Feats that should be Epic, and Epic feats that shouldn't be

[The Kool]

To start this off, there's one feat in particular that I've always felt should honestly be tagged Epic. People always have issues with it, but adding the Epic tag pretty much fixes all of them: Persist Spell. What would you guys bump over to Epic, or bump down from Epic?

[Troacctid]

Basically every epic feat in Magic of Incarnum.

[Kaleph]

Those epic feats that removed some penalty from jumping and climbing; where they updated in 3.5? I believe I've found somewhere non-epic feats that gave the same or even better benefits.

The same applies probably to the feat that gives you some limited pouncing ability; now there are so many ways to get it pre-epic (even at 1st level, actually).

[MultitudeMan]

How about making Leadership an Epic feat? It gets DM bans so often, but would it be so offensive if you had to be level 21+ to qualify?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

It's easier to state which [Epic] feats should remain so, rather than which ones shouldn't. Nearly all the currently-[Epic] feats should not be.

Epic Spellcasting and Epic Manifesting shouldn't be [Epic]. They shouldn't "be" at all. Unless you completely rework the epic spellcasting rules, that is.

Blinding Speed should, at least, if you keep the original 3.0 haste effect instead of the seriously watered-down 3.5 effect.

The additional wild shape feats would be okay once you get some of the higher level wild shape prereqs. HD restrictions are generally enough to keep the extra-large forms out of player hands, and there's no real reason why a druid couldn't have smaller forms, given that metamorphosis can get access to those at level 7.

The [Epic] crafting feats should probably stay [Epic].

Distant Shot should probably remain [Epic], or at least high level.

The feats to gain 10+ level spells & slots and Epic Expanded Knowledge should remain [Epic], though regular Expanded Knowledge should allow 9ths at level 19+.

Epic Leadership, definitely. Regular Leadership could stand to be an [Epic] feat, really.

Epic Speed should be non-[Epic], but it should have more stringent prereqs to keep it higher level (10+). After all, magic items that do this are really cheap.

Epic Toughness should have a few additional prereqs to keep it higher level, but there's no reason you couldn't take it at level 15+.

Ignore Material Components seems a bit much no matter what the level, really.

Improved Heighten Spell should stay [Epic], since you have to have level 10+ spells for it to work anyway. Although abilities such as Versatile Spellcaster do allow you to break that limit pre-epic.

Improved Metamagic should stay [Epic]. That's a REALLY powerful feat.

Improved Metapsionics is waaaaaay less powerful than Improved Metapsionics (the reduction is per manifestation, not per feat). It's fine as pre-[Epic].

Improved Spell Capacity is fine as [Epic].

Legendary Commander, as with Leadership and its improved versions, is most definitely [Epic]-worthy.

Multispell is definitely [Epic].

MULTIWEAPON FIGHTING AND PERFECT MULTIWEAPON/TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING SHOULD BE ROLLED INTO TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING, AVAILABLE AT LEVEL 1. Seriously. There are so many penalties to the TWF fighting style when compared to THF it's revolting. This would help with less than half of them, but it's far less problematic, even so.

Permanent Emanation. I'd say it's a good candidate for an [Epic] feat.

Power Knowledge and Spell Knowledge seem like they'd be awfully overpowered at lower levels, but they're not that bad, actually. Maybe with some minor restrictions, but considering how easy it is to gain spells and powers known, I'd say they're fine pre-epic.

Undead Mastery is really close to Leadership stuff, so it should probably remain [Epic].

[JMS]

Infinite deflection stays epic, as “Ranged attacks can hit” is a bit of an expectation. The feat to deflect rays is fine.

[ayvango]

Deities & Demigods feats should be at least epic

[The Kool]

Deities & Demigods feats should be at least epic

Some of them, yeah, but I don't think Knockdown (for example) should. That's on par with a lot of fighter feats.

[ayvango]

That's on par with a lot of fighter feats.
Could you name two?

