Toughness, how good does it have to be to take?

[Popertop]

So I'm basically rolling a few feats into one in an attempt to make the Toughness feats more desirable, as they seem to be left by the wayside in most games.

Would you take this feat?

Toughness

Characters that take this feat are preternaturally tough. You gain 3 hit points at first level, and +1 hit point for each level past first. This also applies retroactively. You also gain a +2 bonus on Fortitude saves. In addition, any damage you take over 20 points is reduced by 10%.



So we've established already that a pure HP feat isn't exactly doing anyone favors, and I expected that. What I'm aiming for is for this to be an acceptable feat to take in low-mid op games at early levels, while still retaining some relevancy late-game with perhaps some scaling.

For high-op, I don't think any way we slice it a Toughness feat would be acceptable, however we could work out some protections a character would find useful, something worth taking this specific Toughness pre-requisite in order to get access to. (protections perhaps that they wouldn't find as easily in an obscure splatbook, or that have a lot of restrictions on their use. Playground brainstorming power gogogo!)


EDIT: inb4 play a caster, I'm looking for this to be useful for those neglected mundane types


EDIT: Got some good ideas going, here is the updated feat, as well as the improved version.

Toughness
Prerequisite: 13 Con

This character is preternaturally tough. When you take this feat, you gain twice your Con modifier in HP per level, and again when you gain a level.

This feat also grants you a +2 bonus to your Fortitude save, and +2 Natural armor, which stacks with any existing Natural armor bonus.



Improved Toughness
Prerequisite: Toughness

This character has learned to apply the concepts of durability even at a metaphysical level, toughening his mind and spirit to magical and supernatural attack.

This feat grants you a +2 bonus to Will saves, and whenever you make a Fortitude or Will save, you roll twice and take the better result.

In addition, you can choose two of the following benefits when you take this feat, and every additional time you take this feat:

DR/-, Fire, Cold, Electric, Acid, or Sonic resistance equal to twice your Con modifier.

SR or Miss Chance % equal to 10 plus your Con modifier.

All of the benefits provided by this feat are Extraordinary.

This feat can be taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat.

[Naanomi]

I'd take that. I've taken 'Improved Toughness + Scalable Die-Hard' as a feat before as well.

[ngilop]

I think the 10% damage negation is a bit much for a feat

considering you have a better improved toughness and Great Fortitude as a combined feat i think the damage negation is too much.

[mootoall]

So I'm basically rolling a few feats into one in an attempt to make the Toughness feats more desirable, as they seem to be left by the wayside in most games.

Would you take this feat?

Toughness

Characters that take this feat are preternaturally tough. You gain 3 hit points at first level, and +1 hit point for each level past first. This also applies retroactively. You also gain a +2 bonus on Fortitude saves. In addition, any damage you take over 20 points is reduced by 10%.

The biggest problem with that last bit is that it's too mathy and book-keeping intensive. It'll stop combat while people do the math for (damage-damage*.10). Do something simpler for that, like scalable DR.

[OldTrees1]

+numbers feats are only worthwhile when they are prerequisites.

[DJroboninja]

The biggest problem with that last bit is that it's too mathy and book-keeping intensive. It'll stop combat while people do the math for (damage-damage*.10). Do something simpler for that, like scalable DR.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Maybe have it provide DR 2/-- against attacks that deal over 20 damage, to avoid too much extra bookkeeping. Or have it increase your massive damage threshold (if applicable).

[Seerow]

I'd say let it maximize all hit dice automatically. If you take it again, you gain +40% maximum HP from hit dice. This can be taken no more than 3 times.

So a Wizard taking this at level 20 goes from 51.5 + (20xcon) to 80 + (20xcon), gaining about 28 hp, about 1.5 per level. The second time you're going from 80 to 112 hp, gaining 32 hp, still right around 1.5 per level.

A Barbarian taking the feat goes from 135.5 + (20xcon) to 240+(20xcon), an increase of 104 hp (roughly 5 per level). A Barbarian taking it a second time goes from 240 to 336 hp, an increase of 96 HP (still right around 5 per level)



Monsters still get stuck with the old toughness feat, simply because they have ridiculously inflated hit dice and any modification to toughness will give any monster with it a ludicrous amount of HP. (As an example: See the Tarrasque. He has Toughness 6 times. So he goes from 858 hp, up to 2016 hp. Nobody wants to cut through that kind of hp).

[Popertop]

Took the words right out of my mouth. Maybe have it provide DR 2/-- against attacks that deal over 20 damage, to avoid too much extra bookkeeping. Or have it increase your massive damage threshold (if applicable).

This is a great idea. And I like the comment about scalable Die Hard as well, I'll have to play around with this and Endurance and see where I end up.

I was planning to have it be a pre-req for *something*, I just haven't figured out what yet. Maybe an ability that lets you ignore certain status conditions?

EDIT: That's a nice idea Seerow. I'll keep that in mind as well.

[TypoNinja]

Still wouldn't take it. Its just not worth a feat to grab a static bonus like that unless its a feat tax.

Feats are precious, you have very few, and you want them to give you new abilities you didn't have at all, grant powers that don't exist in any other form.

Anything with a flat bonus instead of scaling power is a waste of a feat in my opinion, with few exceptions. You want your feats to provide the defining characteristics of your build. Shock Trooper, Swift hunter and Improved Skirmish, TWF, Metamagic as desired, Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, Jotunbrud

Think of it this way, almost any character can get something better than a hand full of HP (even across 20 levels, you suggest a whole 23HP. That's a rounding error at that level.), and a flat bonus to a save.

As a beatstick, I'd rather pick up Power Attack, the prerequisites to my PRC, nearly anything else is worth more to me than that.

As a caster the options open to be better than more HP are in legion. Aside from PrC entry requirements (some of them harsh) we get metamagic, the more the merrier, metamagic reducers like Practical Metamagic.

[HammeredWharf]

Replace Toughness with Steadfast Determination. It's a great feat that makes melee suck less.

[Kraken]

I'd make it so that you use the better of PF toughness formula or you instead gain double your con mod HP per HD. Improved toughness would be DR/- equal to your con mod. Greater toughness would double the DR/-.

[Killer Angel]

Characters that take this feat are preternaturally tough. You gain 3 hit points at first level, and +1 hit point for each level past first. This also applies retroactively. You also gain a +2 bonus on Fortitude saves.

I think this is already good. I't basically the PF thoughness, plus another feat.

[Socksy]

I would actually choose regular Toughness for pretty much anyone (except a psionic character, they get that psionic variant that gets you +2HP for each psionic feat inclusing itself) at 1st level, especially if you don't play with the '1st HD is maxed out' variant.

[Kraken]

especially if you don't play with the '1st HD is maxed out' variant.

1st HD maxed isn't a variant, it's the default. Level 1 is stupidly lethal as it is, I'd hate to play a game where your first HD wasn't maxed.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I would actually choose regular Toughness for pretty much anyone (except a psionic character, they get that psionic variant that gets you +2HP for each psionic feat inclusing itself) at 1st level, especially if you don't play with the '1st HD is maxed out' variant.

That's the default, not a variant.

While I don't entirely agree with the sentiment that static bonus granting feats are completely undesirable, I wouldn't be inclined to pick up a feat that simply grants HP's either. They just -can't- scale well without some sort of mathematical formula being applied and, apparently, no one wants to do any more math than is strictly necessary (a sentiment I -really- don't get.)

[Socksy]

That's the default, not a variant.

While I don't entirely agree with the sentiment that static bonus granting feats are completely undesirable, I wouldn't be inclined to pick up a feat that simply grants HP's either. They just -can't- scale well without some sort of mathematical formula being applied and, apparently, no one wants to do any more math than is strictly necessary (a sentiment I -really- don't get.)

