Talk:Fey Grace (3.5e Feat)

Discussion of Balance/Design

Saves are king at higher levels in D&D, and this allows you to almost ignore them by falling off the RNG so hard. I'd peg this at VH. --Ghostwheel (talk) 08:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

So, I'm in the middle of trying to convert some nymph abilities for general fey usage. I liked the idea of making Charisma more useful to a fey creature's primary ability outside of casting, but damn, as it is on the nymph, it would be simply abusable for any PC character. I tried to trim it down a bit (and apparently failed), but I'd like to aim for a balance range of High rather than Very High. I suppose I should have just gone with my initial instinct and done a more liberal translation of the ability. Any thoughts on replacing it with something like "you get Charisma to your Will saves instead of Wisdom and your Charisma as some other armor bonus thing"? Fey generally don't have low Wisdom/Will saves though, so that likely wouldn't matter as much for shoring up a weakness. Would typing the bonus properly (as a resistance bonus) so it doesn't stack with things like cloaks of resistances matter all that much, 'cause I kinda forgot about that. Hmmm... perhaps if it were parred down to 1/4 or a 1/3 your level as a cap to keep it in line with such a common item... then really, it's basically a feat in place of cash. Ugh. This is why I generally wait a day or more before posting an article I finish (but didn't here). I'll see what I can do with this tomorrow if there are no more ideas here. --Ganteka Future (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Letting you use Charisma instead of the normal ability modifiers for all your saves would be only slightly excessive.

But I have gotten very tired of all these ability score -> base stat rearranger things. --Foxwarrior (talk) 09:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

That would be another way to somewhat fix it, aye. As long as you're cha-based, you'll be on the (very) high of the saving throw chart (like you save on 3-4 or higher against many effects), but you won't tumble entirely off the RNG. --Ghostwheel (talk) 09:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Alright, this discussion helped. Went and did some research. This now functions as a scaling, slot-less ring of protection + cloak of resistance for the cost of a feat. If there's a problem with that (for High balance or any other reason), voice up. Also, while it's not particularly exciting for PCs, it's probably at least useful for beefing up NPCs a bit without jumbling items onto characters just to get their stats to the right place for a combat (and redirecting treasure wealth gain elsewhere instead of stuff they likely already have). Note: Rerate or scratch it, yo. --Ganteka Future (talk) 05:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

A scaling cap like that doesn't make it very tempting before level 8 or 12, now does it. --Foxwarrior (talk) 08:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

(Reset) Recommend "Minimium +X". -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

+7 on the RNG compared to everyone else for a single feat is a no-no at H-level as far as I'm concerned. --Ghostwheel (talk) 14:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

+7 at level 28. Was I wrong in assuming that cloaks of resistance and rings of protection were among the most common or standard accessories purchased by/awarded to PCs? That's basically all this is in feat form. Do DMs actually ban those items? As for the minimum level, yeah, you wouldn't really want this early (even at 6th level, a +1 to your saves and AC is better cheaply filled by the items this mimics, but the point is that you could grab it. I suppose a minimum ECL 4 is fair (for when the initial effect would kick in). --Ganteka Future (talk) 17:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I, I hadn't seen the cap. My mistake, in that case I think it's fine. --Ghostwheel (talk) 18:41, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

If you have to say "Well, this feat sucks for PCs, but I guess some NPCs could find it useful," I think you've failed. I would definitely change the save bonus to untyped instead of resistance, which would make this feat slightly less underwhelming, or at least bump this feat down to moderate. Unless your DM bans MIC rules about combining common effects into single items, you can't even say that taking this feat frees up magic item slots. As it is, it's just a trap, which is a shame because I love all your other racial Fey feats. Spanambula (talk) 12:42, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

First off, thanks for chiming in. I'm the bads at writing feats. So, when I said above that "it's not particularly exciting for PCs", I meant just that. It's a passive bonus rather than a cool new ability. For NPCs, oh man, not having to pump their treasure into items that end up in the PCs hands where they're like "oh good, another +2 ring of protection, put it in the bag with the others" and DMs can give them other cool stuff instead, that's awesome and a win for everyone, especially when having NPCs with too many abilities (and fey NPCs often end up with weird abilities and spells and such at their disposal) is a nice break for DMs just to give opponents some number boosts to fit the situation. That's all I was getting at their. That said, it does need work. A shame upon me! I am not satisfied with how it is now, though there are a few weird hurdles. So, I'm just gonna rattle off some things and see where this goes.

• 1/4 level for the cap should be changed to 1/3. Why? The feat shouldn't totally be displaced by common magic items. Overall, this just leads to an additional +1 at 20th level. It also makes the feat meaningful at 3rd level when you get feats.
• This feat currently gets worse (sorta) as you level. Since you have to invest in Charisma to keep it meaningful, it goes from liberating over half your wealth-by-level to less than a 10% over the course of a 20 level career (for the equivalent cost in items of the bonus provided now). Being able to spend your cash on other stuff is a nice draw here but man that's a weird bit of scaling. Having it as a feat instead of items is a nice perk, since while fey are magical, I don't see them as gear-dependently thematic properly. If that makes sense.
• I'd like to keep this in the High range.
• Add in a "Special:" line, something along "You're immune to Charisma damage and drain" -or- "Your Charisma cannot drop, through damage or drain, lower than 10+your racial modifier". This at leasts adds something you can't really get via gear and is both thematic and allows you to rely more on the feat as insurance. There's a third option here, but the idea is only roughed out and basically amounts to fake ability points (in this case Charisma) that are damaged/depleted first as a buffer but don't grant you anything otherwise. That's probably less appropriate here anyways.
• I really don't want to make the bonus untyped. It's the only thing stopping it from going into crazy town and turning fey into AC tanks… which is really weird.
• Fey and wearing armor is weird anyways. If the scaling didn't look all off, I'd even consider an additional straight armor bonus. Maybe work some system of Cha+Dex to fall within that golden range of 8-11 armor bonus. Fey usually don't have a lot of HP anyways, so armor is good here. Hmmm… could just set a Charisma cap value of 4-6 (anything lower and it isn't viable since plain armor would be better). Might be better for a different feat though.
• Crap damnit crap this comment got long. I also forgot what else I was going to put here. I spent all day mulling it over, Span! I swear I wasn't drawing dinosaurs and nailbats!
  

So, what say anybody on this. --Ganteka Future (talk) 02:42, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I am all for 1/3rd over 1/4th. I was actually going to suggest just that, but wanted to keep my own comment from being overly lengthy. Scaling up vs just a flat cap in an interesting idea, I think both have their merits. Lastly, I think a special something something you can't get from items would be a fine idea for some flavor that isn't just "save some gold and don't be a weird fey with armor and a cloak." Spanambula (talk) 03:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I mean, heh heh, I'm not doing this so we can have nymphs wearing as little gear as possible or anything... heh, uh... --Ganteka Future (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2015 (UTC)