Is this homebrew racial feat, Stonehide, balanced?Does multi-classing into a martial class make you a member of martial class?Does the Sorcerer feature Draconic Resilience work with shields?Special AC and Wild ShapesIs this homebrew feat for a combat medic balanced?How should this homebrew class be rebalanced?Is this homebrew feat for bards balanced (or even useful)?Is this homebrew “Acrobatic Grappler” feat balanced?Is this homebrew “Throwing Weapons Master” feat balanced?Is this homebrew Elementalist Fighter class balanced?What is the Level Adjustment of this Gorilla Avatar of Nature template? (Version 2)
Exchange,swap or switch
Why is it that the natural deduction method can't test for invalidity?
How do I deal with a coworker that keeps asking to make small superficial changes to a report, and it is seriously triggering my anxiety?
How does a program know if stdout is connected to a terminal or a pipe?
How to have a sharp product image?
What is the strongest case that can be made in favour of the UK regaining some control over fishing policy after Brexit?
Critique of timeline aesthetic
How can Republicans who favour free markets, consistently express anger when they don't like the outcome of that choice?
What language was spoken in East Asia before Proto-Turkic?
What does it mean to express a gate in Dirac notation?
Packing rectangles: Does rotation ever help?
Binary Numbers Magic Trick
A Strange Latex Symbol
What is the most expensive material in the world that could be used to create Pun-Pun's lute?
Is there a way to get a compiler for the original B programming language?
What is Niska's accent?
Is it possible to determine the symmetric encryption method used by output size?
French for 'It must be my imagination'?
How come there are so many candidates for the 2020 Democratic party presidential nomination?
How to reduce LED flash rate (frequency)
Do I have an "anti-research" personality?
What makes accurate emulation of old systems a difficult task?
Please, smoke with good manners
Why was the Spitfire's elliptical wing almost uncopied by other aircraft of World War 2?
Is this homebrew racial feat, Stonehide, balanced?
Does multi-classing into a martial class make you a member of martial class?Does the Sorcerer feature Draconic Resilience work with shields?Special AC and Wild ShapesIs this homebrew feat for a combat medic balanced?How should this homebrew class be rebalanced?Is this homebrew feat for bards balanced (or even useful)?Is this homebrew “Acrobatic Grappler” feat balanced?Is this homebrew “Throwing Weapons Master” feat balanced?Is this homebrew Elementalist Fighter class balanced?What is the Level Adjustment of this Gorilla Avatar of Nature template? (Version 2)
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Is this homebrew racial feat, Stonehide, balanced?
This feat uses the Dragonborn racial feat Dragonhide and the UA Stone Sorcerer Stone's Durability feature as a basis.
Stonehide
Prerequisite: Dwarf or Gnome
The mystical link between your soul and the magic of elemental earth
grants you extraordinary resilience. You gain the following benefits:
- Increase your Strength, Constitution, or Wisdom score by 1, to a
maximum of 20.
- As an action, you can gain a base AC of 13 + your Constitution modifier
if you aren't wearing armor, and your skin assumes a stony appearance.
This effect lasts until you end it as a bonus action, you are
incapacitated, or you don armor other than a shield.
- Your unarmed strike uses a d4 for damage as long as your Stonehide
is active.
dnd-5e feats homebrew balance
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Is this homebrew racial feat, Stonehide, balanced?
This feat uses the Dragonborn racial feat Dragonhide and the UA Stone Sorcerer Stone's Durability feature as a basis.
Stonehide
Prerequisite: Dwarf or Gnome
The mystical link between your soul and the magic of elemental earth
grants you extraordinary resilience. You gain the following benefits:
- Increase your Strength, Constitution, or Wisdom score by 1, to a
maximum of 20.
- As an action, you can gain a base AC of 13 + your Constitution modifier
if you aren't wearing armor, and your skin assumes a stony appearance.
This effect lasts until you end it as a bonus action, you are
incapacitated, or you don armor other than a shield.
- Your unarmed strike uses a d4 for damage as long as your Stonehide
is active.
dnd-5e feats homebrew balance
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I don't get the action/bonus action mechanics. Most "alternative AC" just lets you use an optional calculation for AC. And "if you aren't wearing armor" would be redundant; you can use the armor calc, or the stonehide calc, at any point. Is there a reason behind that?
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:43
$begingroup$
The 2nd bullet is not a permanent change unlike dragon scales. It takes an action to "assume a stony appearance" and gain the AC boost.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 13:48
$begingroup$
For fluff reasons I assume? It needs rewording; as it stands, the stony appearance isn't attached to the AC change. (nor is the unarmed strike) I don't see any balance impact at all from those extra clauses (other than you cannot, say, wear "leather armor of stealth" and use your ability)
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:49
$begingroup$
More than just fluff...also a slight nerf. A character runs the risk of losing the AC boost once becoming incapacitated. I made edits as you suggested.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 14:07
1
$begingroup$
I would probably reword the bottom bullet to say that they may use d4 damage for unarmed strikes. Otherwise if you have a character like a monk who get's progression on their unarmed damage dice you would get a conflict where the monk could do d6 or some other higher damage but this feat states they only do d4, and technically the feat is more exact then the monk's class feature...