Ah, I thought it was a variant since monsters and 1st-level warriors didn't get it, thank you for correcting me.

And I love doing more maths than is strictly necessary, but I'm going to a university for maths next year, so that's probably just me.

[Popertop]

Okay, so let's take this discussion in a different direction.

We will assume that this version of Toughness (or whatever version we end up settling on) is a pre-req for a very desirable feat that gives melee protections from common attacks (both magical and mundane).

What would that "desirable feat" need to look like in order to justify having Toughness as a pre-req?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Okay, so let's take this discussion in a different direction.

We will assume that this version of Toughness (or whatever version we end up settling on) is a pre-req for a very desirable feat that gives melee protections from common attacks (both magical and mundane).

What would that "desirable feat" need to look like in order to justify having Toughness as a pre-req?

Nothing springs immediately to mind but if you want to crowd-source it perhaps a thread in the homebrew forum?

[HammeredWharf]

What kind of melee are we talking about? The kind that loses to Glitterdust because it has +5 Will save at level 10 (pure Fighter) or the kind that has +10 Will save at level 1, can teleport around freely, turn invisible and use Sense Motive as AC (Swordsage)?

Anyway, a "get more HP" feat would have to be be very, very good to be a good choice for a melee character, because lack of HP is usually the least of their problems. AC, saves, immunities and mobility are much more important, because everyone except you has plenty of them and you have none.

[Seharvepernfan]

In my group, we all regularly take it at "+2hp, +1/level".

[Popertop]

Okay, I think I've gotten my answer here. I'm off to Homebrew for some brainstorming!

EDIT: How do I get a mod to move this to Homebrew?

[TypoNinja]

I would actually choose regular Toughness for pretty much anyone (except a psionic character, they get that psionic variant that gets you +2HP for each psionic feat inclusing itself) at 1st level, especially if you don't play with the '1st HD is maxed out' variant.

Here's the thing though. If you really feel like a very few extra HP are that important, HP from magic is cheap. Feats are precious, probably your most limited resource. Why use a precious feat on something minor that can be replaced with magic items?

Even a simple +con item works out the same bonus 1HP a level as the feat Improved Toughness, and has the benefit of raising your fort save while you are at it.

[Seharvepernfan]

Even a simple +con item works out the same bonus 1HP a level as the feat Improved Toughness, and has the benefit of raising your fort save while you are at it.

Toughness would stack with that though, and you often can't afford items to cover your gaps like that until upper mid-levels.

I'm of the opinion that you should aim for a balance between present survivability and future capability. Toughness and Improved Initiative may not be so great at level 18, but they're wonderful at level 1.

[Gemini476]

Toughness would stack with that though, and you often can't afford items to cover your gaps like that until upper mid-levels.

I'm of the opinion that you should aim for a balance between present survivability and future capability. Toughness and Improved Initiative may not be so great at level 18, but they're wonderful at level 1.

+2 Con is literally 4,000gp. That's not exactly a fortune.

Generally, avoid feats that you could just buy for money. You have seven of the first and millions of the latter.
Feats are one of the most valuable resources there are.

[RegalKain]

We ran a few homebrew variations of Toughness, the first being you got Double your con mod per level in HP, improved toughness gave you 5 HP a level, this led to a Cleric we had, having 400+ HP at level 19, while hilarious we found it didn't work well in our group, as most smaller enemies he could literally laugh off as he waded in slapping people about.

I think the big issue here (Especially asking the Playgrounders, no offense to them/us) is that there is NEVER enough HP to survive optimization, many/most of the level 20 builds on this forum do damage in the thousands, it doesn't matter that your Barbarian has 700 HP instead of 200, he's still dead in a single-round. I think that's part of the reason there are so many jaded (As I read them) responses. In a low-op group? I think your toughness feat would do well, though personally I'd say make it +2HP +1/Level and Improved Toughness is Double con modifier to hP (Instead of single) +2 fort save. In a low-op game your Barbarian might very well take that, or a Paladin who has a ton of Con, high-op? The bigger problem is why aren't you playing a caster. =p

[HammeredWharf]

I think the big issue here (Especially asking the Playgrounders, no offense to them/us) is that there is NEVER enough HP to survive optimization, many/most of the level 20 builds on this forum do damage in the thousands, it doesn't matter that your Barbarian has 700 HP instead of 200, he's still dead in a single-round.

Even in a low-op game, +2HP + 1/HD isn't a lot.

Let's take a look at a classic D&D monster, a CR 13 Glabrezu (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#glabrezu). This guy isn't even a brute, but his average melee attack deals 13 damage. He can attack five times per round. So, a semi-melee monster of moderate difficulty can negate your feat's benefit in a single attack, which is 1/5 of his full attack. You could take Toughness and hope the Glabrezu is stupid (it shouldn't be) and doesn't use its at-will abilities or you could take another feat to stand a chance against its DC 19 Unholy Blight.

[TuggyNE]

EDIT: How do I get a mod to move this to Homebrew?

I'd suggest making a new thread, but if you really want to drag the whole thing over click Report Post on the OP and say "this goes to Homebrew" or the like.


+2 Con is literally 4,000gp. That's not exactly a fortune.

Assuming you don't already have the +2 enhancement item; if you do, it's +12000 instead, and if you have the +4 already it cranks up to a nice tidy +20000 gp. (More than that gets very rapidly more expensive.)

[Popertop]

I wanna move the whole thread, I like the foundation of discussion we've got going on here (I've reported it).

EDIT: OP Updated

[Yawgmoth]

Assuming you don't already have the +2 enhancement item; if you do, it's +12000 instead, and if you have the +4 already it cranks up to a nice tidy +20000 gp. (More than that gets very rapidly more expensive.) If you really want a big sack of hp you're likely buying up that +con item anyways so it's not like you're going out of your way for it.

Personally, I would never take a feat that just gave +hp. I would instead make the epic feats Fast Healing and Damage Reduction into regular feats with a much lower con requirement, like 17 or so.

[georgie_leech]

Would the ability to roll twice on any Fortitude saves be out of line for a feat, possibly with some harsh prerequisites?

[Gemini476]

Would the ability to roll twice on any Fortitude saves be out of line for a feat, possibly with some harsh prerequisites?

Ooh, ooh, I know!

BSF
Prerequisites: Improved Toughness, Great Fortitude, Steadfast Determination, Fighter level 20
Benefit: Whenever you roll a Fortitude save, you roll two dice instead of one and take the higher value.
Special: You may take this as a Fighter bonus feat, although you may not if you are also a Monk.

Is that steep enough? You'll have enough feats to pull it off, at least. (That's five feats as prereqs and 14 more levels of Fighter than anyone should ever take unless they're going for Weapon Supremacy.)

[georgie_leech]

Ooh, ooh, I know!

BSF
Prerequisites: Improved Toughness, Great Fortitude, Steadfast Determination, Fighter level 20
Benefit: Whenever you roll a Fortitude save, you roll two dice instead of one and take the higher value.
Special: You may take this as a Fighter bonus feat, although you may not if you are also a Monk.

Is that steep enough? You'll have enough feats to pull it off, at least. (That's five feats as prereqs and 14 more levels of Fighter than anyone should ever take unless they're going for Weapon Supremacy.)

Heh, the point wasn't to come up with harsh pre-reqs, more trying to understand if that is the sort of thing that a "toughness" feat should provide; a means of being tough against things other than swords to the face, like poisons or winds or suffocation etc.

