Balance Edit

Since most enemies have a low (~10) touch AC, and most go down when they take enough nonlethal damage, this feat feels rather overpowered as it is at the moment, especially when taking power attackers into consideration... :-/ --Ghostwheel 15:47, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps make it even just weapon base damage? Or if that's too weak, weapon base damage + str mod (modified by however you're wielding the weapon)? --Ghostwheel 19:26, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
I know it's overpowered for a fighter but it seems pretty normal at wizard level, but lets do the math and see.
A 8th level orc fighter with 20 strength and wielding a +2 Flaming Greatsword and a +2 belt of strength and this feat (and all the prerequisite feats) Power Attacks for full, taking a -8 on attacks for a +16 to damage with a +12 from his boosted strength score for a +30 damage bonus total he attacks and misses by a mile but because of this feat he still gets damage, he rolls a 3 for the fire damage (Lethal) and a 2 and a 4 +30 for the weapon damage (Non-lethal) so that's 39 damage total. On the other hand a 8th level mage can use a empowered fire ball via Arcane Thesis and Metamagic School Focus that would deal 10d6 +1/2 for a average of 45 damage but only three times per day AND they get a save for half damage. But if we use a 12th level fighter with 20 strength, a +6 strength booster and +4 flaming sword power attacking for full, he would deal 3d6+44 damage the first 1d6 of which is lethal, for a average damage of 3 lethal 50 non-lethal while a 12th level mage using the arcane thesis could maximize a fireball for 60 damage, or 30 on save. So this feat is pretty much balanced as you have to so many feats to get it.--ThirdEmperor 04:35, November 20, 2009 (UTC)
How about making it an attack action? That way a lvl 20 fighter is not near guaranteed to pull off 4 hits in a turn. Azel Deslin 21:22, November 20, 2009 (UTC)
Well, as I chime in here, I gotta say I like the idea of getting "consolation prize" damage as non-lethal damage. However, the implementation, wording and mechanics here just don't do it for me, yo. As for ramblings, there are beasts and such who don't take non-lethal damage (undead and constructs), and in general, this feat kinda reminds me of glancing blow style shots from other game systems (which someone may even have instituted as a feat or variant rule while I wasn't looking). So, hooowah, okay, it this feat is gonna be both useful and workable in any given game (the point of practically any feat), I'm gonna recommend the following changes:
1.) No full damage. Its way too much for a consolation prize. Susceptible monsters/NPCs would get dropped anyhow, with you "killing" them.
2.) Simplify it. Bogging down combat with extra rules and calculations sucks. No one wants that.
That basically brings me to this: An attack made that misses the target, but would otherwise hit on a touch attack, instead deals 1 point of non-lethal damage per Base Attack Bonus -or- strength bonus plus enchantment bonus in damage. So, with that, you get at 10th level for a full melee guy, 10 consolation non-lethal per overbearing blow -or- strength and enchantment (maybe around 22 strength let's say, with maybe a +2 weapon) for 8 non-lethal. Now, toss in that he gets multiple attacks for BAB, haste, dual-wielding or whatever and such, and that's some fairly decent consolation damage. Option two here varies more, and I'm not doing all the math at the moment for an off-the-top-of-my-head thing. Enough of my rambling, and probably me overlooking some stuff, what has anyone else to say about this? --Ganteka Future 22:55, November 21, 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I used your suggestion but I used BAB and Weapon Enhancement Bonus because the base +1 thing is so underused.--ThirdEmperor 07:58, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
but using BAB actually makes it possible t odo MORE damage when you miss their regular ac. if a 10th level fighter misses with his longsword, he deals 2 more damage for missing (10 vs a d8). i think enhancement+str damage is good enough damage--NameViolation 21:14, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
While it is possible to deal more non-lethal damage with this system (lending possible abuse to knife throwers or tiny characters, who would use minimal damage weapons to occasionally deal more damage), the example you used is a rather flawed perspective (given that your example "good enough damage" = 0). A 10th level fighter with a longsword (mundane or masterwork) and a 10 Strength (impossible for the example, as the feat requires 15 Strength as a prerequisite) is probably among the worst characters ever. Something more along the lines of "A Dexterity-based halfling shuriken tosser would be able to drop living targets with much greater ease, abusing the system." would have been more appropriate. In any case, if it is unintended for thrown/ranged weapons, as Strong Grip (3.5e Feat) talks about, that should be clarified. Really, the biggest possible abuse comes from characters dealing with weapons that have small damage die types. Just something to think about/do some math on. --Ganteka Future 21:41, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
Yes a incredibly pathetic fighter who's player wasn't kind enough to just have him jump of a cliff COULD deal more damage but I wouldn't worry about anyone that pathetic becoming overpowered with this feat. As for the ranged weapons I'll fix that right away. As for the small weapon damage thing do any fighters even use tiny weapons?--ThirdEmperor 09:54, December 4, 2009 (UTC)
I've got an idea, how about it only works when you power attack and deals consolation damage equal to half the damage plus your strength mod? Or would 3/4ths power attack penalty be closer to rogue tier? --ThirdEmperor 19:05, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
i like how it looks now, but it should have powerattack as a pre req since you neeed that for this to work. otherwise this looks nice. personally i'd put a bab req on it, but its good for now.--NameViolation 19:51, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
You do have to have power attack, you need it to get strong grip, as for BAB requirements I didn't put one because the previous feat (strong grip) had BAB requirement so I didn't feel the need, as it is it's impossible to get it at any level below eighth unless you multiclass to get a feat at seventh level. So should I put a BAB +8 requirement or reward those of a powergaming bent?--ThirdEmperor 10:25, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
maybe let str and enhancement of weapon apply to damage? to keep it rogue level?--NameViolation 08:19, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Changes Edit

