PDA

View Full Version : Feat-based Combat Stances



nibel
03-12-2015, 08:47 PM
Small changes to make the combat stances other than Power Attack desirable to everyone (other than as a pre-requisite for something else):

Power Attack: Stay as is. It is good enough for any melee character, except, maybe, rogues.

Precision: While this stance is active, you gain +5% to hit, -20% threat, and reduce the target's fortification against your attacks by 25%. This stance can't be used while you are under Barbarian Rage.

25% Fortification bypass is a huge bonus for crit-based characters, even if they are not rogues. The threat reduction will help so those crit-based characters don't suddenly spike at the threat list.

Combat Expertise: While this stance is active you can +100% Threat, +10% Dodge, Armor Maximum Dexterity Bonus, and Dodge cap. At the same time, you can't Rage or deal Sneak Attack damage, your spell's cooldown will have three times their normal values, and you have a -5 penalty on Spell DC and Caster Level checks to bypass Spell Resistance.

Combat Expertise is supposed to be a "tanking" stance. It will give you incredible physical defensive ability (I would put it on 20% dodge to equate with the +4 AC it gave before, but Dodge is a second layer of defense over your AC, so reduced value), but will reduce your damage-dealing capabilities. The huge penalties on casting is because it is a low-hanging fruit for 10% dodge.

Resilience: While this stance is active, you get a +4 bonus to all saves, and can't fail a save when rolling a 1. Spells have three times their normal cooldown when this mode is active.

Small change, but will make the stance more valuable to all characters.

Cardoor
03-12-2015, 09:34 PM
If Resilience (a defensive stance) could be used at the same time as an offensive stance (like Power Attack for example), it would be taken a lot more. As-is I doubt many people give up PA for it, even with the "cannot fail on a 1" that you added, I am trying to figure out who would use it.

Dandonk
03-13-2015, 12:49 AM
If Resilience (a defensive stance) could be used at the same time as an offensive stance (like Power Attack for example), it would be taken a lot more. As-is I doubt many people give up PA for it, even with the "cannot fail on a 1" that you added, I am trying to figure out who would use it.

Take it as evasion character to run through traps?

I think no-fail on 1 is pretty powerful, but as we're all obsessed with DPS I doubt many would take it even so :)

digital_terror1
03-13-2015, 01:23 AM
Resilience: While this stance is active, you get a +4 bonus to all saves, and can't fail a save when rolling a 1. Spells have three times their normal cooldown when this mode is active.

Small change, but will make the stance more valuable to all characters.

What you are proposing with this one is taking a pair of epic destiny enhancements and a level 27 feat, and then rolling all of them into a something a character could get at level 1. Far too powerful this way.
Instead of can't fail on a 1, perhaps a 2nd chance roll if you fail a save once every 12 seconds.

As for who would take a feat like this, consider all the alternate melee builds possible now that are NOT strength based. Con based dwarves. Anyone using Swashbuckler or Harper and Int, Cha, or Dex based. Cha based PDK. All of those builds can use their non strength stat for both attack and damage, and many of the builds have alternate special sweeping attacks they can use in place of cleave/g.cleave. If these players chose to sacrifice cleave and great cleave in favor of other feats, they could also ditch strength as a dump stat...to these players, a feat such as Resilience would be a lot more appealing if it were upgraded in some manner as the OP suggests.

nibel
03-13-2015, 08:55 AM
I think no-fail on 1 is pretty powerful, but as we're all obsessed with DPS I doubt many would take it even so :)

Same here. I mean, you can get no fail on fortitude and will saves as T1 twists, and almost no one uses it. But if Save Boost can have the no fail on a 1, why not a defensive stance focused on improving saves?

Enoach
03-13-2015, 09:25 AM
...
Combat Expertise: While this stance is active you can +100% Threat, +10% Dodge, Armor Maximum Dexterity Bonus, and Dodge cap. At the same time, you can't Rage or deal Sneak Attack damage, your spell's cooldown will have three times their normal values, and you have a -5 penalty on Spell DC and Caster Level checks to bypass Spell Resistance.

Combat Expertise is supposed to be a "tanking" stance. It will give you incredible physical defensive ability (I would put it on 20% dodge to equate with the +4 AC it gave before, but Dodge is a second layer of defense over your AC, so reduced value), but will reduce your damage-dealing capabilities. The huge penalties on casting is because it is a low-hanging fruit for 10% dodge.

...

While CE is commonly taken on builds that are designed for tanking, CE is a Defensive Feat. Not all players using it to be a tank. Some simply use it because of the AC benefit as well as the LD's twistable PRR bonus. and the added hate will go against their playstyle.

On my tank build the extra 100% hate would be nice but I do well without it.

Next why double penalty the stance? The 3x cooldown already penalizes the Divine based Tank Builds with Spell Healing. I think -5 DC/Spell Pen is too high a penalty for a Heroic Feat. But either way CE should only have one of those penalties not both.