[Chronos]

I've actually taken Improved Toughness (without the extra boost at first level, but we were starting at high level). My character was a DMM persist clerzilla, and the most effective use of his feats was just a whole bunch of Extra Turnings, but I had an extra feat left over after that (i.e., one more Extra Turning wasn't enough to give me another use of DMM, and I wasn't using Turn Undead for anything else). I already had all the metamagic I was likely to use, I didn't need any prerequisites, and I already had so much bonus damage that my optimum Power Attack against most foes would be -0/+0 anyway. That basically left me with either Improved Critical or Improved Toughness, and Improved Toughness was a higher percentage increase to my survivability than Improved Critical was to my offense.

Yeah, it's a boring feat, but it's really easy to qualify for, and it's useful for everyone, without needing to be combined with anything else. There's a place for something like that in the system.

[Amphetryon]

Improved Toughness is already a decent - if unspectacular - option to take. Combine it with Diehard and I can see several melee-types choosing it either after meeting PrC prereqs or before they settle on a course. Even a melee-oriented caster could find that useful.

[Shining Wrath]

I think you can reword that as "When you take Toughness, you gain HP equal to your level plus 2. You gain one additional HP each time you level". Saves you a sentence.

As to whether I'd take that ... yes, HP + Fort save for a character that lacks them (wizard) might be worth looking at.

Damage reduction seems like a pain to implement, think about how to do that better.

[TypoNinja]

Personally, I would never take a feat that just gave +hp. I would instead make the epic feats Fast Healing and Damage Reduction into regular feats with a much lower con requirement, like 17 or so.

I'm not sure about this idea to be honest. 1/- is going to work out to a lot more effective HP than 1 a level, so better option yes, I'd be tempted to take it under some conditions assuming my build had free feats (usually doesn't) On the other hand 1/- isnt very much DR, I still can't see it being the line between life and death.

Careful with the fast healing feat, it pretty much eliminates the need for after combat heals. 1 HP a round isn't much in combat, but once the fight ends, time scales kind of change. Searching the room and looting the bodies will probably be enough time to provide a full heal. That is something I'd try to squeeze into any build that I expected to be soaking a lot of HP damage.

[TuggyNE]

If you really want a big sack of hp you're likely buying up that +con item anyways so it's not like you're going out of your way for it.

No, really? That was kind of exactly my point: stacking +2 Con is worth a lot more than +2 enhancement to Con is, since almost everyone will already get +2 enhancement or better to Con in mid levels if not before.

[bekeleven]

Still wouldn't take it. Its just not worth a feat to grab a static bonus like that unless its a feat tax.
[...]
You want your feats to provide the defining characteristics of your build. Shock Trooper, Swift hunter and Improved Skirmish, TWF, Metamagic as desired, Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, Jotunbrud

These aren't static bonuses?

[Rubik]

Grant hardness 1 + 1 per 5 HD, +2 to Fort, and the ability to reroll Fort saves 1/encounter (whereupon a nat 1 isn't an auto-fail, but only on that roll). Counts as a fighter bonus feat. Prereq: Base Fort save +3.

That might actually be worthwhile.

[Yawgmoth]

I'm not sure about this idea to be honest. 1/- is going to work out to a lot more effective HP than 1 a level, so better option yes, I'd be tempted to take it under some conditions assuming my build had free feats (usually doesn't) On the other hand 1/- isnt very much DR, I still can't see it being the line between life and death. It's DR 3/-, not 1/-. It's better if you're taking a lot of hits, which is the only reason you'd be taking any feat like toughness.

Careful with the fast healing feat, it pretty much eliminates the need for after combat heals. So? There's a million better ways to obviate after-combat healing that don't eat feat slots.

No, really? That was kind of exactly my point: stacking +2 Con is worth a lot more than +2 enhancement to Con is, since almost everyone will already get +2 enhancement or better to Con in mid levels if not before. Unless I'm making a front-line fighter or something that involves me burning hp as a resource, I don't take +con items. I'd much rather have +castingstat or +dex or +miss% or a utility effect than slightly more hp and fort saves. It's less "almost everyone" and more "everyone who sees D&D combat as simple addition and subtraction of hp".

[FreakyCheeseMan]

Maybe let toughness give renewable temporary HP?

[TypoNinja]

These aren't static bonuses?

Or the defining characteristic of a build.

TWF gives you more attacks, you tend to design a character concept around getting the most out of your extra attacks, like stacking bonus damage, Jotunbrud gives you many of the large sized benefits without actually making you large, Weapon Proficiencies (Like the much loved spike chain) open new tactical options. Improved Skirmish is the defining characteristic of the build, if you are fishing for Skirmish damage you want more. Even then the power still scales, it gives you extra damage per hit, so generating more hits gives more benefits from the feat.

See how these new options all differ from a flat bonus HP a level? They scale, or allow you to do something entirely new/different.

Edit: while Improved Toughness technically does scale, it does so poorly it practically doesn't count. Something like gain your con twice ever level for a feat might be better. That way if you are really serious about stacking HP, its really going to add up. Though even then, at really high level HP loss isnt what kills you, its the save or die.

[OldTrees1]

These aren't static bonuses?

TWF is a feat tax to get ITWF from an item. (ITWF gives an extra attack)

[andresrhoodie]

I'd consider a toughness feat worthwhile if it....

A. doubled CON bonus
B. Bonus to fort and will saves (i can see willpower being related to toughness)
C. A natural armor bonus, +2 would do it for me.

[Popertop]

Okay, I actually like that idea a lot, though I won't give the Will bonus in the first feat. What we can do is put the physical toughness in the first feat, and have some magical protections in the latter. Let's see how this looks:

Toughness
Prerequisite: 13 Con

This character is preternaturally tough. When you take this feat, you gain twice your Con modifier in HP per level, and again when you gain a level.

This feat also grants you a +2 bonus to your Fortitude save, and +2 Natural armor, which stacks with any existing Natural armor bonus.


Improved Toughness
Prerequisite: Toughness

This character has learned to apply the concepts of durability even at a metaphysical level, toughening his mind and spirit to magical and supernatural attack.

This feat grants you a +2 bonus to Will saves, and whenever you make a Fortitude or Will save, you roll twice and take the better result.

In addition, you can choose two of the following benefits when you take this feat, and every additional time you take this feat:

DR/-, Fire, Cold, Electric, Acid, or Sonic resistance equal to twice your Con modifier.

SR or Miss Chance % equal to 10 plus your Con modifier.

All of the benefits provided by this feat are Extraordinary.

This feat can be taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat.

[Jergmo]

Personally I think Toughness is fine as it is.

...No, really. The way I see it, it isn't really even a feat that's meant for PCs (beyond prerequisites), and a common ruling is that Improved Toughness can be used in its stead.

That is if you have someone who would deem a Dwarven Defender worth playing.

Toughness is the feat that DMs give 1st level mooks so they aren't killed in one hit. It's the feat you give to the marauding orc or the elite infantryman when you expect to use groups of expendable soldiers as baddies.

It feels like most of the suggested alternatives for Toughness are just too good for an easy, entry level feat.

[Popertop]

Toughness is the feat that DMs give 1st level mooks so they aren't killed in one hit. It's the feat you give to the marauding orc or the elite infantryman when you expect to use groups of expendable soldiers as baddies.

It feels like most of the suggested alternatives for Toughness are just too good for an easy, entry level feat.

That's all well and good for your games, but I have a few problems with this:

I can maximize my mooks hit dice and give them increased con scores, or even just extra Hp if I want survivability. I am the DM after all, I do what I want.

Lots of times extra HP isn't a great defense.

