "Uh oh, look where we are, we better all take skill focus (swim)."

[Eldariel]

But if you want to bring in splatbooks all this is moot and core is only for pre-requisites, so I wouldn't even bother "rebalancing" anything. Just tell players don't take any core feats they don't need for their other feats and don't waste your time guessing on what may or may not actually be fair.

Well, there are a few exceptions:
- Power Attack is a good feat as a standalone to all caster warrior hybrids; it's easy to pump To Hit and this enables even superior Power Attacking than in core.
- Craft feats, especially Wondrous Items and Arms & Armor are always great with the time to craft, or Dedicated Wrights.
- Leadership is obviously always a no-brainer.
- Improved Familiar remains very strong.
- Rapid Shot remains a must for any archer.
- Two-Weapon Fighting feats remain decent in certain contexts (tho of course, GTWF and ITWF remain horrible feat taxes).
- Natural Spell obviously remains an autopick.
- EWP: Spiked Chain remains the best way to cover both ranges with an affordable weapon to enhance.
- Improved Trip remains as good as ever.
- Combat Reflexes remains a core feat for e.g. trippers (in general, controllers).
- Improved Initiative is as occasionally worthwhile in and out of Core.
- Extra Turning obviously fuels plenty of Divine feats without being necessarily a prerequisite.
- Extend Spell and Quicken Spell are still the best at what they do.
- Spirited Charge is still amazing for chargers.
- Flyby Attack is, and will always remain, awesome.
- Ability Focus is worth it in a few cases.
- Multiattack is a great feat whenever applicable.
- Augment Summoning is worth it for summoners in and out of Core.

[ericgrau]

Some can still be useful depending on the level of power creep; it isn't usually 100% "all core is good" or 100% "all core is useless except with a non-core combo". Some might not be strictly prerequisites but still part of a non-core combo so it's not much different. Ya it is true most groups don't optimize to the extreme, and that's great, but it shows how hard it would be to provide a blanket rebalancing solution when it all depends who you play with.

I think there are magic items to replace a lot of the crafting feats, but it's been a while since I heard those tricks so I don't remember.

[Venger]

Buy kiting is also super powerful when the rest of the party goes along with it. Like, insanely powerful at low levels. At mid levels your archery damage becomes dependent on full attacks and younhave to sit and shoot until greater many shot comes online.

With kiting, you can get through encounters with very few resources lost, esp. considering the preponderance of melee bruisers in the monster manual.

what is "buy kiting" ?

[Rubik]

what is "buy kiting" ?I believe he meant "But kiting". In this case, "kiting" being, staying out of reach while killing your opponent.

[Cranthis]

I believe he meant "But kiting". In this case, "kiting" being, staying out of reach while killing your opponent.

It usually involves a lot of "Move, Shoot. Next turn. Move, Shoot. ETC"

[juicycaboose]

It's capped at 5.


Quick Draw doesn't let you sheathe as a free action, and anyone with at least +1 BAB can draw a weapon as a free action while moving, making Quick Draw extremely situational unless you use throwing weapons.

Yeah my bad, capped at 5*

And well dang, I thought quick draw allowed you to stow a weapon as a free action, it's not nearly as good as i thought it was :(

[Darth Stabber]

So here's a thought.

Make all of the +2/+2 feats into one feat. You choose the two skills it applies to, and it counts as skill focus in those two skill for the purpose of prerequisites. Makes the old core staple of wizard7/loremaster8/archmage5 have one less feat tax since you can roll skillfocus (know:any) and skillfocus(spellcraft) into one feat.

This is basically just a feat taxcut, but bards might be happy with concentration+perform.

That's my campaign platform: a feat taxcut that will get this action economy moving.

Such a bad joke

[Draz74]

This is basically just a feat taxcut, but bards might be happy with concentration+perform.

Eh, in Core, maybe. Bards who have access to Complete Mage don't bother with Concentration anyway. :smallcool:

[Drelua]

I feel like combat expertise doesn't need a boost as large as that, it's quite useful as it is.
Although I do think it's silly that it's capped at 6, I would personally probably roll Combat Expertise and Improved Combat Expertise into one feat and just have it capped at the characters BAB.

