Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well the good days are over. Divine Protection from ACG got nerfed from "Give me Paladin 2nd level Divine Grace" to 1/day immediate action on one save.
I got to say it is probably for the best. That feat was ridiculously broken.
I had it on a RotRL character, rocking 34 as my lowest save (Couldn't afford 2 levels in Paladin.)
I had it on another home creation.
I had it in a Dragon Conflict event on 2 characters I'm running for GenCon.
It was in PVP tournament characters I've played.
It was prolific. Every character that is CHA based, had this feat. If they didn't have the pre-res, they took them if possible before taking this feat.
It was dumb.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm glad to hear about this change, but maybe they nerfed it too much.
Now it is something I would probably never take.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Of course, this was also in a high-power AP campaign.
Likewise.
I'm glad to hear about this change, but maybe they nerfed it too much.
Now it is something I would probably never take.
It went from "every CHA character takes this feat" to "who would waste a feat". But not every option should be broken (old) or required to be useful (new).
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Welp, I misread the errata on this. I thought they had reduced it to a bonus on one save, not a bonus on one save once per day. The former would have been a great change that would help make Swashbucklers more viable; the latter ensures nobody is going to use this. Once-per-day feats my ass.
I would still take it on the right character, i.e. one with already decent/good if not OMG-amazing Saves,
i.e. i already expect to pass most saves, but for the one that i do fail, i can use this 1/day option.
i believe even a Paladin might take it?, if their Saves/CHA isn't super amazing, it lets them double up on CHA on 1 save.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't double up on a stat to a thing. That's a general rule that the feat reminds you of in its text. This feat was always useless to Paladins.
Furthermore, unless you're a Swashbuckler you have to add the bonus before you even roll the dice so. Completely, and utterly useless for your purposes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Welp, I misread the errata on this. I thought they had reduced it to a bonus on one save, not a bonus on one save once per day. The former would have been a great change that would help make Swashbucklers more viable; the latter ensures nobody is going to use this. Once-per-day feats my ass.
Yeah, the short description doesn't say the once per day. They errata'd the chart and the feat in full, if you stopped reading at the chart update, you wouldn't have seen the once per day part in the full description.
As it is now this feat is almost fully worthless. Only way I can see it being used is if you could use it after you rolled but before you knew what the DC was vs what you were saving against.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. The pendulum has swung too far the other direction. It's like crane wing all over again.
There really has to be a reasonable middle ground between overpowered and awful. I don't understand why this keeps happening.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's really hilarious to me is that the short description for Divine Protection is a completely reasonable and balanced feat that enables all those people who want to pump charisma instead of wisdom, regardless of their class choice.
But the short description isn't what the feat does.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's really hilarious to me is that the short description for Divine Protection is a completely reasonable and balanced feat that enables all those people who want to pump charisma instead of wisdom, regardless of their class choice.
But the short description isn't what the feat does.
That's interesting - Steadfast Personality also had a discrepancy between short and long text, Mark confirmed the short description was correct and the long rewrite was in error. Maybe the long text on Divine Protection is wrong too?
Edit: Hm... If Divine Protection adds Charisma to one save then that'd put Oracles on equal footing with all the other divine casters - they'd take Divine Protection: Fortitude and have roughly the same fortitude saves as clerics. That'd be a great change!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Downloadable PDF here.
Change the Divine Protection feat’s Prerequisites section to
“Prerequisites: Cha 13, Knowledge (religion) 5 ranks.”
and change the Benefit section to “Benefit: Once per day as an immediate action before rolling a saving throw, you can add your Charisma modifier on that saving throw. As usual, this does not stack if you already apply your Charisma modifier to that saving throw.
If you possess the charmed life class feature, you can instead apply Divine Protection’s bonus after rolling the saving throw but before the result is revealed.”
It is easier now to dip two levels of Paladin then 4 of something else, especially if your DM allows the old 3.5 versions of different alignments like Paladin of Freedom and so forth.
+2 to all saves would have been perfect option and you know what that was the exact number and option That was used in D&D for paladins pre 3rd edition. Still would have been a good feat considering requirements, would have been something for everyone to run out and want to take no.
If you want +2 to all saves there is already a set of feats for that. Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude. One feat combining all of those is way off balance. +1 to all would be about right.
And true not all options are equal or balanced, one feat doing what it normally takes 3 to get goes a bit far though IMO.
Once per day may be a little under powered, but again, IMO, not significantly so. The typical adventuring day isn't likely having you make more than a few saves per day. Though that could vary wildly depending on what you are fighting. Invading a conclave of wizards? All you will be doing is making saves all day long. Attacking a strong hold of giants? Mostly your going to be far more worried about AC/healing to survive through it - with maybe a couple saves thrown in for the fire giant priestess encounter.