[The Kool]

Stand Still is pretty good. Improved Trip does a similar thing. I could dig for more?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Could you name two?The dungeon crasher ability is not a fighter feat, but it's a feat-equivalent, since you trade a feat for it.

Improved Trip is definitely a fantastic feat.

Shock Trooper, too.

Snap Kick is fantastic if you optimize unarmed strikes.

Evasive Reflexes is really nice, especially with Combat Reflexes added in.

Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike are excellent. Also see Evasive Reflexes and Combat Reflexes.

[ayvango]

Well, I just noticed that you could not trip already tripped creature, so no perpetum mobile on improved trip + knock-down, so it is ok.

[King of Nowhere]

To start this off, there's one feat in particular that I've always felt should honestly be tagged Epic. People always have issues with it, but adding the Epic tag pretty much fixes all of them: Persist Spell. What would you guys bump over to Epic, or bump down from Epic?

the problem is not persist spell. +6 to spell level is a major investment.
the problem is getting persistent spells for free with tricks. Since the top offender here is divine metamagic, I'd say that there's a stronger case for making divine metamagic an epic feat than persist spells.


How about making Leadership an Epic feat? It gets DM bans so often, but would it be so offensive if you had to be level 21+ to qualify?

some DM do not ban it, and everyone has fun with cohorts. Making the feat epic would hurt them.
Those that ban it would ban it even if it was epic, so no improvement there.

But personally, I think leadership should not exist as a feat, period. if it exist, there is no reason not to take it on any build, so you may as well say "everyone get leadership at level 6 and does not get a feat". So at this point you may as well say "this story/table will let you all get followers without needing to take a feat"

that said, I name improved whirlwind attack as a non-epic feat.
It looks cool on paper, but seriously, when are you ever gooing to pull off that many attacks? and those times you do, you may as well get your cake. wizards regularly get to attack more opponents with AoE effects.
In fact, I say improved whirlwind attack should be the effect of the normal whirlwind attack. it costs 5 feats to get, most of them useless feat taxes. and if you want to enjoy reach, you need still more stuff. may as welll let you enjoy something nice if you invested so much in it.

[MinimanMidget]

Instant Reload. If you want to pay 3 feats to make up for the fact that crossbows suck, go nuts.

I also think Combat Archery. It has enough useless prereqs, it shouldn't need level 21 as well.

[Doctor Awkward]

MULTIWEAPON FIGHTING AND PERFECT MULTIWEAPON/TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING SHOULD BE ROLLED INTO TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING, AVAILABLE AT LEVEL 1. Seriously. There are so many penalties to the TWF fighting style when compared to THF it's revolting.

This is largely because they wanted to reflect the reality of two-weapon fighting. It's insanely difficult to do well, for exactly the same reason juggling is difficult.

Most instructors won't even start letting you train to fight with a weapon in each hand until you can fight equally well with one weapon in either hand.

[The Kool]

So at this point you may as well say "this story/table will let you all get followers without needing to take a feat"

AD&D used to do that! It's a valid style of campaign, and one that can easily be worked in. It's not the followers that break the game, after all, it's the cohorts.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

AD&D used to do that! It's a valid style of campaign, and one that can easily be worked in. It's not the followers that break the game, after all, it's the cohorts.Tell that to Epic Spellcasting mitigation.

Or Tucker's Kobolds.

Or ascending to godhood via a cult of personality bona-fide religion, I swear!

[ngilop]

A good rule of thumb is; if it benefits mundanes it should NOT be epic and probably available at levels 7th through 15th give or take.


If it benefits casters as much as mundanes. It should be epic


If it benefits only casters, chances are its broken (and in the too good definition) and should mostly be banned.

[DarkSoul]

How about making Leadership an Epic feat? It gets DM bans so often, but would it be so offensive if you had to be level 21+ to qualify?Stop letting players design every aspect of their cohorts and followers, and make PC classes count as higher levels like the rules say, and it's not nearly so bad. The extent of the players involvement should be "I want a class X cohort. If I can get prestige class Y, even better." These players that think they can expect to create an entire second character down to the last skill point are sadly (for them) mistaken.