$endgroup$
– dsollen
Apr 24 at 19:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Is this homebrew racial feat, Stonehide, balanced?
This feat uses the Dragonborn racial feat Dragonhide and the UA Stone Sorcerer Stone's Durability feature as a basis.
Stonehide
Prerequisite: Dwarf or Gnome
The mystical link between your soul and the magic of elemental earth
grants you extraordinary resilience. You gain the following benefits:
- Increase your Strength, Constitution, or Wisdom score by 1, to a
maximum of 20.
- As an action, you can gain a base AC of 13 + your Constitution modifier
if you aren't wearing armor, and your skin assumes a stony appearance.
This effect lasts until you end it as a bonus action, you are
incapacitated, or you don armor other than a shield.
- Your unarmed strike uses a d4 for damage as long as your Stonehide
is active.
dnd-5e feats homebrew balance
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
$endgroup$
Is this homebrew racial feat, Stonehide, balanced?
This feat uses the Dragonborn racial feat Dragonhide and the UA Stone Sorcerer Stone's Durability feature as a basis.
Stonehide
Prerequisite: Dwarf or Gnome
The mystical link between your soul and the magic of elemental earth
grants you extraordinary resilience. You gain the following benefits:
- Increase your Strength, Constitution, or Wisdom score by 1, to a
maximum of 20.
- As an action, you can gain a base AC of 13 + your Constitution modifier
if you aren't wearing armor, and your skin assumes a stony appearance.
This effect lasts until you end it as a bonus action, you are
incapacitated, or you don armor other than a shield.
- Your unarmed strike uses a d4 for damage as long as your Stonehide
is active.
dnd-5e feats homebrew balance
dnd-5e feats homebrew balance
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
edited 2 days ago
V2Blast
28.1k5101171
28.1k5101171
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
asked Apr 24 at 11:52
Unaligned OozeUnaligned Ooze
24711
24711
$begingroup$
I don't get the action/bonus action mechanics. Most "alternative AC" just lets you use an optional calculation for AC. And "if you aren't wearing armor" would be redundant; you can use the armor calc, or the stonehide calc, at any point. Is there a reason behind that?
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:43
$begingroup$
The 2nd bullet is not a permanent change unlike dragon scales. It takes an action to "assume a stony appearance" and gain the AC boost.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 13:48
$begingroup$
For fluff reasons I assume? It needs rewording; as it stands, the stony appearance isn't attached to the AC change. (nor is the unarmed strike) I don't see any balance impact at all from those extra clauses (other than you cannot, say, wear "leather armor of stealth" and use your ability)
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:49
$begingroup$
More than just fluff...also a slight nerf. A character runs the risk of losing the AC boost once becoming incapacitated. I made edits as you suggested.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 14:07
1
$begingroup$
I would probably reword the bottom bullet to say that they may use d4 damage for unarmed strikes. Otherwise if you have a character like a monk who get's progression on their unarmed damage dice you would get a conflict where the monk could do d6 or some other higher damage but this feat states they only do d4, and technically the feat is more exact then the monk's class feature...
$endgroup$
– dsollen
Apr 24 at 19:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
I don't get the action/bonus action mechanics. Most "alternative AC" just lets you use an optional calculation for AC. And "if you aren't wearing armor" would be redundant; you can use the armor calc, or the stonehide calc, at any point. Is there a reason behind that?
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:43
$begingroup$
The 2nd bullet is not a permanent change unlike dragon scales. It takes an action to "assume a stony appearance" and gain the AC boost.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 13:48
$begingroup$
For fluff reasons I assume? It needs rewording; as it stands, the stony appearance isn't attached to the AC change. (nor is the unarmed strike) I don't see any balance impact at all from those extra clauses (other than you cannot, say, wear "leather armor of stealth" and use your ability)
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:49
$begingroup$
More than just fluff...also a slight nerf. A character runs the risk of losing the AC boost once becoming incapacitated. I made edits as you suggested.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 14:07
1
$begingroup$
I would probably reword the bottom bullet to say that they may use d4 damage for unarmed strikes. Otherwise if you have a character like a monk who get's progression on their unarmed damage dice you would get a conflict where the monk could do d6 or some other higher damage but this feat states they only do d4, and technically the feat is more exact then the monk's class feature...
$endgroup$
– dsollen
Apr 24 at 19:51
$begingroup$
I don't get the action/bonus action mechanics. Most "alternative AC" just lets you use an optional calculation for AC. And "if you aren't wearing armor" would be redundant; you can use the armor calc, or the stonehide calc, at any point. Is there a reason behind that?