Quick Draw is another one that i feel shouldn't really be in a list of the "worst feats in core" sure it's not the best feat you could choose but it can still be pretty useful, drawing/sheathing a weapon as a free action is great in my book.

You're probably right about Combat Expertise, I thought that might be overkill. Still, it seems fairly weak. Hitting someone now always seems like something you should focus on over not getting hit later; I mean, if you do it right, there might not be a later, at least not for whoever you're killing. Still, it may be situational, but I guess maybe it doesn't really need a buff.

As for Quick Draw, I certainly don't consider it one of the worst feats in core, I was just trying to suggest a fix for all of the ones I thought could use an improvement.


...I'm going to vote for Improved Overrun as "worst in Core." I mean, have you ever seen anyone make an Overrun attempt? And if you have, should they have?

In answer to you questions; yes, actually and not a chance in Baator, respectively. I still don't know why they thought it was a good idea. See, there were these goblins on the other side of the door trying to get through to kill us, and I convinced them the door was angry, making a successful intimidate check. Then we smashed the door down and charged them, which is when everyone else decided 'we should overrun them!' So they did, and then... attacked them from the other side. I refused on principle.

So, why did my party overrun the goblins? To get to the other side.:smallbiggrin: I'm a terrible person, I know.

[Gwendol]

Improved overrun is quite useless unless you happen to be a mount.

Quick draw isn't bad, it's just not for everyone. Same can be said for Run and Endurance: not getting fatigued can be very useful at times.

I really dislike dodge, and the rest of that feat tree: instead of making it a flat +1 bonus to AC, you need to actively declare the "target" of your dodge, which means it is forgotten a lot of the time. Mobility and spring attack aren't that much better due to the minor bonuses they confer, and the huge tax feat eventually expended. Better get extra movement from other sources and spend feats on something else.

Power attack is ok, but it's not for everyone either. At least it doesn't feel like a tax when considering the feats it is a pre-requisite for: cleave, imp bull rush & sunder, etc. Essentially all the good fighter feats are made available from power attack (with the exception of improved trip and combat reflexes).

[Darth Stabber]

Power attack is ok, but it's not for everyone either. At least it doesn't feel like a tax when considering the feats it is a pre-requisite for: cleave, imp bull rush & sunder, etc. Essentially all the good fighter feats are made available from power attack (with the exception of improved trip and combat reflexes).

>Implying there is more than one good fighter feat in core with Power attack as a prerequisite

I'll give you cleave, but that's it. None of the others are worth didley in core. Tripping, archery, and twf, these are the reasonably strong choices in core, and they're not that good (tripping's okay, especially if you open it up to srd and grab knockdown and/or standstill)

[Runestar]

The only use I can think of for Overrun is if a tanky monster wants to quickly make a beeline to get to the wizard at the back, and there is a fighter in the way. Never came up in my games.

[Dusk Eclipse]

To fix the +2/+2 feats I make them add the skills to the character skill list, a better benefit and makes entering prestige classes with weird skill requisites a little easier.

[Gwendol]

>Implying there is more than one good fighter feat in core with Power attack as a prerequisite

I'll give you cleave, but that's it. None of the others are worth didley in core. Tripping, archery, and twf, these are the reasonably strong choices in core, and they're not that good (tripping's okay, especially if you open it up to srd and grab knockdown and/or standstill)

Imp bull rush and imp sunder aren't bad choices for the right builds, even in core. Sunder perhaps less so than bull rush, since you often can sunder using a reach weapon with impunity.

[Darth Stabber]

Imp bull rush and imp sunder aren't bad choices for the right builds, even in core. Sunder perhaps less so than bull rush, since you often can sunder using a reach weapon destroy your loot with impunity.

Fixed that for you.

Also note !bad=/=good.

[Togo]

I've found myself using most of the core feats in various builds. Even endurance and improved overrun, although the latter was an unusual build.

The +2/+2 ones were the least useful - the bonus isn't large enough to make a noticeable difference in game to justify the labels they give it. +2 to listen and +2 to spot isn't enough to make you alert in 3.5.

