Talk:Practiced Combatant (3.5e Feat)

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Revision as of 22:56, 31 October 2016 by Spanambula (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


RatedLike.png Spanambula likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
For the reasons Aarnott stated to Eiji, it makes taking some 3/4 BAB classes sting a little less without handing yet another "Win at D&D" card to casters. I give full marks.

And now I'm taking marks off for the changes. The HD -2 cap feels like a pointless nerf. The below example of "help out the Barb 10/ Rogue 10" now would bring their BAB from 17 ALL THE WAY UP TO 18!!! Wow! What a great use of a feat!! </sarcasm>

Okay second edit. This is workable, and nice that it requires a fair bit of investment to get the benefits. I can live with this. However, I do really think this should be a moderate level feat. But I won't switch to an oppose or something if Aarnott keeps it at High.

Changed it back to cap out at HD. Although it is certainly strong this way, I don't see it so strong that it needed that change. Not sure what I was thinking. --Aarnott (talk) 17:39, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

A BAB granting feet ends up becoming ok due to the HD cap, making it akin to Practiced Spellcaster (and like the feat, making it perfect for entering PrCs you'd otherwise not qualify for cause you jumped around classes). But why so high? Practiced Spellcaster can be picked up nigh right away (and you don't really benefit from it til at least 3rd level), so I'd think this should be similar. -- Eiji-kun 05:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, the main reason is that the purpose of this feat is to allow full-BAB characters to put half their levels into 3/4 BAB classes. The thing I wanted to prevent is yet another feat that makes a gish easier to make. This isn't supposed to be yet another wizard optimizing feat. It is supposed to make some more unusual combos more feasible (barbarian 10 rogue 10 maybe).
That being said, it does have a very high prereq. What if I changed it to "+1 BAB per 5 levels in classes that grant full BAB, to a maximum of your HD" and removed the prereq entirely? It would function nearly identically and at least be able to be taken at level 1 (even though it wouldn't make any difference until 6th. --Aarnott 19:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Maybe, except your wording confuses me. 1 BAB per 5 levels... so... ah, ok, thats not a pre-req thats how it functions.
While I see nothing wrong or broken with just saying +2 BAB, happy birthday, that does work. I prefer the previously mentioned wording though, +2 BAB won't make or break most builds and won't turn a wizard into a fighter, but it will be, as in your example, help round out those who lost a few BAB. -- Eiji-kun 19:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)