Talk:Iron Tide (3.5e Feat)

Ratings

 * "This is why fighters can't have nice things" amirite?
 * More seriously though, do you think it's High level now? I don't really see it being all that useful by itself even at moderate levels with moderate feats. --Ghostwheel (talk) 00:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Moderate used to be explicitly named after the kind of fighter who couldn't have nice things, you know.
 * If I was really sure that this was too cool for Moderate, I would have put in a Neutral rating instead. --Foxwarrior (talk) 01:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

DC
Base DC of 10 + 3/2 your character level + your Str mod seems a little much (as much as I love push/pull effects). Strength is usually the easiest score to raise and characters that power attack often do it for large amounts. I'd instead just remove the BAB component. It still has the potential to go off the RNG (+10 higher DC than you would expect at level 20), but at least this remedies it a bit. Or alternatively, you could do 1/2 power attack penalty + 1/4 BAB so that the DC caps out at +5 higher than you expect at level 20.

I like this feat a lot other than the DC. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 13:44, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * 10 + ability modifier + 1/2 HD is pretty common for most DCs. The only difference is adding power attack which makes it less likely you'll hit in the first place, so I'm not sure what the problem is... --Ghostwheel 19:33, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I see what Aarnott was complaining about, and it's confusing. "+ penalty to attack you take from Power Attack" can easily be read to imply that you add a bonus to the DC equal to the penalty you take. --Foxwarrior 20:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm fairly sure that's what Ghostwheel meant. With 18 Strength, 6 HD, and a -2 to power attack, the DC will be 19 = 10 + 4 (Strength) + 3 (HD) + 2 (PA penalty).  What he pointed out above, if I understand him correctly, is that trying to drive up the DC in this way would also make the original attack less likely to hit to prompt the save in the first place.
 * With that said, I think that this does seem like it would end up being a little high in the end. Half of the power attack penalty might have a better progression... I'm tinkering with this among other feats, but I've approved it for my campaign nonetheless.  --Maninorange (talk) 19:39, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That's correct, and there's two parts why it's the case.
 * First, it's not that big of an effect, even if it shows up in a Moderate game (I may even need to change the balance level on it, looking at it again), so I don't see a big deal in it being able to be used and working more than usual. It would mostly be for defendery characters anyhow, and those aren't seen all that much from my experience.
 * Second, it's a second "attack roll" that's required (the first being the actual attack), which makes the chance of it going through lower than that of, say, most spells. Furthermore, as I've mentioned above, it makes your actual attack miss more readily, and to quite a large degree if the RNG starts towards the middle, so I don't think there's a problem with it. --Ghostwheel (talk) 21:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Given the confusion which has resulted so far, it occurs to me that an example section might be a good idea. --Maninorange (talk) 03:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Go for it, I'll play editor/proofread it for ya ;-) --Ghostwheel (talk) 11:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Just one small problem--you could not push the figure in the example North, as that is not one square away from you. Every square you push them needs to be one further from where you are, so East and South-East work, but North doesn't as they are still adjacent to you. --Ghostwheel (talk) 22:09, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Mea Culpa; I fixed it.

Inaccurate Summary
I'm unsure as to how the summary refers to this feat. I don't see anything to do with defense, or anything to do with sudden strikes from defense, etc. Maybe I'm being dense, but I think the summary could use an upgrade. - Aelaris 18:58, 29 December 2010 (UTC)