Archery and thrown weapons can be deadly - you just have to stack the damage right, and make sure the party is protecting you so that you don't have to move. Full attacking every turn isn't something most melee types can do.

The one I never, ever found a single use for, was brew potion.

[Darth Stabber]

Full attacking every turn isn't something most melee types can do.

Spirit lion totem barbarian
cleric dip +travel devotion
Psionic lion's charge
100 other things.

You are missing most of the good non-ToB builds, it's almost necessary. Infact it's necessary for everything but trippers, and trippers still like having it. The ability to move and full attack requires some finagling, but it is always included if possible.

[navar100]

I'm going to reiterate an earlier comment on Combat Casting. Skill Focus completely outclasses it in any situation (save for one) where you need to make a Concentration check.

Yes taking Combat Casting allows you to use the cast defensively action automatically 4 levels before your Concentration skill should normally allow, but it doesn't help against literally every other effect that requires a Concentration check, of which two can occur even while you are casting defensively (ongoing damage and being struck by an attack, thanks to readied actions).

Again, it's for spellcasters who like to be in the midst of bad guys a lot - warrior-focused clerics and druids. Core only it's not worth it for Paladin since he has few spells anyway. Outside of Core he takes Battle Blessing. Rangers use bows or are busy with two-weapon fighting to be bothered with spellcasting in melee.

More often than not if you're not casting defensively you don't really ever need to make Concentration checks except maybe once in a blue moon. However, if for your particular game you are needing to make Concentration checks often enough despite not using it for defensive casting then of course Skill Focus will be a good help and the one to take.

Combat Casting is not for everyone. A feat does not need to be for everyone to not suck. Call it a niche feat, if you want, but it helps a lot for that niche.

[Talderas]

Combat Casting is pretty bad, but ... short of feats that are actually useless, I'm going to vote for Improved Overrun as "worst in Core." I mean, have you ever seen anyone make an Overrun attempt? And if you have, should they have? Or would a bull rush or Tumble check or something have been stronger, even with the Improved Overrun feat? Yuk. :smallyuk:

Yes. I have seen an NPC bard make an overrun attempt. That was after using a variant that let him drop a -10 penalty to like everything on the character he was overrunning and he was doing it to get OUT of the building he was trapped. If he had Improved Overrun, he would have succeeded. Of course if he didn't roll poorly (3) and the player didn't roll really good (18) he would have also succeeded.

[Draz74]

The one I never, ever found a single use for, was brew potion.
... OK, good point. That might qualify as a worse feat than Combat Casting, Run, or (gasp) Improved Overrun. Since every single potion in 3.5e ever is waaaay overpriced for what it does.

EDIT: Except the spell Nightstalker's Transformation is awesome enough that at high levels, it might be worth using a 300-gp material component on. So Potions of Cat's Grace aren't worthless. Same with that one SpC spell that uses an Oil of Magic Weapon as a material component; I think it was Arrow of Bone? Of course, even in these cases, it's better to use the (Drawmij's) Quick Potion spell than to take the Brew Potion feat.


Combat Casting is not for everyone. A feat does not need to be for everyone to not suck. Call it a niche feat, if you want, but it helps a lot for that niche.

It's a very niche feat in Core-only games. (I'd rather take Skill Focus (Concentration) unless it's a prerequisite.)

It is, however, even worse in non-Core. By far. For at least three reasons:

There are a lot more good uses for Concentration checks than just defensive casting. (Diamond Mind, anyone? Even full casters like to spend 3k gp on an item that lets them replace a Fort or Ref save 1/encounter with a Concentration check.)
If you REALLY need it as a prerequisite, there are ways you should try to get it as a bonus feat, e.g. Duskblade 2.
People already say Skill Focus (Concentration) is better than Combat Casting overall, if it's not a prerequisite. But Skill Focus and Combat Casting are BOTH strictly inferior to Shape Soulmeld (Vitality Belt).

[Gwendol]

Fixed that for you.

Also note !bad=/=good.

Bah! Plenty of stuff can be sundered that is more or less worthless in gold, but useful to break.

[Rubik]

Bah! Plenty of stuff can be sundered that is more or less worthless in gold, but useful to break.See: spell component pouches, holy symbols, locked gauntlets...