What I want these feats to be is something that will be a viable choice to help out Fighter types in low-mid op games and have relevancy both in the early and late game.

I want the Improved Toughness version to give some magical protections, in the form of increased Will saves and a few benefits to select from based on their Con modifier.

[Gemini476]

Personally I think Toughness is fine as it is.

...No, really. The way I see it, it isn't really even a feat that's meant for PCs (beyond prerequisites), and a common ruling is that Improved Toughness can be used in its stead.

That is if you have someone who would deem a Dwarven Defender worth playing.

Toughness is the feat that DMs give 1st level mooks so they aren't killed in one hit. It's the feat you give to the marauding orc or the elite infantryman when you expect to use groups of expendable soldiers as baddies.

It feels like most of the suggested alternatives for Toughness are just too good for an easy, entry level feat.

Level one mooks are better served by Diehard, since that's basically +10HP.
+3HP kind of pales in comparison to that.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Level one mooks are better served by Diehard, since that's basically +10HP.
+3HP kind of pales in comparison to that.

Diehard has endurance as a prerequisite. Most level 1 mooks can't get it.

[Popertop]

Human mooks could, or rather, any race that grants a bonus feat at level 1.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Human mooks could, or rather, any race that grants a bonus feat at level 1.

An unrestricted feat or endurance, specifically, sure. That's humans, strongheart halflings, and...... that's all I got.

[Karnith]

An unrestricted feat or endurance, specifically, sure. That's humans, strongheart halflings, and...... that's all I got.
Desert Orcs (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/environmentalRacialVariants.htm#desertOrcs) get Endurance as a bonus feat, so that's another one.

[bekeleven]

Why has everyone decided double con to HP is a good idea? Let's make hit dice entirely irrelevant, shall we?

Seerow's increased HP scaling with HD is a bit overcomplicated how he wrote it, but I think it's the right track.

[Popertop]

We could have it improve the hit dice that you have, or maximize them, or both. Double con modifier just seemed like the simplest way to go.

[Suddo]

So in my opinion I think Improved Toughness as a feat (without prereqs) is a fine feat and I always try and get it into my builds. All the feats described here are crazy good and any buff you give to toughness and general feats makes them juicier for magicals (vs the mundane you are trying to buff).

I mean normally Toughness is good for mundanes and better for casters (if they can afford the feat slot) but adding either a anti massive damage aspect, more stacking natural armor, or bonuses to saves just makes the scale increase. So if on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being Natural Spell level of needed and 1 being Skill Focus (Know Language) level of worthless, and the fighter wants Toughness at around a 5 and the wizard wants it at around a 6 you just upped the desire for both by 2. So now the Fighter wants it more but so does the wizard.


Edit: I will point out that I like the idea of scaling the bonus health with hit die size. Something like 25% (round up) HD size. d4:+1, d6:+2, d8:+2, d10:+4, d12:+4. This makes it so you shaft some classes that kind of need it, and it is still a straight buff. This is complicated but it is better than "double con mod" because a wizard's second best mod is usually con (sometimes dex).

[Emperor Tippy]

Toughness is *never* worth a feat outside of the most extreme of edge cases.

HP just aren't all that valuable.

More precisely, the amount of HP that is worth one of the (at most) 21 feats (Fighter 20 for 11 bonus feats and 7 feats from HD along with 2 feats from Flaws and 1 feat from Human) that you get is absurdly high.

Take Faerie Mysteries Initiate. It's worthwhile because for a Gray Elf it ends up being a minimum of a 40 point HP swing (Con being -2 and Int being +2) over 20 levels. On an Int Focused character it can easily end up being 200 or so extra HP. That is the kind of gain that tends to be worth a feat.

And even then, FMI still really isn't worth a feat in high optimization environments simply because everyone is running around with Hide Life up and thus doesn't care, at all, about HP totals.

---
The problem with HP is that anything short of a Necropolitan Gray Elf with FMI and 36 or so Int is always going to die if they are struck by a peer competitor more than maybe once or twice. Damage from pretty much any single attack is virtually always going to be at least ECLx5 and ECLx10 or more isn't particularly rare.

----
Someone should work the numbers but I feel fairly confident in stating that Improved Initiative will do more to keep you alive than Toughness will. Especially when taken across the party as a whole (because if you all beat the enemies Initiative roll then you should have defeated your enemies before they ever get to act in the first place).

[Mighty_Chicken]

Make it the prerequisite for Diehard? Or maybe fuse it with Endurance (since they're synonyms...)

Or make it more complex: turn it into a patch of HP that has improved DR, and you could decide what attacks affect your Toughness HP. Naturally, you'd choose to "spend" the protectiong granted by Toughness with multiple weaker attacks.

I like the solution given by Rogue Shadow's fix: it grants Fast Heal 1, but only up to half your HP. Fits thematically the idea of a tough fighter.

Double the negative hit points needed to kill you? Almost flavor text, but works well with diehard, even if you are not councious at the additional negative hp.

All those options have a general flavor, any character theme fits with them.

[HaikenEdge]

Make it the prerequisite for Diehard? Or maybe fuse it with Endurance (since they're synonyms...)

Or make it more complex: turn it into a patch of HP that has improved DR, and you could decide what attacks affect your Toughness HP. Naturally, you'd choose to "spend" the protectiong granted by Toughness with multiple weaker attacks.

I like the solution given by Rogue Shadow's fix: it grants Fast Heal 1, but only up to half your HP. Fits thematically the idea of a tough fighter.

Double the negative hit points needed to kill you? Almost flavor text, but works well with diehard, even if you are not councious at the additional negative hp.

All those options have a general flavor, any character theme fits with them.

Honestly, the only way I'd take Toughness is it if fused Toughness, Endurance and Diehard together, and still gave me something else that's nice, because Endurance is situational at best, and Toughness/Diehard won't matter by midgame, where CR-appropriate damage outpace HP dramatically and will kill you by taking you beyond -10 HP in a couple hits, if not a single SoD.

I suppose, if I were trying to make Toughness something I'd take, I'd combine Improve Toughness, Endurance, Diehard, and Mettle of Fortitude, and even then, it'd still be very situational to me.

[FreakyCheeseMan]

So, again... renewable temporary HP, anyone? It doesn't help so much with one or two big attacks, but a fighter that can burn a swift action to renew some number of HP per level each turn will certainly have an edge at the lower levels, and can keep him from having to completely hide his head in the sand if he gets wounded at higher levels. That's sort of the image I have when I think of "Toughness", anyway - the guy who just keeps getting hit all day long but never actually goes down.

[Yogibear41]

Assuming the bonuses from Improved Toughness stack with themselves since you said taking it more than once allows you to pick another 2, and there were only 3 options to begin with. So that being said:

Play something like a warforged or a dwarf for a +2 to con, put highest score in con or use point buy to max it out, take toughness as level 1 feat then go:

Fighter2/Wizard 1 using wizard fighter bonus feat variant, pick IMP toughness every time, get a DR of 30 and resistance to 30 of every element at level 30.

Nvm just read it again it says or not and. Still having DR 10/- or even DR6 or 8/- at low levels is pretty amazing. Who am I kidding DR 10/- is great all the time.

[Fax Celestis]

FWIW, this is my "fix":


Great Fortitude [Investing]
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on Fortitude saves.

You gain 1 additional Hit Point per Hit Die.

Investiture: You gain additional Hit Points equal to the amount of prowess invested in this feat.

When you invest four prowess into this feat, the bonus on Fortitude saves increases to +3. When you invest six more prowess—a total of ten prowess—into this feat, the bonus on Fortitude saves increases to +4. When you invest eight more prowess—a total of eighteen prowess—into this feat, the bonus on Fortitude saves increases to +5. Thereafter, the cost to increase the bonus by one is twice as much prowess as your current bonus, following the same pattern (28 prowess for +6, 40 prowess for +7, 54 prowess for +8, and so on and so forth).