[HouseRules]

A good rule of thumb is; if it benefits mundanes it should NOT be epic and probably available at levels 7th through 15th give or take.

No, If it benefits mundanes in a NUMERICAL way, it should convert to a skill that uses another source of skill points (non-intelligence based skill points; preferably strength-based or dexterity-based skill points). If we convert all of the Martial Weapon Proficiency Feats, Weapon Focus Feats, and Greater Weapon Focus Feats into a single skill for each Martial Weapon, then the game relatively balanced.

The issue is that 1 feat = remove -4 penalty (many feats, mostly proficiency feats) or give +1 bonus (feats similar to weapon focus and greater weapon focus).

[Biggus]

Nonepic feats that should be epic:

Natural Spell: probably shouldn't be available until about level 27 in fact

Craft Contingent Spell: if it shouldn't be banned entirely

Fell Drain: borderline, but just a bit too good, especially if metamagic reducers are available

Craven: waaaay better than the epic feat Improved Sneak Attack

Words of Creation: for a Bard with a decent source of healing available, far better than Epic Inspiration

Greenbound Summoning: apparently this was intended to be a +2 level adjustment metamagic feat. Like that, it would have been OK. As published, it's ridiculous

Initiate of Mystra: if it should be allowed at all. One feat to give Clerics access to all Arcane spells up to 5th level? Oh, and you can attempt to cast spells in an AMF...

Epic feats that shouldn't be epic:

Armor Skin: Quite possibly the worst of the lot. +1AC? When any nonepic monster can get the same thing if they have a natural armour bonus? And when AC is not generally very useful at epic? Sheesh...

Epic Weapon Focus: this is probably what Greater WF should do. Maybe +3 for the actual epic version?

Epic Weapon Specialisation: this is probably what Greater WS should do. Maybe +6 for the actual epic version?

Dire Charge: worse than a lot of nonepic pounce abilities

Energy Resistance: weak for an epic feat, probably more appropriate at level 11 or so

Overwhelming Critical: this is basically just a feat tax for Devastating Critical, can't see why anyone would think it worth an epic feat slot otherwise in 3.5 (wasn't quite so bad in 3.0 when improvements to threat range stacked, but it wasn't great even then)

Improved Darkvision/ Improved Low-Light Vision: so Distant Shot enables you to target anything at any range with no penalties, and these...double the range of your vision?

Improved Favored Enemy: worse than the nonepic feat Improved Favored Enemy

Legendary Climber/ Legendary Leaper: if you've reached level 21 without the ability to fly or teleport, you're doing something wrong (or your DM is really stingy with magic items)

Epic Prowess: only reason I can see you'd take this is if you're a high-epic Fighter who's run out of other things to spend your feats on. And by high-epic, +1 to attack is feeble

There are plenty of other epic feats which are pretty uninspiring, but these are the ones which really stand out for me.



Epic Toughness should have a few additional prereqs to keep it higher level, but there's no reason you couldn't take it at level 15+.


Epic Toughness is a badly designed feat, it's worse than Improved Toughness at level 31+. It would make more sense for Epic Toughness to simply be a version of Improved Toughness you can take multiple times, or possibly a slightly better version, maybe extra HPs = 10 + HD.


Some of them, yeah, but I don't think Knockdown (for example) should. That's on par with a lot of fighter feats.

Which feats from D&DG do you think should be epic? Most of them don't seem all that OP to me.


the problem is not persist spell. +6 to spell level is a major investment.
the problem is getting persistent spells for free with tricks. Since the top offender here is divine metamagic, I'd say that there's a stronger case for making divine metamagic an epic feat than persist spells.