[Darth Stabber]

Bah! Plenty of stuff can be sundered that is more or less worthless in gold, but useful to break.

But you rarely know which is which until it's broken.

[LibraryOgre]

I feel like combat expertise doesn't need a boost as large as that, it's quite useful as it is.
Although I do think it's silly that it's capped at 6, I would personally probably roll Combat Expertise and Improved Combat Expertise into one feat and just have it capped at the characters BAB.


I would have the 2:1 for Combat Expertise be a feature of fighting Sword and Board, like Power Attack gets a bonus if you're fighting two-handed.

[Darth Stabber]

See: spell component pouches, holy symbols, locked gauntlets...

-Spell component pouch: never actually seen a gm care about those, but I suppose if people care about that sort thing sure. Are you really worried about a wizard's AoO, 1d4 if the poor bugger can even hit your ac (half BAB, little to no bonus from equipment and no strength) just take it like a man, that goes for any other wizard equipment

-holy symbol: valid concern, and taking a feat to break holy symbols and other clerical equipment seems way to narrow.

-locked gauntlet: breakable sure, but why? Are you going to use improved disarm too?

[ericgrau]

I'm going to agree with excessive fear of loss there. It's so good to knock a foe out of the fight it's worth the risk. Especially if the campaign has any challenge at all and you have to pay for resurrections. Besides special situational items, magic weapons tend to take more than 1 hit to break and they are masterwork-looking. If it looks nice and/or survives blow #1 that's a pretty good indication to hold off. Even a +1 is +10 hp and +2 hardness. Mundane weapons all go down in 1 hit except sometimes metal hafted two handed pole arms if you roll low. If you limit yourself to 27 damage you should be in pretty good shape on almost anything.

It isn't just for any one thing, the point of the non-standard sunder targets is probably to say that you can sunder something regardless of the foe. Locked gauntlets would be a reason why you can't always disarm instead, besides other drawbacks. It is true that you should go after easy targets even without the feat.

[Gwendol]

Well, since sundering is applicable to holy symbols, belt pouches, potion belts and content (say, acid, oil, alchemist fire, tanglefoot bags, etc) in addition to mundane weapons, it can well be worth the feat. It depends ultimately on the character and the game, but it's far from useless.

[Darth Stabber]

Well, since sundering is applicable to holy symbols, belt pouches, potion belts and content (say, acid, oil, alchemist fire, tanglefoot bags, etc) in addition to mundane weapons, it can well be worth the feat. It depends ultimately on the character and the game, but it's far from useless.

I still feel that better off taking generally applicable feats and just accepting the AoO as the cost of doing business.

[Eldariel]

Again, it's for spellcasters who like to be in the midst of bad guys a lot - warrior-focused clerics and druids. Core only it's not worth it for Paladin since he has few spells anyway. Outside of Core he takes Battle Blessing. Rangers use bows or are busy with two-weapon fighting to be bothered with spellcasting in melee.

More often than not if you're not casting defensively you don't really ever need to make Concentration checks except maybe once in a blue moon. However, if for your particular game you are needing to make Concentration checks often enough despite not using it for defensive casting then of course Skill Focus will be a good help and the one to take.

Combat Casting is not for everyone. A feat does not need to be for everyone to not suck. Call it a niche feat, if you want, but it helps a lot for that niche.

It's rarely worth it for Clerics; if you're casting a spell that provokes (e.g. a non-quickened spell) you're not attacking that turn and thus can 5' step back with impunity unless you're surrounded or something. Touch spells are really the only exception and they come so late you don't need Combat Casting for them.

Besides, Combat Casting doesn't help with readied actions; you need Skill Focus: Concentration for those (and on-going spells). Combat Casting is too niché; even Druids and Clerics should almost never bother with it without retraining. With retraining, Clerics could pick it for the first 8 or so levels; Druids tend to get good enough Con from Wildshape to make it unnecessary by the time they care about melee.

[Darth Stabber]

Druids tend to get good enough Con from Wildshape to make it unnecessary by the time they care about melee.

