D&D Skills & Feats [Rebalancing 3.5]

[Soda]

I thought we had TWF still having the -2 penalty, but the Improved and Greater feats were all rolled into the main feat.

Other than that, now I remember the feat: it lets you treat a heavy shield as light for TWF purposes, effectively.

Oop, my mistake.

Ya, it should continue to do that, but get more attacks with level. It'd be in line with twf, the ac of the shield balanced by the ease of putting bonus damage on light weapons of the same type.


One more thing:
I don't like how spiked shields deal more damage than non. That should be an aesthetic and damage type choice. And it becomes a significant choice with Bashing.

Shield, light   1d4
Shield, heavy  1d6

[RobbyPants]

So, any thoughts one way or the other on the two shield feats posted here?  I'm hoping to include these before playtesting in case someone rolls up a S&B fighter.

[Soda]

You're ok with the +11 Reflex for fighters? With Con and Dex to Ref, it'll be better than his Fort save by a good amount I think.

Shield Guard gives more Ref!

Definitely makes shields better.

[RobbyPants]

Well, perhaps I should specify that the bonus is only to Reflex saves for half damage.  Then it shouldn't be overpowered.  I can't see how a shield would keep you from getting stuck in a Web for from falling on Grease.

[RobbyPants]

I added the two shield feats to the front page (and to the compendium).  I also fixed the bonus to Reflex saves to only apply to saves for half damage.

[SKRP]

You should mention that Daring Warrior feat is no longer available.

[bkdubs123]

I'm sure you've already been over this, but we might as well go over it again. I personally think Shield Specialization is going overboard. +13 Shield bonus to AC when wielding a non-magical wooden shield? Seriously?

Fighters could already get ACs in the 50s-60s by spending lots of Wealth on it. Now they get to 44 without even trying. I don't know. Seems to be too much, but if you don't change at all how important AC is with respect to "real defenses" like images/concealment/displacement/blink then I guess it hardly matters.

[RobbyPants]

I think that's where JaronK was coming from when he suggested it.  Although, that's at level 20, and you're trading huge damage by using a one-handed weapon.

Playtesting might be a good way to see if it's useful.

You should mention that Daring Warrior feat is no longer available.

Good point.

[Kuroimaken]

I'm sure you've already been over this, but we might as well go over it again. I personally think Shield Specialization is going overboard. +13 Shield bonus to AC when wielding a non-magical wooden shield? Seriously?

Fighters could already get ACs in the 50s-60s by spending lots of Wealth on it. Now they get to 44 without even trying. I don't know. Seems to be too much, but if you don't change at all how important AC is with respect to "real defenses" like images/concealment/displacement/blink then I guess it hardly matters.

Also, I believe it's been mentioned before, but AC as a stat sucks horribly. Just think about it - a mage using Invisibility (which makes anyone he attacks flat-footed) can murder pretty much anything he likes with ranged touch attacks (which ignores armor bonuses that are not deflection and dodge bonuses).

[bkdubs123]

I understand that, but for the times it does matter (which is still a lot more often than it is given credit, the party isn't fighting wizards all the time now is it) a single feat now grants you +11 to your AC. I don't see a single feat granting +11 to attack rolls. I don't see a single feat granting +11 to a single saving throw. It seems to be too much, too easy, that's what I'm saying. Then of course there's Shield Ward.

[Kuroimaken]

I understand that, but for the times it does matter (which is still a lot more often than it is given credit, the party isn't fighting wizards all the time now is it) a single feat now grants you +11 to your AC. I don't see a single feat granting +11 to attack rolls. I don't see a single feat granting +11 to a single saving throw. It seems to be too much, too easy, that's what I'm saying. Then of course there's Shield Ward.

The difference between having ungodly AC and not having it is the difference between being a target or not. That said, if you're not a target, your other party members are (and only to those who would be attacking in melee or ranged with no spells, might I add). It makes you a better tank, which is what a fighter should be in the first place. So I seriously don't see what the problem IS.

Also, that's at 20th level. By then, +11 to AC is a drop in the bucket.

[Soda]

I agree with both sides. :X

[bkdubs123]

By then, +11 to AC is a drop in the bucket.

Absurdly untrue. A Great Wyrm has a Base Attack of +37, and with a Str bonus of +12 say, is capable of hitting ACs 51-69. If, without the Shield Ward feat, you had AC of let's say 46, that Wyrm is going to hit you with a 95% chance. Conversely, with the feat, that Wyrm is going to have to roll a 6 to hit you. The percent chance of a CR 26 monster to hit a 20th level PC goes from 95% down to 65%. Impacting a monster's to hit, who is well out of your league (6 CR over your level), by 30% seems to be a bit more than a drop in the bucket. Make the monster a Pit Fiend, capable of hitting ACs 32-50, it hits you 30% of the time, whereas if you have the feat it knocks it down to praying for a crit at 5%.

Now, of course, I assume you mean that by such a level, AC becomes irrelevant. And you're right, I've never argued that it doesn't. All I argue is that AC becoming irrelevant at those levels is really a problem with the game rather than AC itself. AC is perfectly fine as long as monsters don't have options that completely circumvent AC which are leagues and above those that target AC. Just because too many monsters have those kinds of options after a certain level of gameplay doesn't mean that AC is stoopid, it just means that the game developers decided to make a stat that's supposedly a melee stat irrelevant.