Iron Will [Investing]
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on Will saves.

If you are affected by an ongoing mind-affecting, compulsion, or charm spell or effect and fail your saving throw, you can attempt the save again 1 round later at the same DC. You get only this one extra chance to succeed on your saving throw.

Investiture: When you invest four prowess into this feat, the bonus on Will saves increases to +3. When you invest six more prowess—a total of ten prowess—into this feat, the bonus on Will saves increases to +4. When you invest eight more prowess—a total of eighteen prowess—into this feat, the bonus on Will saves increases to +5. Thereafter, the cost to increase the bonus by one is twice as much prowess as your current bonus, following the same pattern (28 prowess for +6, 40 prowess for +7, 54 prowess for +8, and so on and so forth).

In addition, you gain extended use of this feat's secondary ability: you may make attempts to break an ongoing mind-affecting, compulsion, or charm spell or effect for a number of rounds after the initial saving throw equal to the Will save bonus provided by this feat minus one. Each saving throw is at the original save DC. For instance, a character with ten prowess invested in this feat would gain a +4 bonus to Will saves and would attempt to break ongoing mind-affecting, compulsion, or charm spells or effects for three rounds after the initial saving throw.

Lightning Reflexes [Investing]

Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on Reflex saves.

You gain a +1 Dodge bonus to your Armor Class.

Investiture: When you invest four prowess into this feat, the bonus on Reflex saves increases to +3 and the bonus to your Dodge armor class increases to +2.

When you invest six more prowess—a total of ten prowess—into this feat, the bonus on Reflex saves increases to +4 and the bonus to your Dodge armor class increases to +3. When you invest eight more prowess—a total of eighteen prowess—into this feat, the bonus on Reflex saves increases to +5 and the bonus to your Dodge armor class increases to +4. Thereafter, the cost to increase both bonuses by one is twice as much prowess as your current Reflex save bonus, following the same pattern (28 prowess for +6 Reflex and +5 Dodge AC, 40 prowess for +7 Reflex and +6 Dodge AC, 54 prowess for +8 Reflex and +7 Dodge AC, and so on and so forth).

For those of you not familiar with my Investing Feats system, it's basically skill points for feats. Fighter classes get 6/level, rogues get 4/level, casters get 2/level. Cap per feat is BAB+3.

[Ydaer Ca Noit]

Toughness is a good feat for a DM to put to monsters if he knows that the monster doesn't really need more feats to be powerful.

If I had to remake it I would combine it with the endurance feat. +2 natural armor and/or DR looks too much compared with other feats like dodge or improved natural armor etc

[bekeleven]

Toughness is a good feat for a DM to put to monsters if he knows that the monster doesn't really need more feats to be powerful.

If I had to remake it I would combine it with the endurance feat. +2 natural armor and/or DR looks too much compared with other feats like dodge or improved natural armor etc

Good feats often look like a lot compared to bad feats. Natural spell looks like a lot compared to Skill Focus (Basketweaving), but if you take one, you're so powerful that you might as well take the other too.

[Ydaer Ca Noit]

Good feats often look like a lot compared to bad feats. Natural spell looks like a lot compared to Skill Focus (Basketweaving), but if you take one, you're so powerful that you might as well take the other too.

Ok some feats are amazing, but should every feat be amazing instead of good/average?

[HaikenEdge]

Ok some feats are amazing, but should every feat be amazing instead of good/average?

Yes. Because most good/average feats are rarely taken. Feats need to be Amazing, Excellent or Great.

[georgie_leech]

So, again... renewable temporary HP, anyone? It doesn't help so much with one or two big attacks, but a fighter that can burn a swift action to renew some number of HP per level each turn will certainly have an edge at the lower levels, and can keep him from having to completely hide his head in the sand if he gets wounded at higher levels. That's sort of the image I have when I think of "Toughness", anyway - the guy who just keeps getting hit all day long but never actually goes down.

Hm. What about something like "Gain your CON Modifier and half of your Fighter and Barbarian levels in Temporary Hit Points each round. These THP do not stack with other THP, unless the source of the other THP says they do." As long as we're fiddling with the numbers, it seems like Fighters and Barbarians should be able to get more out of this than Wizards. Any other classes that should probably benefit?

[HaikenEdge]

Hm. What about something like "Gain your CON Modifier and half of your Fighter and Barbarian levels in Temporary Hit Points each round. These THP do not stack with other THP, unless the source of the other THP says they do." As long as we're fiddling with the numbers, it seems like Fighters and Barbarians should be able to get more out of this than Wizards. Any other classes that should probably benefit?

The problem is, though, that fighters and barbs aren't the only people who were meant to take Toughness, ie, the example Wizard in the books has Toughness, so making the feat class specific defeats makes it even less useful, and fighters and barbarians still have better feats to take.

Temporary HPs are nice, but all it'll really ever let the character do is survive an 2-4 hits, instead of 1-3.

[OldTrees1]

Why not grant scaling Fast Healing instead?

[FreakyCheeseMan]

Temporary HPs are nice, but all it'll really ever let the character do is survive an 2-4 hits, instead of 1-3.

Well, that depends on the sort of hits your taking - it could let you survive infinitely many minor hits, or a whole lot of moderate ones.

It also would have good synergy with other endurance things - like, if you already have a high con, decent AC, fast healing and DR, then putting temporary HP on top of it could be the thing that carries you from "Solid" to "Tank."

[HaikenEdge]

Well, that depends on the sort of hits your taking - it could let you survive infinitely many minor hits, or a whole lot of moderate ones.

It also would have good synergy with other endurance things - like, if you already have a high con, decent AC, fast healing and DR, then putting temporary HP on top of it could be the thing that carries you from "Solid" to "Tank."

I don't know, maybe it's because I play in mid-to-high op campaigns, but games I play in have hits doing a hundreds, if not thousands, of damager per hit, and if I'm fighting mooks, I don't even care about getting hit.

[pwykersotz]

Focusing on low to mid op, what if you increased hp from Hit Dice by 50%? Thus, a level 1 Barbarian with the feat would start with 18hp, while a Wizard with the feat would start with 6 (before being modified by con, naturally). This gives melee nicer things with it, and doesn't trivialize HD.

[Rubik]

Focusing on low to mid op, what if you increased hp from Hit Dice by 50%? Thus, a level 1 Barbarian with the feat would start with 18hp, while a Wizard with the feat would start with 6 (before being modified by con, naturally). This gives melee nicer things with it, and doesn't trivialize HD.Non-maxed HP from HD tends to be less than amazing when compared to Con bonuses anyway, since the average from even a d12 is only 6.5 hp. Even for a barbarian, this feat would only grant an extra 3 hp per level, which is alright, but anything less than a d12 is marginal at best and not worth taking at all.

[RegalKain]

Focusing on low to mid op, what if you increased hp from Hit Dice by 50%? Thus, a level 1 Barbarian with the feat would start with 18hp, while a Wizard with the feat would start with 6 (before being modified by con, naturally). This gives melee nicer things with it, and doesn't trivialize HD.

I don't think this is wise, but it does give me a good idea (I don't think it wise as the person right after you stated) make it give +XHP/level (As is being discussed) in addition to your HD is always maxed. Meaning a 10th level Barb with 10Con (Like that happens.) will have 120Health from hitdice, since they are auto-maxed (Much like they are at first levels.) I think this makes it a much more tempting feat in my opinion, as you're taking out the chance of a 1 on your shiney d12, a Wizard CAN take it sure, but they won't benefit nearly as much as Barb/Warblade etc. Thoughts?