While I am not endorsing combat casting, I will say, in all fairness, that a druids 3/4bab and d8 hd, and fair weapon selection may have it into melee combat before it gains wildshape, or before it can be wildshaped constantly. They have better weapons than a cleric balanced by a likely lower ac, they are more than capable of doing it, and it would be unreasonable to expect a low level druid to get involved in blastomancy (low level druid blasto isn't all that good.)

[Eldariel]

While I am not endorsing combat casting, I will say, in all fairness, that a druids 3/4bab and d8 hd, and fair weapon selection may have it into melee combat before it gains wildshape, or before it can be wildshaped constantly. They have better weapons than a cleric balanced by a likely lower ac, they are more than capable of doing it, and it would be unreasonable to expect a low level druid to get involved in blastomancy (low level druid blasto isn't all that good.)

That's not possible without fairly high ability scores though; from what I've seen, the Druid with sufficient Strength and Dex to not be a liability in melee combat pre-Wildshape is fairly rare.

[Gwendol]

I still feel that better off taking generally applicable feats and just accepting the AoO as the cost of doing business.

Well, you avoid the AoO and get +4 to the roll. But sure, if tactical feats are off the table, sundering alone will be a bit of a corner case.

[TuggyNE]

Spirit lion totem barbarian
cleric dip +travel devotion
Psionic lion's charge
100 other things.

You are missing most of the good non-ToB builds, it's almost necessary. Infact it's necessary for everything but trippers, and trippers still like having it. The ability to move and full attack requires some finagling, but it is always included if possible.

None of that is core, though, except SRD-core in some cases.

[SiuiS]

Skill Focus (Speak Language)

It is the definition of a useless feat.

It is now my life's goal to find a game to use this and make it work.

[LibraryOgre]

It is now my life's goal to find a game to use this and make it work.

Can be useful in Pathfinder, where it's a generic "linguistics" skill.

[Togo]

Spirit lion totem barbarian
cleric dip +travel devotion
Psionic lion's charge
100 other things.

You are missing most of the good non-ToB builds, it's almost necessary. Infact it's necessary for everything but trippers, and trippers still like having it. The ability to move and full attack requires some finagling, but it is always included if possible.

And if it's not possible, or possible but not easy, then archery has an advantage. A single move action may not be enough to get you into contact with your desired opponent in any case. Different things are useful in different games. Given that I've played with archers who can polish off CR+2 encounters simply by full attacking each round and getting the rest of the party to defend them, I'm not inclined to call them useless.

[Flickerdart]

Archery can be really good, and melee can be really good, but it takes a lot more work to get archery to be good than it does to grab Spirit Lion Totem and Shock Trooper.

[navar100]

It's rarely worth it for Clerics; if you're casting a spell that provokes (e.g. a non-quickened spell) you're not attacking that turn and thus can 5' step back with impunity unless you're surrounded or something. Touch spells are really the only exception and they come so late you don't need Combat Casting for them.

Besides, Combat Casting doesn't help with readied actions; you need Skill Focus: Concentration for those (and on-going spells). Combat Casting is too niché; even Druids and Clerics should almost never bother with it without retraining. With retraining, Clerics could pick it for the first 8 or so levels; Druids tend to get good enough Con from Wildshape to make it unnecessary by the time they care about melee.

Clerics have lots of touch spells - attacks, buffs, and remove afflictions. Often times they want to cast them on others, such as enemies for attack and warrior party members engaged in battle for buffs and remove afflictions. You can't always buff before combat. Such clerics will be in threatened areas. 5 ft step back is not always an option. Sometimes you need to move first to get to the person you want to cast the spell on. Terrain, dungeons features, where everyone is sometimes force you into a threatened square when casting the spell. Same thing for druids using wild shape and Natural Spell, even wanting to cast a buff spell on their Animal Companion. Freedom of never risking provoking no matter where you are in the battlefield is a lot of help.

[Eldariel]

Clerics have lots of touch spells - attacks, buffs, and remove afflictions. Often times they want to cast them on others, such as enemies for attack and warrior party members engaged in battle for buffs and remove afflictions. You can't always buff before combat. Such clerics will be in threatened areas. 5 ft step back is not always an option. Sometimes you need to move first to get to the person you want to cast the spell on. Terrain, dungeons features, where everyone is sometimes force you into a threatened square when casting the spell. Same thing for druids using wild shape and Natural Spell, even wanting to cast a buff spell on their Animal Companion. Freedom of never risking provoking no matter where you are in the battlefield is a lot of help.