Dandonk
03-13-2015, 09:41 AM
Same here. I mean, you can get no fail on fortitude and will saves as T1 twists, and almost no one uses it. But if Save Boost can have the no fail on a 1, why not a defensive stance focused on improving saves?

Fair point, and you ARE giving up the extra damage from either PA or Precision.

zaphear
03-13-2015, 09:59 AM
To be fair, you can get Saves Boost at level 1 that gives you a save even on a failed 1.

nibel
03-13-2015, 07:14 PM
Next why double penalty the stance? The 3x cooldown already penalizes the Divine based Tank Builds with Spell Healing. I think -5 DC/Spell Pen is too high a penalty for a Heroic Feat. But either way CE should only have one of those penalties not both.

Double penalty because the only real drawbacks for triple cooldown is the inability to stack dots. Healing still works if you know you will have triple cooldowns, just will raise the SP expenditure, because you will be using more healing spells on the rotation (Eg, Reconstruct and Repair Crit; or all four mass cures on divines).

+10% AC is decent, but not that much since the AC pass. +10% Dodge and dodge cap, however, is very powerful. If it do not heavy penalize casting, every primary caster will have this feat.

Enoach
03-13-2015, 07:31 PM
Double penalty because the only real drawbacks for triple cooldown is the inability to stack dots. Healing still works if you know you will have triple cooldowns, just will raise the SP expenditure, because you will be using more healing spells on the rotation (Eg, Reconstruct and Repair Crit; or all four mass cures on divines).

+10% AC is decent, but not that much since the AC pass. +10% Dodge and dodge cap, however, is very powerful. If it do not heavy penalize casting, every primary caster will have this feat.

But your double penalty would penalize the Cleric and FvS builds that use CE more than arcane. Admittedly the DC/Spell pen would not even be a factor for the Ftr/Paladin/Ranger/Monk that may use this feat. But Arcane Casters which have a greater cycle of offensive spells that don't have DC/SR requirements would still not be hindered. Think how an SC Arcane using Magic Missiles, Chain Missiles, Force Missiles, Prism Spray, Meteor Swarm etc would still not be effected by this. Where the Cleric/FvS don't have the depth except in healing. The DC/SR penalty is too much, we are just going to have to disagree on that part.

Also keep in mind that an Arcane through the EK tree can gain +10% AC with Improved Mage Armor - So in this case they could already forgo the AC bonus of CE and not have the Penalty. CE right now would simply be an Extra 10%.

nibel
03-13-2015, 09:55 PM
But your double penalty would penalize the Cleric and FvS builds that use CE more than arcane. Admittedly the DC/Spell pen would not even be a factor for the Ftr/Paladin/Ranger/Monk that may use this feat. But Arcane Casters which have a greater cycle of offensive spells that don't have DC/SR requirements would still not be hindered. Think how an SC Arcane using Magic Missiles, Chain Missiles, Force Missiles, Prism Spray, Meteor Swarm etc would still not be effected by this. Where the Cleric/FvS don't have the depth except in healing. The DC/SR penalty is too much, we are just going to have to disagree on that part.

I still think if the -DC/SR thing is removed, every palemaster will walk around with this stance on, since they already have the Int for it. Damage casters usually are not int-based, so it would require some investment on their part, and except for the small list of no-DC spells, it would basically reduce their DPS in half on a save. Do we have enough no-DC damage spells to make a full rotation while under triple cooldown?

So, what if it also had something like -150 spellpower (except positive/repair), like a reverse-maximize? Triple cooldown should still stay, because it is the current penalty, and I'm making the thing more powerful.

coolpenguin410
03-25-2015, 05:12 PM
If Resilience (a defensive stance) could be used at the same time as an offensive stance (like Power Attack for example), it would be taken a lot more. As-is I doubt many people give up PA for it, even with the "cannot fail on a 1" that you added, I am trying to figure out who would use it.

My Mechanic repeater rogue uses it. Precision might have been a better choice DPS-wise, but I wanted to boost my saves, mostly reflex. Considering all the other save boosting feats that only add +1 or +2, if Power Attack is not needed, Resilience is far and away the best save boosting feat.

Granted, most ranged builds are feat starved, but if they can squeeze one it, +4 saves is not a bad option. Doubly so if they have evasion available.

Honestly, I'd like to see them add something to Resilience like they did for Precision in the Bard's Swashbuckler's tree. Even with what I stated above, there is very little incentive to take it.

General_Gronker
03-26-2015, 06:08 PM
reduce the target's fortification against your attacks by 25%. No. Fort bypass needs to be totally removed from the game, because that's not how Fortification works.


I would put it on 20% dodge to equate with the +4 AC it gave before,Those aren't even remotely comparable. +5%, maybe +10% at best.