[pwykersotz]

Non-maxed HP from HD tends to be less than amazing when compared to Con bonuses anyway, since the average from even a d12 is only 6.5 hp. Even for a barbarian, this feat would only grant an extra 3 hp per level, which is alright, but anything less than a d12 is marginal at best and not worth taking at all.

Does that matter? Con bonuses cap at a certain point anyway, the majority of games not seeing more than a +6 enhancement bonus, +5 with levels, +5 with wishes/books, plus whatever you managed to gain from race/class/template. This makes HP from other sources more valuable, as the cost for increasing Con continues to take more resources. Granted, this only nets a Barbarian 67.75 extra HP on average by level 20, but in lower op games that isn't too bad. That is almost a full 20d6 spell that gets absorbed.


I don't think this is wise, but it does give me a good idea (I don't think it wise as the person right after you stated) make it give +XHP/level (As is being discussed) in addition to your HD is always maxed. Meaning a 10th level Barb with 10Con (Like that happens.) will have 120Health from hitdice, since they are auto-maxed (Much like they are at first levels.) I think this makes it a much more tempting feat in my opinion, as you're taking out the chance of a 1 on your shiney d12, a Wizard CAN take it sure, but they won't benefit nearly as much as Barb/Warblade etc. Thoughts?

The problem with this, is the assumption of a game in which HP does not matter. It matters in a lot of games, in fact, most that I am aware of. This is basically an application of part of the Paragon Template.

[RegalKain]

The problem with this, is the assumption of a game in which HP does not matter. It matters in a lot of games, in fact, most that I am aware of. This is basically an application of part of the Paragon Template.

The problem with D&D is after level 18 HP doesn't matter all that much, unless your entire group is low-OP and your DM players the monsters as such, if this is the case though? I think you should alter the homebrew to fit your setting. What I proposed wasn't really a bad idea, infact it adds to making HP "important" or relies on it being as such, maxed HD every level plus a little bonus is a good thing, in the end it works out to be about the same, the average is just over 50% of a roll, instead of increasing the max you get from a HD (12 to 18 for example) auto-maxing them all to 12 is in my opinion a superior idea, and much easier to do in gameplay terms. I guess it all depends on the group, even mid-op though, HP matters very very little late-game, as most creatures have spell-casting or can throw out over a hundred damage easily in a single round.

[DrDeth]

I often take Imp Toughness as it stands.

Now, Toughness- well that's for 1st level elf wizards. It's actually not a bad feat at 1st level. After that, it's pretty worthless.

[pwykersotz]

most creatures have spell-casting or can throw out over a hundred damage easily in a single round.

I respectfully disagree on this point. Both a Balor and an Ancient Green Dragon (CR 20 and 21 respectively) deal less that as written.

As for your other points, you're right, a lot of monsters have ways to kill you that trivialize HP, but is this a reason to have a single feat do so much? Your proposed idea would net a 20th level Barbarian 110 hp for just the maxed HD alone, not to mention the xbonus added on. If you already believe HP is less that important (such as if you use Hide Life) than this feat is irrelevant anyway. If you're playing a game where it IS important, such a vast departure from the norm with one feat is generally ill advised.

Or have I missed something from your argument?

[Chronos]

To those who say that HP don't matter at high levels: Last game, my 16th level cleric (the one who took Improved Toughness) ended the climactic battle at exactly 6 HP. You might want to do the math on that one. And that was even after a mid-battle Heal spell used on himself, after he previously ended up in the single digits.

Yes, a feat should give you interesting abilities. In this case, the feat gave me the ability to move, and to cast spells, and to stick a sword in things, none of which I would have been able to do without the feat.

[RegalKain]

I respectfully disagree on this point. Both a Balor and an Ancient Green Dragon (CR 20 and 21 respectively) deal less that as written.

As for your other points, you're right, a lot of monsters have ways to kill you that trivialize HP, but is this a reason to have a single feat do so much? Your proposed idea would net a 20th level Barbarian 110 hp for just the maxed HD alone, not to mention the xbonus added on. If you already believe HP is less that important (such as if you use Hide Life) than this feat is irrelevant anyway. If you're playing a game where it IS important, such a vast departure from the norm with one feat is generally ill advised.

Or have I missed something from your argument?

If the dragon uses no spells of any kind, without using quicken of any kind sure, it'll do less then a 100, assuming you are immune to fire completely, sure the Pit Fiend will do less then a 100, the Balor's absolute minimum damage (Assuming it hits with it's full-attack) is 61 damage, that's assuming all damage rolled are 1s. So sure you're right assuming he doesn't case a spell, and just full attacks, he won't do over 100 damage. But he'll be rather close.

Vast departure from the norm? Ok, let's for instance say it gives +1HP a level, that means for the barbarian he has gained roughly 120-130 bonus HP from this feat. (Assuming average rolls before.) Your variant gives him a chance (I'm also wondering how you'd do that with 18, a d12 and a d6? That boosts his minimum at least.) with average someone else already worked it out to being what, 60 or so HP? Yes, mine is double that, but it leaves less room for a higher maximum, Let's say both of our "barbarians" have a con of 10 (Easier that way.)

Level 20 Barbarian- My variant- 260HP at level 20 (Everytime, no questions asked, that's what he gets.)

Level 20 Barbarian- Your Variant- (Assuming 1d12+1d6 if you are just adding half again to the roll this will change, correct me if you're adding half again.) Round-down since D&D likes to do that. Level 1 is auto 18, Levels 2-20 will vary wildly based on the roll. he will get anywhere from 1 to 18 or 2-18 (Assuming 1d12 and 1d6) So at level 20 your Barbarian will have anywhere from, 37 HP (The extreme low, rolling minimum everytime.) to 360 (The extreme high rolling max everytime.) unless you do 1d12+1d6 in which case his minimum would be 56. Leveling it out to an average? Both barbarians wind up with comparable HP at those levels (A difference of perhaps 20 or so which is one attack most often.) yours makes it so that there is a variation in it still, and you can still get Barbarians with less HP then a wizard who rolled better, my variation auto-maxes so the Barbarian will know exactly how much HP he's going to end up with.

Edit:
To those who say that HP don't matter at high levels: Last game, my 16th level cleric (the one who took Improved Toughness) ended the climactic battle at exactly 6 HP. You might want to do the math on that one. And that was even after a mid-battle Heal spell used on himself, after he previously ended up in the single digits.

Yes, a feat should give you interesting abilities. In this case, the feat gave me the ability to move, and to cast spells, and to stick a sword in things, none of which I would have been able to do without the feat.

HP doesn't matter in High-OP games, and often doesn't matter as much in Mid-OP games, it does matter in Low-OP games and sometimes in Mid-OP games. Honestly how useful a feat is, depends almost entirely on your DM and your group, if your DM is an optimizer of any kind and uses advanced tactics with their enemies, HP will matter a lot less at high levels and your casters will matter more. This is also assuming your party is built by the standard boring rule of 1Caster,1Divine Caster, 1 Melee, 1SkillMonkey I find that rather boring so, it'll change a lot based on who is in your party as well, I think we can all agree the usefulness of most feats is dependent on your party, your group size, and what your DM allows.

[Popertop]

Yay, Tippy posted in my thread!


So basically this question is directed at him, but I'm also wondering what other people's thoughts are.

What kind of benefits should the Improved Toughness feat give that would make it worth taking for non-casters? (I'm mainly looking at what types of protections or immunities, as that's what would logically be gained from a feat named Toughness)

[Emperor Tippy]

Yay, Tippy posted in my thread!