But the +1 extra from Combat Casting is very unlikely to be applied often enough to be nearly as good as Skill Focus: Concentration and you shouldn't need both to make the checks vast majority of the time. Like all feats it improves something but if that something comes up rarely enough, it's not worthwhile compared to other feats even on the archetype most likely to use it.

[TypoNinja]

But the +1 extra from Combat Casting is very unlikely to be applied often enough to be nearly as good as Skill Focus: Concentration and you shouldn't need both to make the checks vast majority of the time. Like all feats it improves something but if that something comes up rarely enough, it's not worthwhile compared to other feats even on the archetype most likely to use it.

Its been my experience that at all but the lowest levels concentration checks are all but impossible to fail as long as you keep your skill ranks maxed out, I don't think I'd ever contemplate blowing a precious feat on a bonus to that check.

[Ravens_cry]

It's much more important in Pathfinder, where feats are more common, and Concentration is not a skill any more and so is harder to pump.

[Eldariel]

It's much more important in Pathfinder, where feats are more common, and Concentration is not a skill any more and so is harder to pump.

You get it off casting stat tho and Humans & Half-Elves have +2 to any stat so unless you're playing some interesting race caster, you'll have an obscene Concentration modifier from level 1.

[Darth Stabber]

Combat casting is still not as stupid as combat manifestation.

[Spuddles]

Archery can be really good, and melee can be really good, but it takes a lot more work to get archery to be good than it does to grab Spirit Lion Totem and Shock Trooper.

In my experience, the value of archery is not losing resources to getting mauled, poisoned, diseased, or dead. It's more noticeable at low levels, of course.

Shock Trooper kills you really fast, especially if the enemy has reach.

[Deepbluediver]

Toughness and the +2/+2 skills feats are generally among those called out as worst.

Toughness I understand (and I even brewed a fix for) but I've never quite gotten why people hate the +2/+2 to skills or +2 to saves feats quite so much. Are they considered to be "bad" because the bonus is too small or because the feat itself is bland and boring?

If both, what would you consider more important to fix?

[Flickerdart]

Toughness I understand (and I even brewed a fix for) but I've never quite gotten why people hate the +2/+2 to skills or +2 to saves feats quite so much. Are they considered to be "bad" because the bonus is too small or because the feat itself is bland and boring?

If both, what would you consider more important to fix?
A character only ever gets 6 feats ever, without sources of bonus feats. Spending one of those 6 feats on something that is matched in effectiveness by two 50gp items is a very inefficient use of such a limited resource.

[Draz74]

Toughness I understand (and I even brewed a fix for) but I've never quite gotten why people hate the +2/+2 to skills or +2 to saves feats quite so much. Are they considered to be "bad" because the bonus is too small or because the feat itself is bland and boring?

If both, what would you consider more important to fix?


A character only ever gets 6 feats ever, without sources of bonus feats. Spending one of those 6 feats on something that is matched in effectiveness by two 50gp items is a very inefficient use of such a limited resource.

... but yes, they're also boring. And you have to fix both problems if you want me to actually have my characters take them. :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

It is now my life's goal to find a game to use this and make it work.

So your life's goal is to find a game with a specific subset of house-rules? :smallconfused:

[Darth Stabber]

Toughness I understand (and I even brewed a fix for) but I've never quite gotten why people hate the +2/+2 to skills or +2 to saves feats quite so much. Are they considered to be "bad" because the bonus is too small or because the feat itself is bland and boring?

If both, what would you consider more important to fix?

Generally feats that give flat bonuses are considered a waste, even if the bonus is pretty good. Feats that give you a new capability are far better. Improved Trip gives you a free attack, power attack gives you sliding scale, cleave gives you an extra attack. All of these things are not flat bonuses. Never spend permanent character build resources on what you can buy with money.

