Talk:Untethered (3.5e Feat)

Blink
"2 constitution damage: You may, as a full round action take a 5 foot step through any solid materials that do not prevent incorporeal movement."

Strange. Even blink, where you're only half there, lets you walk through walls incorporeal style. Its just there is a fail chance that you might not do so when you try (wasting the move action). Doesn't seem like a benefit, and certainly not for 2 con damage and a full round. Double plus when you get high enough level (say 70%) where you'd be successful most of the time just stepping through the wall normal.

If you're wondering, if you end up coming back while in the wall you're shunted out. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 04:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Balance
Taking a move action to be invincible to almost all conventional spells and weaponry, even at level 20, would put this at VH IMO. --Ghostwheel (talk) 09:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * It's such a strange feat, it starts off really weak and then gets really strong. While I agree with Ghost here, it may also end up unquantifiable because it doesn't become abnormally great until 10th.


 * That said, sadly it seems spellcasters benefit the most of this feat. Fighting types lose the full attack and usually need to be in melee to be useful, spellcasters can sit back at range and cast while enjoy miss chance.  Pity. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 10:15, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I changed the way that this feats scales to (hopefully) make it more balanced. This feat is most beneficial when your opponent is already very likely to hit you, and least useful when they already have trouble doing so.  This means that rather than significantly unbalancing combat encounters, it equalizes fights allowing you to better fight opponents with superior stats.  This can become a rather sizable bonus (by twelfth level it is often equivalent to more than a +3 bonus to AC) but only when your opponent is more likely than not to hit you anyway and at the expense of a move action, which is a significant cost for combatant characters greater than 6th level, potentially halving their damage potential (a fair trade I think).  The below table explains this pretty well I think:
 * {| class="zebra d20"


 * Roll Needed To Hit
 * Unmodified Odds of Hitting
 * Odds of Hitting with 10% Miss Chance
 * Odds of Hitting with 20% Miss Chance
 * Odds of Hitting with 30% Miss Chance
 * Odds of Hitting with +1 to AC
 * Odds of Hitting with +2 to AC
 * Odds of Hitting with +3 to AC
 * 1
 * 100%
 * 90%
 * 80%
 * 70%
 * 95%
 * 90%
 * 85%
 * 6
 * 75%
 * 67.5%
 * 60%
 * 52.5%
 * 70%
 * 65%
 * 60%
 * 11
 * 50%
 * 45%
 * 40%
 * 35%
 * 45%
 * 40%
 * 35%
 * 16
 * 25%
 * 22.5%
 * 20%
 * 17.5%
 * 20%
 * 15%
 * 10%
 * }
 * Furthermore, I've modified the feat to take a more significant toll on spellcasters. I hope this addresses Eiji's concerns.--TheDarkWad (talk) 00:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * 15%
 * 10%
 * }
 * Furthermore, I've modified the feat to take a more significant toll on spellcasters. I hope this addresses Eiji's concerns.--TheDarkWad (talk) 00:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, I've modified the feat to take a more significant toll on spellcasters. I hope this addresses Eiji's concerns.--TheDarkWad (talk) 00:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I would also make it ability burn rather than ability damage, as some of the activateable effects are quite strong, and at any decent level ability damage is a cinch to heal. --Ghostwheel (talk) 07:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)