[Kuroimaken]

By then, +11 to AC is a drop in the bucket.

Absurdly untrue. A Great Wyrm has a Base Attack of +37, and with a Str bonus of +12 say, is capable of hitting ACs 51-69. If, without the Shield Ward feat, you had AC of let's say 46, that Wyrm is going to hit you with a 95% chance. Conversely, with the feat, that Wyrm is going to have to roll a 6 to hit you. The percent chance of a CR 26 monster to hit a 20th level PC goes from 95% down to 65%. Impacting a monster's to hit, who is well out of your league (6 CR over your level), by 30% seems to be a bit more than a drop in the bucket. Make the monster a Pit Fiend, capable of hitting ACs 32-50, it hits you 30% of the time, whereas if you have the feat it knocks it down to praying for a crit at 5%.

Now, of course, I assume you mean that by such a level, AC becomes irrelevant. And you're right, I've never argued that it doesn't. All I argue is that AC becoming irrelevant at those levels is really a problem with the game rather than AC itself. AC is perfectly fine as long as monsters don't have options that completely circumvent AC which are leagues and above those that target AC. Just because too many monsters have those kinds of options after a certain level of gameplay doesn't mean that AC is stoopid, it just means that the game developers decided to make a stat that's supposedly a melee stat irrelevant.

The reason that +11 to AC is a drop in the bucket by then is because, as you pointed out, at this level no one is targetting AC. Seriously, a dragon has six times or more your size. You think he's going to use his full attack routine? Hell no, he'll grapple you with his PINKY. The difference in sizes ALONE is going to give him a +16 to his grapple check, never you mind that since they cast as sorcerers, if he's going to actually BE in melee he'll be buffing himself accordingly. And don't forget his yummy draconic presence, which WILL send you running more often than not.

Dragons and pit fiends are both poor examples to test AC at these levels anyway, because they're not specialized for melee - they're good at it, if anything due to size alone, but not their primary focus.

[bkdubs123]

Were the effects of the original Shield Ward feat ever added to standard shield usage, or to any other feats. I thought I remembered some discussion about that.

[Soda]

If we're adding things to standard shield usage, I think shield bonus to Ref for half damage is a good one. Nothing could possibly protect you from a fireball better than a shield. And with the bump to direct damage, it's a much more viable threat.

[RobbyPants]

Looking at both sides of the super-high-AC issue for Shield Specialization, I think I am siding more with bkdubs.

I agree at high levels, the AC bonus doesn't mean much, so, why should we give it out in the first place?  At low levels, it simply might be too high.

The question is, what else could I grant to make it more useful? 

The ability to simply block an attack?  If we go this route, how might we work up a mechanic for it?  I have a few rough ideas:

Defelect Arrows
Grant the bonus of the Deflect Arrows feat, but you need to be holding a shield to make it work.

Auto-Deflect Attack
Allow it to deflect any physical attack with no check, but only once per encounter.

Deflect Attack with check
Allow it to deflect any physical attack, but with an opposed roll.  Perhaps opposed attack rolls, treating the shield as a weapon (so it adds any enhancement bonuses it might have to attack).  This block can be done as an immediate action, but takes a use of an AoO.

Personally, I like that last option the best, but it might slow down gameplay.  Option two is simple, but the justification for why it can only be done once per encounter gets kind of wierd.

Thoughts?

[Risada]

I vote for the last option.

And I don't think it will slowdown gameplay a lot... mainly because it's gonna take mostly some seconds to check how much the shield guy rolled against his foe...

[RobbyPants]

True, and it's not hard to write down your modified shield attack modifier (BAB + Str + whatever else) on your sheet either.

Now, I know a lot of other melee threats will have superior BAB and/or Str to a fighter, but I still think this is better than a flat AC bonus for the most part.

[Midnight_v]

Auto-Deflect Attack
Allow it to deflect any physical attack with no check, but only once per encounter.

Hell no.
No auto anything. If his ac is going to be high then he auto blocks the first of the attacks.. then this guys been given a hell of an advantage. Also kills charging DEAD.

Deflect Attack with check
Allow it to deflect any physical attack, but with an opposed roll.  Perhaps opposed attack rolls, treating the shield as a weapon (so it adds any enhancement bonuses it might have to attack).  This block can be done as an immediate action, but takes a use of an AoO.

Personally, I like that last option the best, but it might slow down gameplay.  Option two is simple, but the justification for why it can only be done once per encounter gets kind of wierd.

Yes better what is that manuever called? Ahh Wall of blades.
Also its balanced. Uses the immediate action as well as an AAO.
I find this to be good.

Defelect Arrows
Grant the bonus of the Deflect Arrows feat, but you need to be holding a shield to make it work.

I always though it was odd that you were allowed to deflect arrows only with an empty hand were as people traditionally used shields. It is good. Doesn't need to be an auto include though just that Deflect arrows shuold work with shields as well *maybe requiring a roll*