With the new changes (only getting penalty from Power Attack to damage), I'd say it's closer to Fighter level now... --Ghostwheel 07:18, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, but penalty + double str like it is now isn't bad. Since it's most likely to see use in high Str builds anyway, and it's something like min 14 points (Str 20, lowballing it here) on a touch attack as a consolation prize... I think it's fine for rogue now.
The current wording kinda bugs me a bit. Do you think this sounds better:
"When making a Power Attack for at least a -4 penalty to attack, and that attack misses but would have otherwise hit the target's touch AC, you deal non-lethal damage equal to the attack penalty from Power Attack plus twice your Strength bonus."
The mention of "Strength modifier" was switched to "Strength bonus" for the purpose of: the feat is unusable without that Str 15 prerequisite. Anyone think it sounds better this way?
As a side note, I added in all the prerequisites (as this feat has Strong Grip as a prerequisite, which has it's own prerequisites, and for clarity, should be listed here as well). --Ganteka Future 02:50, December 18, 2009 (UTC)
I'd prefer the wording: "When you take at least a -4 penalty to attack with Power Attack, ...". Otherwise, your wording is as clear as it can be. "Power Attack for X" seems like an informal expression. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 16:41, December 18, 2009 (UTC)
Okay, fixed the wording, thanks for the help I'm terrible at fitting game mechanics into words and the fact that I've never seen a feat that gives you a bonus when you miss doesn't help either.--ThirdEmperor 16:55, December 18, 2009 (UTC)


RatedExcellent Tarkisflux's Favor
This article has been favored and rated Excellent by Tarkisflux, for the following reasons: If you're going to go auto-attack something, you may as well make each roll count. Like this does. If you hit, they hurt. If you miss by a little, you still tire them out. If you miss by a lot you've actually wasted a roll, but this makes this much less common and helps those often useless iterative attacks contribute more without boosting your attack numbers. Which I rather appreciate.

RatedGood Ganteka Future's Favor
This article has been favored and rated Good by Ganteka Future, for the following reasons: A good feat. A nice game mechanic. While I would be nitpicking to hold it back because of formatting/spelling, the wording is awkward. With that, it should be a solid addition for a burley dude to have.

RatedGood Sam Kay's Favor
This article has been favored and rated Good by Sam Kay, for the following reasons: A nice little feat for a fighter to take, though I agree that the wording is a little awkward. The mechanic makes sense (even in your foe is wearing full plate, if you wack them hard enough, they will get bruised), and it makes the sometimes pointless extra attacks at -5, 10, 15 etc more worthwhile.

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.