So basically this question is directed at him, but I'm also wondering what other people's thoughts are.

What kind of benefits should the Improved Toughness feat give that would make it worth taking for non-casters? (I'm mainly looking at what types of protections or immunities, as that's what would logically be gained from a feat named Toughness)

Once per encounter (or five minutes if outside of an encounter, whichever is longer) you get to become immune to damage until the start of your next turn thanks to your mighty thews. This can be used as a free action at any point in time (including your enemies turn) and even if you are flat footed.

Basically, once per encounter you get to just say Nope to damage for a round.

[Popertop]

Okay, how about some protections from magical attack?

Like permanent protections that don't outright invalidate or duplicate another classes features? (slippery mind)

[hicegetraenk]

Gaining HP / passive protection from some kind of damage in whatever way is the kind of feat I'd never take. As mentioned before, feats should be amazing. But not just in their power they add to the character; it should improve my gameplay options. I like feats that I can use actively, and that have an impact on the game.

HP has no impact on the game on itself, it's rather more of "nothing really happens" if you get hit. And they're not even usable in any fashion (without serious meta gaming problems like "I'ma jump down this cliff, because the 20d6 dmg can't kill me with my 200hp"), unlike other passive bonuses to initiative / attack / ...

Protection from magical attack has the exact same issue. It'll trigger some time and then its effect is that there is less effect on everything without me really influencing things.

[Mighty_Chicken]

Once per encounter (or five minutes if outside of an encounter, whichever is longer) you get to become immune to damage until the start of your next turn thanks to your mighty thews. This can be used as a free action at any point in time (including your enemies turn) and even if you are flat footed.

Basically, once per encounter you get to just say Nope to damage for a round.

IMHO, situations like a town guard surviving being chewed by a dragon should be avoid,

So what about, at lower level (maybe up to 10th level) you can halve the damage of an attack once per encounter.

And to keep things simple, aside from that, it's one of the weaker variants (like 3 hp +1/level). Improved Toughness could grant a HD-based hp bonus (like extra 4hp/level for barbarians, 3/level for fighters and pallys etc) and an additional use of the damage avoiding ability.

Is this too powerful for a low op game?


Gaining HP / passive protection from some kind of damage in whatever way is the kind of feat I'd never take. As mentioned before, feats should be amazing. But not just in their power they add to the character; it should improve my gameplay options. I like feats that I can use actively, and that have an impact on the game.


Next game I DM, we'll use the "awesome points" varient: players give Action Point chips every time another player does something awesome. Describing how you didn't die with that sword in your gut, or after your skin was carbonized by a fireball, seems a good opportunity to be awesome.

[Popertop]

Next game I DM, we'll use the "awesome points" varient: players give Action Point chips every time another player does something awesome. Describing how you didn't die with that sword in your gut, or after your skin was carbonized by a fireball, seems a good opportunity to be awesome.

Fate actually has "awesome points" built into the game engine. I'm thinking I should just convert 3.5's content over to that system. :smallsigh:


Since everyone has expressed a negative view of passive protection, let's look into how we can make this feat proactive.

Tippy's idea is great for higher OP games, but what are some other ways you could "use" a Toughness feat in a game?

[Maginomicon]

Why not have it simply increase the size of all hit dice of the creature by one step (maximum d12)? If that doesn't seem powerful enough, it could also force all HP rolls to be the average (like that used in monster stat blocks and described in a variant in the DMG), which would universally improve the creature's virulence (as described in that DMG variant).

[Oko and Qailee]

So, I wanted to join this discussion a bit. Some people mentioned that toughness will never be good because it's static. I don't quite agree. Knowledge Devotion is static, and I don't think anyone doesn't enjoy 50k worth of weapon damage stapled onto a build.

Tippy kinda touched on HP being bad on page two, but I don't think he really does it justice explaining why a ton of HP is bad (no offense intended).

So first let me think of a flat total that would be fine to add to a character that should be justifiable. Just so I am adding a suggestion to the thread.

How about 120? A Amulet of Health gives +6 CON, this gives 60 HP by level 20, but we don't get the Fort Bonus, so why not just double the HP?

Toughness:
+120 HP.

It sounds pretty awesome, but honestly it's still pretty bad. The reason is because no matter what stacking HP is bad in practice when you really think about it.

Yeah you're going to be stabbed 300 times and live, but once the DM realizes you're unkillable that way he's going to always change methodology. Damage doesn't have this problem AT ALL.

Ex. Things that stop an Uber-charger for massacring you - not being there (duh), concealment, DR, AC. That's usually everything. Of those, two of those can be overcome by just doing "more damage", and concealment just requires an item. Stacking tons of damage always works in positive relation to the goal of "I want to kill that guy/girl/thing".

Now, the point of tons of HP is to Not Die. However, there are way more methods of attack that don't touch HP.
Ability Drain, Ability Damage, Paralysis, Stun, Sleep, Instant Death, etc.
When so many options are available, and your goal is to never die, in order to cover all the bases you end up having to make an essentially "I can't period" build. In which case the HP is pointless. On the other hand, if you choose to not do that, well you being beaten is just a Shivering Touch and a few COup-de-Grace' away. Stacking tons of HP may be completely useless in terms of working towards the goal of "I don't want to die."

To make things worse, as Tippy pointed out, the amount of methods that basically make you "never hit" are pretty high. Meaning any HP you get at all is unimportant. If your AC and Reflex saves are abazillionty you don't really need HP. Even not including T1's you can be so tanky your HP is indirectly infinity.

Now, that's not to say at your typical gaming table you CANT make HP valuable. Not every DM is using a ton of spells and in a low OP campaign stacking HP would actually be pretty decent.

Hell, if people had tons of more HP, optimized healing might actually become decent because there would be a reason to actually heal abazillion hp per round (Healing is too good for too little effort) and healing is one of my favorite archetypes (but I guess that's off topic, sorry).

[Oko and Qailee]

TBH I think toughness should just be scrapped and replaced with a buffed Improved Toughness (gives 3-5HP per level).

Or make toughness a feat chain that ends up crazy awesome. Each requiring the previous with other bonuses than just HP.

Toughness: +5HP
Bacons Toughness: +10HP, +1 Fort Saves
Crispy Bacon Toughness: +20HP, +2 Con
Mega Tough Beef Jerky Toughness: +40HP, +2 Con, 3/day you can replace any save with your fort save or add your fort save to your AC.

[Seerow]

So that post gave me a random idea.

Toughness
Prerequisite: Con 13
Benefit: Gain [+bunch] HP. If you are under the effect of a status condition that negatively impacts you, you can give up your level in hit points to spend a swift action to shrug off that status condition. If you are not able to take actions normally(or your actions are being controlled by another creature), you may activate this feat anyway, as a full round action. Activating the feat in this manner costs 3x level in hit points.

[Oko and Qailee]

1) That's super cool
2) Why not make it always a swift action and make it a sort Iron-Heart Surge thing?

[HaikenEdge]

So that post gave me a random idea.

Toughness
Prerequisite: Con 13
Benefit: Gain [+bunch] HP. If you are under the effect of a status condition that negatively impacts you, you can give up your level in hit points to spend a swift action to shrug off that status condition. If you are not able to take actions normally(or your actions are being controlled by another creature), you may activate this feat anyway, as a full round action. Activating the feat in this manner costs 3x level in hit points.

At which point, why not just make Toughness Iron Heart Surge you can activate by paying health?

[Seerow]

1) That's super cool
2) Why not make it always a swift action and make it a sort Iron-Heart Surge thing?