This was my first thought, but then it occurred to me that there are a lot of metamagic reducer feats and class abilities out there, so it's a case of either make most/ all of them epic, or just making Persistent Spell epic. Certainly DMM is by far the worst offender, but even allowing Clerics to persist 4th-level spells is problematic (Divine Power being the most obvious example) and with a bit of effort they can persist 5th and 6th level spells too, even without DMM.

I can see an argument for making all metamagic reducer feats epic, to be fair.



If it benefits only casters, chances are its broken (and in the too good definition) and should mostly be banned.

I dunno, there are a few caster-only epic feats (Epic Spellcasting, Multispell, Ignore Material Components, Improved Metamagic) which are insanely powerful if allowed without any restrictions, but most of the others seem OK to me.

[Zaq]

No love-hatred for Augmented Alchemy? That shouldn't even be a feat, let alone an epic feat. The actual effect of improved alchemical items is so disgustingly small that it doesn’t even come close to justifying the gold cost, even without a feat.

[The Kool]

Stop letting players design every aspect of their cohorts and followers, and make PC classes count as higher levels like the rules say, and it's not nearly so bad. The extent of the players involvement should be "I want a class X cohort. If I can get prestige class Y, even better." These players that think they can expect to create an entire second character down to the last skill point are sadly (for them) mistaken.

I've actually done similar things. In future small campaigns I would probably allow the feat, subject to: Your followers aren't under your direct control, we'll stat some out if we need to but they're probably all NPC classes; Your cohort is likewise not under your control, I will keep the character sheet and make his decisions, if you want him to do something you'll need to communicate; You don't get to level up your cohort, though you can request he train up certain things; When you gain your cohort, you will be presented with several different descriptions and will have to pick which one you like most, you don't get to see the character sheets or even know what level they are yet; Speaking of, I will in fact stat them out myself and randomly determine things like race, age, level, and so forth.

[Biggus]

and make PC classes count as higher levels like the rules say

This is actually an optional rule, and it only appears in the ELH; it wasn't reproduced in the SRD. All the DMG says is "followers are similar to cohorts, except they’re generally low-level NPCs".

I 100% agree that if you allow followers with PC classes you should reduce their level though. Leadership is plenty good enough as it is.

[Mr Adventurer]

Numerical epic feats tend to be 5 or 10 times the effect of their nonepic counterparts. So Epic Weapon Focus should be +5 or +10 to hit, and Epic Weapon Specialisation should be +10 or +20 to damage.

Regarding Leadership, not getting to build all your cohorts and followers is fine, but hiding info from your players or offering them a range of levels for their cohort selection which they don't know ahead of time is hardcore bull****.

[Biggus]

Numerical epic feats tend to be 5 or 10 times the effect of their nonepic counterparts.

Which epic feats are you talking about? Most of them that I'm aware of are about 2-3 times the effect of the nonepic version. The only one I know which is 10 times the effect is Epic Toughness.

[King of Nowhere]

This was my first thought, but then it occurred to me that there are a lot of metamagic reducer feats and class abilities out there, so it's a case of either make most/ all of them epic, or just making Persistent Spell epic. Certainly DMM is by far the worst offender, but even allowing Clerics to persist 4th-level spells is problematic (Divine Power being the most obvious example) and with a bit of effort they can persist 5th and 6th level spells too, even without DMM.

I can see an argument for making all metamagic reducer feats epic, to be fair.


my personal houserule here is that you cannot reduce the cost of a metamagic feat below half of its normal cost. so, persist under that rule is at least 3 levels higher. Granted, it is still very useful, probably the most useful of all the metamagic feats together with quicken spell.
when coupled with a lack of insane caster level sheanigans to prevent dispels, though, it remains at least manageable.

[Mr Adventurer]

Which epic feats are you talking about? Most of them that I'm aware of are about 2-3 times the effect of the nonepic version. The only one I know which is 10 times the effect is Epic Toughness.

Wait, you're right.