[TypoNinja]

Toughness I understand (and I even brewed a fix for) but I've never quite gotten why people hate the +2/+2 to skills or +2 to saves feats quite so much. Are they considered to be "bad" because the bonus is too small or because the feat itself is bland and boring?

If both, what would you consider more important to fix?

Toughness is a bad feat because there's another feat that does what it does better.

Toughness gives you 3 HP. Improved Toughness gets you 1HP a level.

Improved toughness is still a pretty crappy feat, but its better than Toughness.

+2 feats are a bad choice because Feats are probably the single rarest resource when you are building your character, and its so easy to get +2 to a save, or +2 (well usually 5 or 10) to a skill check, so many other ways with resources that are not nearly as limited.

Its a bad investment basically, you want feats that scale in power if at all possible, or give you entirely new options. At first level +2 to a save is basically doubling that save, but by the time you've hit 10th, +2 doesn't look so impressive anymore, but something like Zen Archery let you dump dex on your Cleric, and bumped your ranged touch attack roll pretty nicely. Now any increase in wisdom gives you bonus spells, higher DC's, better will save, and better to hit. It scales as you go.

Metamagic like wise keeps on giving, you take a feat and can apply it to more and more spells every level, better yet meta magic can be stacked with other meta-magics for truly powerful effects.

Power attack lets you subtract up to your BAB from your to hit and add it to damage. It scales, from 1-20).

Collegiate Wizard gives you an extra 2 spells per level known, and an extra 3 starting spells.

A flat +2 to a skill check seems pretty underwhelming compared to these options no? Or look at it another way, a Cloak of Resistance +2 is 4k and gives +2 to all your saves. Or you can spend 3 of your 7 precious feats on it.

Given the relative rarity of feats you want to spend them on things you can't reasonably acquire though any other means, and you want them to stay useful through the entire life of your character.

[Amnestic]

Generally feats that give flat bonuses are considered a waste, even if the bonus is pretty good. Feats that give you a new capability are far better. Improved Trip gives you a free attack, power attack gives you sliding scale, cleave gives you an extra attack. All of these things are not flat bonuses. Never spend permanent character build resources on what you can buy with money.

Not a bad view, though I'd question why so many people are praising Imp. Initiative then since, as the List of Necessary Magic Items (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187851) indicates, there are numerous ways to acquire a boosted initiative from magic items - including one (Dragonfly Medallion, ~30k gp) which grants the feat. Quite expensive, yes, but you're still spending gold to replace a feat.

[nedz]

By WBL 30Kgp is a lot of cash until high level, and since initiative is a d20 more plusses always help. Especially since going first is the aim and the other side is probably trying to do this as well.

[TypoNinja]

Its more a case of Initiative being that good, rather than the feat being that good in my opinion. Going first is king, especially as the OP level grow when you can be expected to kill or incapacitate at least one enemy per turn.

[JohnDaBarr]

The biggest issue is, by my understanding, that almost all classes are very highly feat depleted (except for Fighter and a couple of others), and the whole feat thing is not very thought out section of the game with loots of illogical stuff.

I mean just Power Attack is equal/better to the entire Two Weapons Fighting chain!!

So even if is useful for character to have Quick Draw/ +2 to Save/Dodge+Mobility etc... there are like 50+ better feats and you can take only like 6-7.......

[Story]

What about Planar Touchstone? Most of the things it can give you are static bonuses, but something like untyped +4 to dispel isn't something you can easily get from items, either.

[Deepbluediver]

@Flickerdart, Typoninja, and all the rest who responded

Thank you very much, I think I understand the problems better know.

I know this is a little off-topic, but here's an idea I have for improving them:
Rather than giving you a static bonus to your save, what if Lightning Reflexes instead granted Evasion? Another homebrew I read a while back had already come up with names for the Fortitude/Will equivalent, I think they called them Mettle and Resolve.

Since there are more damage based effects that offer Reflex saves than the other two, what if the improved/advanced versions of Mettle and Resolve reduced all numeric values of harmful spells (such as duration) by 1/2.

Would that address both the power and the "interesting effect" issues for most people?

[Amnestic]

Its more a case of Initiative being that good, rather than the feat being that good in my opinion. Going first is king, especially as the OP level grow when you can be expected to kill or incapacitate at least one enemy per turn.