Even if every encounter contains a caster of some kind, chances are you aren't an exclusive target for all spells cast - your party is going to be the target some of the times. Sometimes it will be a low level spell that you can reliably make the save without using your once per day ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Welp, I misread the errata on this. I thought they had reduced it to a bonus on one save, not a bonus on one save once per day. The former would have been a great change that would help make Swashbucklers more viable; the latter ensures nobody is going to use this. Once-per-day feats my ass.
it's now available to martials, it couldn't be passive, they had to nerf it beyond belief.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's really hilarious to me is that the short description for Divine Protection is a completely reasonable and balanced feat that enables all those people who want to pump charisma instead of wisdom, regardless of their class choice.
But the short description isn't what the feat does.
That's interesting - Steadfast Personality also had a discrepancy between short and long text, Mark confirmed the short description was correct and the long rewrite was in error. Maybe the long text on Divine Protection is wrong too?
Edit: Hm... If Divine Protection adds Charisma to one save then that'd put Oracles on equal footing with all the other divine casters - they'd take Divine Protection: Fortitude and have roughly the same fortitude saves as clerics. That'd be a great change!
Do you have a link to Mark's Steadfast Personality ruling? I am having trouble finding it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A simpler change for Divine Protection might have been to eliminate ALL prerequisites and simply have it grant +1 to all saves. A feat like that would be at close to the same power level as the existing feats that grant +2 to a single save.
+2 to all saves would have been perfect option and you know what that was the exact number and option That was used in D&D for paladins pre 3rd edition. Still would have been a good feat considering requirements, would have been something for everyone to run out and want to take no.If you want +2 to all saves there is already a set of feats for that. Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude. One feat combining all of those is way off balance. +1 to all would be about right.
And true not all options are equal or balanced, one feat doing what it normally takes 3 to get goes a bit far though IMO.
Once per day may be a little under powered, but again, IMO, not significantly so. The typical adventuring day isn't likely having you make more than a few saves per day. Though that could vary wildly depending on what you are fighting. Invading a conclave of wizards? All you will be doing is making saves all day long. Attacking a strong hold of giants? Mostly your going to be far more worried about AC/healing to survive through it - with maybe a couple saves thrown in for the fire giant priestess encounter.
Even if every encounter contains a caster of some kind, chances are you aren't an exclusive target for all spells cast - your party is going to be the target some of the times. Sometimes it will be a low level spell that you can reliably make the save without using your once per day ability.
But remember it is Cha to Save 1/day.
If it was +3 to a save 1/day, then fine. But undefined 1/day is worthless (without the previous ruling that you can't add Cha to a save if have Cha as a base modifier).
You have to be a class that has good Cha, not already using Cha for saves (Oracle out), and wants a 1/day feat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would still take it on the right character, i.e. one with already decent/good if not OMG-amazing Saves,
i.e. i already expect to pass most saves, but for the one that i do fail, i can use this 1/day option.
This doesn't work. You have to use it BEFORE you roll (another new limitation people seem to forget about). That means you use it, roll a natural 20, and come to the realization that you've just wasted your once per day ability.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was clearly overpowered pre-nerf.
It is clearly underpowered post-nerf.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was clearly overpowered pre-nerf.
It is clearly underpowered post-nerf.
/thread
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I fail to understand why things are continuously, wholly destroyed like this.
Yes, +Cha to all saves was very powerful.
Yes, Divine Protection beat out all the +2-one save feats.
Yes, +Cha to one save, 1/day, as an immediate action, before you roll the save is just about useless.
Yes, it is intended to, allegedly, make swashbucklers more appealing.
No, it has not done so, at least for me.
Yes, I will never be using the new Divine Protection,
|
It's only slightly good for Swashbucklers. They usually have a decent CHA, crappy saves, and are the only ones that can apply it after the roll.
It's still worse for them than Iron Will or Great Fortitude.
How many times a day do you usually fail fort/will by 1-2 points for saves that really matter? (separately - not combined)
If it's rarely more than once (it is for me), then that makes Divine Protection very competitive with the two of them for Swashbucklers - better most of the time.
It's also a competitive choice for Oracles, Sorcerers, and some bards who can use it for +7 or more. I'd consider it to use against save vs death spells - though I wouldn't grab it early for them.
Part of it for me was that I'm an old school purist..... the original core classes can be outshone in terms of flavour and RP factor by follow ons BUT should NEVER be usurped in terms of power by any of the new classes. And before anyone jumps in... I've playing RPG's for 25+ years and many of my fellow old timers feel this way.