Still, EWF/EWS seem about right at those levels

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I've actually done similar things. In future small campaigns I would probably allow the feat, subject to: Your followers aren't under your direct control, we'll stat some out if we need to but they're probably all NPC classes; Your cohort is likewise not under your control, I will keep the character sheet and make his decisions, if you want him to do something you'll need to communicate; You don't get to level up your cohort, though you can request he train up certain things; When you gain your cohort, you will be presented with several different descriptions and will have to pick which one you like most, you don't get to see the character sheets or even know what level they are yet; Speaking of, I will in fact stat them out myself and randomly determine things like race, age, level, and so forth.This is the best argument I've ever heard of for using them purely as sacrificial XP.

[Blackhawk748]

Whats the feat that gives you Fast Healing 3? It has a pre req of like 21 Con I believe? That shouldn't be Epic, just let the Barbarian and Fighter have it if they want.

[DarkSoul]

This is actually an optional rule, and it only appears in the ELH; it wasn't reproduced in the SRD. All the DMG says is "followers are similar to cohorts, except they’re generally low-level NPCs".

I 100% agree that if you allow followers with PC classes you should reduce their level though. Leadership is plenty good enough as it is.
Considering the availability of the 3.5 books, especially for the internet-savvy, the fact that something isn't in the SRD isn't a valid reason to disregard a rule, in my opinion. It being an optional rule is, but it also reins in the power of Leadership so there's little reason not to use it.

It's almost sad that most of the players I've encountered online assume the feat is banned by default. I've only had one player take it and they were a bit shocked when I not only allowed it, but suggested it in the first place.

[Mr Adventurer]

I don't take Leadership for the same reason I don't play a Wizard: I'm there to play the game, not spend hours poring over books for spells or a whole second character build. No negativity for those who do - it's just absolutely not my bag.

[Biggus]

my personal houserule here is that you cannot reduce the cost of a metamagic feat below half of its normal cost. so, persist under that rule is at least 3 levels higher. Granted, it is still very useful, probably the most useful of all the metamagic feats together with quicken spell.
when coupled with a lack of insane caster level sheanigans to prevent dispels, though, it remains at least manageable.

That's a pretty good idea actually, I might adopt that myself.


Considering the availability of the 3.5 books, especially for the internet-savvy, the fact that something isn't in the SRD isn't a valid reason to disregard a rule, in my opinion.


I just meant that those who aren't much interested in epic play (which is quite a lot of people) might not of even heard of it, as it's neither in the core books or the SRD. But yeah, if you are aware of it, I can't think of any good reason not to use it.

[The Kool]

Regarding Leadership, not getting to build all your cohorts and followers is fine, but hiding info from your players or offering them a range of levels for their cohort selection which they don't know ahead of time is hardcore bull****.

Is it really, though? Or is it just a hardcore nerf from what you're used to? A feat for an entire second character complete with the action economy, build versatility, and tactics that entails, plus a slew of cannon fodder? Or a feat for an ally that will follow you into combat, and a small horde of people you can give orders to? You're not going in completely blind, the one time I did this the player was quickly able to suss out which one had the skills he wanted, and had a pretty influential say in how the cohort leveled from there.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Is it really, though? Or is it just a hardcore nerf from what you're used to? A feat for an entire second character complete with the action economy, build versatility, and tactics that entails, plus a slew of cannon fodder? Or a feat for an ally that will follow you into combat, and a small horde of people you can give orders to? You're not going in completely blind, the one time I did this the player was quickly able to suss out which one had the skills he wanted, and had a pretty influential say in how the cohort leveled from there.Given that you have no control over the characters' builds or actions, I'd say that's more like, "DMPCs: The Feat."

[Mr Adventurer]

Is it really, though? Or is it just a hardcore nerf from what you're used to?

It's both, obviously. Although as you'll see elsewhere in the thread, I actually don't use Leadership myself, so I'm not committed to its power for myself, and you're mistaken if you're implying that's my motive.