Unless you're in an initiative arms race with your DM though (in which case that's a specific subset of use, not what I'd consider "normal play"), there's diminishing returns on initiative boosting though - get to a certain point and simply nothing will be going ahead than you, no matter how poorly you roll. And even if you do roll poorly, there's an item to fix that too.

[Cranthis]

Unless you're in an initiative arms race with your DM though (in which case that's a specific subset of use, not what I'd consider "normal play"), there's diminishing returns on initiative boosting though - get to a certain point and simply nothing will be going ahead than you, no matter how poorly you roll. And even if you do roll poorly, there's an item to fix that too.

Then only boost it to there. I, for instance, have my initiative boosted to 17 on my wizard, but I don't intend to take it any further.

[Amnestic]

Then only boost it to there. I, for instance, have my initiative boosted to 17 on my wizard, but I don't intend to take it any further.

Which is my point - you can probably hit that point without spending a precious feat slot on Improved Initiative, moving it into "not very useful feat" status.

[Cranthis]

Which is my point - you can probably hit that point without spending a precious feat slot on Improved Initiative, moving it into "not very useful feat" status.

Eh, I used improved initative. Of course we use flaws, so thats 2 extra feats. But still, going first never hurts, and I have yet to see why its not useful.

[Amphetryon]

Which is my point - you can probably hit that point without spending a precious feat slot on Improved Initiative, moving it into "not very useful feat" status.

I suspect that, at most tables, you'll hit +17 (or whatever your group's "I'm going first" benchmark is) sooner with Improved Initiative than if you just rely on WBL to get there. Once WBL catches up, you can always see about retraining. By that metric, Improved Initiative is a pretty good Feat for a solid portion of your adventuring career, particularly measured against Core options.

[Cranthis]

I suspect that, at most tables, you'll hit +17 (or whatever your group's "I'm going first" benchmark is) sooner with Improved Initiative than if you just rely on WBL to get there. Once WBL catches up, you can always see about retraining. By that metric, Improved Initiative is a pretty good Feat for a solid portion of your adventuring career, particularly measured against Core options.

Exactly. You can actually hit it by 3rd level by using Elf Wizard substitution levels.

[Cranthis]

On the original topic, Monkey Grip is pretty bad.

[nedz]

On the original topic, Monkey Grip is pretty bad.

Monkey Grip is in CWar, which is not core.

[Cranthis]

Monkey Grip is in CWar, which is not core.

Woops, sorry.

[Flickerdart]

@Flickerdart, Typoninja, and all the rest who responded

Thank you very much, I think I understand the problems better know.

I know this is a little off-topic, but here's an idea I have for improving them:
Rather than giving you a static bonus to your save, what if Lightning Reflexes instead granted Evasion? Another homebrew I read a while back had already come up with names for the Fortitude/Will equivalent, I think they called them Mettle and Resolve.

Since there are more damage based effects that offer Reflex saves than the other two, what if the improved/advanced versions of Mettle and Resolve reduced all numeric values of harmful spells (such as duration) by 1/2.

Would that address both the power and the "interesting effect" issues for most people?
Mettle is already an existing ability in 3.5 that gives you the "if you pass a save on an effect with a "save partial" effect, it fails entirely" ability for both Fortitude and Will.

[Deepbluediver]

Mettle is already an existing ability in 3.5 that gives you the "if you pass a save on an effect with a "save partial" effect, it fails entirely" ability for both Fortitude and Will.

Ah, ok, I did not know where the original idea had come from.

[elvengunner69]

Eh, I used improved initative. Of course we use flaws, so thats 2 extra feats. But still, going first never hurts, and I have yet to see why its not useful.

Especially if you can crowd control/buff/debuff/etc

[TypoNinja]

Eh, I used improved initative. Of course we use flaws, so thats 2 extra feats. But still, going first never hurts, and I have yet to see why its not useful.

I actually prefer to go later with a beat-stick type character, there's usually somebody foolish enough to rush me and then eat a full attack once my turn rolls around. But my games are relatively unoptimized, so that works, most melee does not have pounce, so positioning is a key factor.