At which point, why not just make Toughness Iron Heart Surge you can activate by paying health?



Mostly because I feel shrugging off something like Shaken or Dazzle should be easier to do than shrugging of Paralysis and Dominate. And Iron Heart Surge is encounter limited, and generally considered very powerful despite that. (And of course Toughness is coming with a bunch of HP in addition to the IHS style effect)

[Oko and Qailee]

What you can do is just make an HP Iron Heart Surge and then make separate Toughness feats that add HP. It would give a good reason to add tons of HP. You can also make different CC's cost different amounts, TBH Fighters/Barbarians would love this.

I also made a homebrewed Blood Mage that used HP to cast spells, with a d4 HD, meaning HP stacking was ok on him.

[Seerow]

What you can do is just make an HP Iron Heart Surge and then make separate Toughness feats that add HP. It would give a good reason to add tons of HP. You can also make different CC's cost different amounts, TBH Fighters/Barbarians would love this.

I also made a homebrewed Blood Mage that used HP to cast spells, with a d4 HD, meaning HP stacking was ok on him.

The point is to make toughness a good feat. Making toughness a good feat, but only when taken with this other feat that is what people really want doesn't really cut it IMO.

[Oko and Qailee]

Completely changing the feat but keeping the same name doesn't really cut it IMO, it's no longer the same feat. Adding a bunch of HP makes it better but still basically the same function.

Some feat's are only good because of what they add in conjunction with other feats/features/items. A ton of melee options are useless by their own but when you add them all together they end up being worth it. A better example is a Diplomancer, Skill Focus (Diplomacy) by itself is nothing to write home about, and if that's all you have in Diplomacy it's a bad feat. Now on a half-elf, with high charisma, SKill Focus/that other feat that gives +2, synergies, ranks, etc. We'll suddenly that +3 is the difference between convincing everyone in town to worship you 50% of the time or 65% of the time.

[Seerow]

I think I've just witnessed a microcosm of the Fighter problem.

"Let's make the Fighter better"
"Okay let's do these things!"
"Okay yeah those things are cool... but it's not the Fighter. We'll give that to someone else."
"Okay well the Fighter still sucks, what do we do?"
"Eh the Fighter works well as a dip to supplement that other class, so it's good"




Replace Fighter with Toughness, and we get the recent exchange of posts. It's actually quite entertaining.

[Popertop]

Holy crap, HP as a resource.


Folks, I think we've hit the motherload.


This reminds me of when MtG printed Necropotence.

[TypoNinja]

Why not have it simply increase the size of all hit dice of the creature by one step (maximum d12)? If that doesn't seem powerful enough, it could also force all HP rolls to be the average (like that used in monster stat blocks and described in a variant in the DMG), which would universally improve the creature's virulence (as described in that DMG variant).

Increasing HD by one step actually equates to +1 HP on average per level. Every die is two sides larger than its predecessor, so your average roll is one point higher.

Average (I assume you mean at least average) roll minimum isn't bad either, but again you run into the same problem, its just not very much HP.

For the same reason Empower gives more average damage than Maximize, forcing a minimum HP roll isn't going to give you very many HP for your Feat. In fact half the time it's going to give you nothing.


Somebody mentioned Knowledge devotion as an example of a static benefit that people still like. They missed the second part of what makes a good feat. Scaling power, or new tricks/powers.

Knowledge devotion adds any knowledge skill to your Class Skill list, regardless of what class you picked. That's a pretty unique power, and could help you qualify for a PrC. It also grants you the use of the knowledge skill, which can be very handy. All this before we even hit the damage bonus for the check. (which seems to synergize nicely with the archivists Dark Knowledge, I must say.)

When we talk about feats providing static bonuses being bad, its usually in reference to things like the +2+2 feats, or things like Iron Will (when its not a feat tax for something else you want.) Lots of feats do provide static bonuses and are still nice, but they usually provide something that is hard or impossible to gain without that feat. Improved Grapple is a flat +4, but the ability to start a grapple without provoking is the ability you are really after.

There are of course exceptions. Once you have a character gimmick picked out, you stack everything you can on it. A feat that might be bad in isolation could be perfect for a certain build.

Bottom line, you typically want your Feats to either give you scaling powers so they stay relevant, or new abilities so you have options you wouldn't have otherwise. Or to drive your skill level at a chosen task even higher. To a lesser extent, you typically don't want feats that give you things that could be replaced by money. Money is plentiful, your feats are scarce.

[Oko and Qailee]

Replace Fighter with Toughness, and we get the recent exchange of posts. It's actually quite entertaining.

Haha.

It's not quite the same though.

Because Toughness is staying the same, but it's good because of what it allows you to take, just like I believe Fighters would be good if there were better Fighter Only feats (Like honestly, weapon specialization for +2? Cmoooon.) The fighter is the same, toughness is the same, just toughness will let you also have IHS and Fighter would still be fighter but way better if it let you take Wep Spec, except Wep Spec gives a +8 to damage instead of +2.

But that's just my opinion at this point. I can't really prove what is or isn't the same "feat" or "class".

[Oko and Qailee]

Holy crap, HP as a resource.


Folks, I think we've hit the motherload.


This reminds me of when MtG printed Necropotence.

The Blood Mage homebrew I mentioned (isn't on this comp so I can't double check) was something like:

Has a # of Arcane Spells known (as Erudite I think), drawn from Sorcerer/Wizard list, removing healing spells and troublesome spells (polymorph line).
Can only spend XHP per day on spells (as Psion power points).

Spells had a base cost of twice that as a S2P Erudite (ex. Level 2 spells cost 6 HP to Cast and 2HP to Augment)

Casting stat was Constitution.

[TypoNinja]

The Blood Mage homebrew I mentioned (isn't on this comp so I can't double check) was something like:

Has a # of Arcane Spells known (as Erudite I think), drawn from Sorcerer/Wizard list, removing healing spells and troublesome spells (polymorph line).
Can only spend XHP per day on spells (as Psion power points).

Spells had a base cost of twice that as a S2P Erudite (ex. Level 2 spells cost 6 HP to Cast and 2HP to Augment)

Casting stat was Constitution.

Its like casting magic on Krynn!

[Maginomicon]

Increasing HD by one step actually equates to +1 HP on average per level. Every die is two sides larger than its predecessor, so your average roll is one point higher.

Average (I assume you mean at least average) roll minimum isn't bad either, but again you run into the same problem, its just not very much HP.

For the same reason Empower gives more average damage than Maximize, forcing a minimum HP roll isn't going to give you very many HP for your Feat. In fact half the time it's going to give you nothing.
What if...

The upgrade affected all of your hit dice (making you reroll the older hit dice too),
You always reroll 1s on hit dice,
After rerolling 1s, you rolled your HP again and took the better result (rerolling 1s as before),
Like the original toughness, you could take it multiple times, AND
You gain a Reserve Point pool (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/reservePoints.htm) if you don't already have one.


Also, aren't there some effects that only qualify by having a certain kind of hit die?

[Fax Celestis]

Why not have it simply increase the size of all hit dice of the creature by one step (maximum d12)?
Averages to +1 HP/die, or basically, Improved Toughness.


If that doesn't seem powerful enough, it could also force all HP rolls to be the average (like that used in monster stat blocks and described in a variant in the DMG), which would universally improve the creature's virulence (as described in that DMG variant).

...should have essentially no effect on HP, unless you're referring to doing a floor() function, not an average(). Forcing all HD to be minimum average is pretty strong. Depending on HD, that's between +1 (d4) and +5 (d12) per level.

[Popertop]

When I made this thread, I didn't really think it was going to be such a divisive issue! Lol.