For arcane casters this truth still holds.... the wizard although quite dull in comparison to the subsequent arcane casters still is No 1 in power.
For divine casters, Divine Prot IMO raised the Oracle head and shoulders above the cleric in terms of power whilst simultaneously being far more flavoursome..... ergo goes against the grain.... ergo WRONG!!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Flavor is not a balance for power.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seniority in getting written is also not a good reason to determine power rankings, either. It also doesn't change the fact that Divine Protection was ridiculously strong for the low cost of a couple skill points and a single feat slot for anyone who could benefit from it. It should have never been written in the first place.
Flavor is not a balance for power.
The problem with that is it is a gaping hole... for power creep.
Every class must have more and new abilities than its predecessor...... or its boring!!
The Shaman and Arcanist are classic examples of this...
Seniority in getting written is also not a good reason to determine power rankings, either. It also doesn't change the fact that Divine Protection was ridiculously strong for the low cost of a couple skill points and a single feat slot for anyone who could benefit from it. It should have never been written in the first place.
I agree it shouldnt have
However having played the game for 25+ years me and my friends do know something of what were talking about in terms of what does and doesnt work and how class power should be distributed....
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
For games other than Pathfinder, sure. But your 20+ years don't mean squat in the context of Pathfinder. The fact that you're arguing that the Fighter, Rogue and Monk (because they came first!) should be stronger than every other class that came after them is pretty clear evidence of that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is space in class design for flavor features, and for power features.
5e design refers to flavor abilities as "ribbons".
A Storm Sorcerer might (and this is a rough example since I honestly don't remember the specific level and ability) might learn at level 7 to control the weather in his immediate space to a degree, but at-will. He can at his leisure make the wind whip his robes around or he can stay perfectly dry in a storm. It's not giving him Power, as a level 6 ability might give him Cha to damage with Electric spells.
You would not think that his personal weather control is a worse ability than adding his casting stat to damage, because it's growing the character in a different way.
A flavor drawback (such as a strict code) should be balanced with a flavor feature, not a power feature.
|
Classes should play differently but evenly. One class shouldn't be inherently more powerful than the next at the same class level, but they should have differing mechanics as to how they play. That's the problem with people who spout the 4th edition fallacy, they say they made a system where characters were equal and no one liked it. But what really happened was they made a system that made so many characters play the same mechanically that it didn't really matter what you were playing. I understand creating different, but equal classes is pretty hard to do, but that doesn't mean that shouldn't be the goal. /derail
As for Divine Protection, it's a shame that it ended up where it is, there are so many more alternatives that would have created a useful, but not overpowered feat. Cha instead of x for one save would be powerful, but not game breaking. +1 to all saves would have been good. Once per day re-roll a save would have been good (though you can already get this as a trait). Even once per day, after the roll but before seeing the result you can add your Cha mod would have been alright, but right now, this just seems awful. As is, this is only an okay feat for swashbucklers, but as mentioned above, the other +2 to a save feats are all better than this. And it just serves to remind me of Paizo's blatant attempt to try and get everyone to like the swashbuckler, by making options terrible for anyone else.
the wizard should honestly be brought back, but not anything to do with it's seniority, likewise stuff should be better than the fighter regardless of how old it is.
the wizard should honestly be brought back, but not anything to do with it's seniority, likewise stuff should be better than the fighter regardless of how old it is.
Personally, I don't think anything should be better at fighting than the fighter, if the fighter can't really do anything other than fight. But really, I don't think it's good design to make a class that can't do anything but fight.
Personally, I don't think anything should be better at fighting than the fighter, if the fighter can't really do anything other than fight. But really, I don't think it's good design to make a class that can't do anything but fight.
+100...
"Hi there whats your name"
"Fighter"
"And what do you do?"
"Fight"
"Anything else.. any hobbies, interesting extras?"
"No... I fight..,. therefore I am"
"Kudos friend"
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unfortunately, the Fighter being the best at fighting ship sailed in 1985 when the Barbarian was introduced to 1st edition D&D. There was a little bit of a comeback in 2nd edition when Grand Mastery was fighter only, but it's never really been the best at fighting ever.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I don't think anything should be better at fighting than the fighter, if the fighter can't really do anything other than fight. But really, I don't think it's good design to make a class that can't do anything but fight.+100...
"Hi there whats your name"
"Fighter"
"And what do you do?"
"Fight"
"Anything else.. any hobbies, interesting extras?"
"No... I fight..,. therefore I am"
"Kudos friend"
so, basically it was made for an mmo and not ttrpgs, okay.