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:43
$begingroup$
I don't get the action/bonus action mechanics. Most "alternative AC" just lets you use an optional calculation for AC. And "if you aren't wearing armor" would be redundant; you can use the armor calc, or the stonehide calc, at any point. Is there a reason behind that?
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:43
$begingroup$
The 2nd bullet is not a permanent change unlike dragon scales. It takes an action to "assume a stony appearance" and gain the AC boost.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 13:48
$begingroup$
The 2nd bullet is not a permanent change unlike dragon scales. It takes an action to "assume a stony appearance" and gain the AC boost.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 13:48
$begingroup$
For fluff reasons I assume? It needs rewording; as it stands, the stony appearance isn't attached to the AC change. (nor is the unarmed strike) I don't see any balance impact at all from those extra clauses (other than you cannot, say, wear "leather armor of stealth" and use your ability)
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:49
$begingroup$
For fluff reasons I assume? It needs rewording; as it stands, the stony appearance isn't attached to the AC change. (nor is the unarmed strike) I don't see any balance impact at all from those extra clauses (other than you cannot, say, wear "leather armor of stealth" and use your ability)
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:49
$begingroup$
More than just fluff...also a slight nerf. A character runs the risk of losing the AC boost once becoming incapacitated. I made edits as you suggested.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 14:07
$begingroup$
More than just fluff...also a slight nerf. A character runs the risk of losing the AC boost once becoming incapacitated. I made edits as you suggested.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 14:07
1
1
$begingroup$
I would probably reword the bottom bullet to say that they may use d4 damage for unarmed strikes. Otherwise if you have a character like a monk who get's progression on their unarmed damage dice you would get a conflict where the monk could do d6 or some other higher damage but this feat states they only do d4, and technically the feat is more exact then the monk's class feature...
$endgroup$
– dsollen
Apr 24 at 19:51
$begingroup$
I would probably reword the bottom bullet to say that they may use d4 damage for unarmed strikes. Otherwise if you have a character like a monk who get's progression on their unarmed damage dice you would get a conflict where the monk could do d6 or some other higher damage but this feat states they only do d4, and technically the feat is more exact then the monk's class feature...
$endgroup$
– dsollen
Apr 24 at 19:51
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
More than likely, this is balanced
Your features almost directly mirror the features of the Dragon Hide feat.
- The same ability increase except offering Wisdom instead of Charisma
- AC of 13 + Constitution modifier rather than Dexterity modifier
- 1d4 + Strength bludgeoning damage rather than slashing damage on unarmed strikes
As such, the feature is almost certainly balanced compared to official options.
However... there may be a slight unbalance in the fact that Constitution is used for the Armor Class. Typically, gaining such high effective Hit Points (EHP) requires investment in both Constitution (for the Hit Points) and Dexterity or Strength (for the Armor Class). Your feature allows similar range of EHP for just Constitution. This may not be too problematic since a character almost always has to invest in a different ability for the purposes of attacks or spells anyway, but it is a consideration that may reveal itself to be especially strong during playtesting.
At first, I considered whether it would be better to just use...
10 + Dexterity modifier + Constitution modifier
...to require two ability scores to reach the same Armor Class, but that would be substantially stronger for characters who have access to ample Ability Score Increases to reach beyond the 13 + Constitution modifier limits (characters like Dexterity-based fighters, rangers, and rogues). It may be more balanced in this way, or may be overpowered. I would probably playtest both versions.
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f146743%2fis-this-homebrew-racial-feat-stonehide-balanced%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
More than likely, this is balanced
Your features almost directly mirror the features of the Dragon Hide feat.
- The same ability increase except offering Wisdom instead of Charisma
- AC of 13 + Constitution modifier rather than Dexterity modifier
- 1d4 + Strength bludgeoning damage rather than slashing damage on unarmed strikes
As such, the feature is almost certainly balanced compared to official options.
However... there may be a slight unbalance in the fact that Constitution is used for the Armor Class. Typically, gaining such high effective Hit Points (EHP) requires investment in both Constitution (for the Hit Points) and Dexterity or Strength (for the Armor Class). Your feature allows similar range of EHP for just Constitution. This may not be too problematic since a character almost always has to invest in a different ability for the purposes of attacks or spells anyway, but it is a consideration that may reveal itself to be especially strong during playtesting.
At first, I considered whether it would be better to just use...
10 + Dexterity modifier + Constitution modifier
...to require two ability scores to reach the same Armor Class, but that would be substantially stronger for characters who have access to ample Ability Score Increases to reach beyond the 13 + Constitution modifier limits (characters like Dexterity-based fighters, rangers, and rogues). It may be more balanced in this way, or may be overpowered. I would probably playtest both versions.
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
More than likely, this is balanced
Your features almost directly mirror the features of the Dragon Hide feat.
- The same ability increase except offering Wisdom instead of Charisma
- AC of 13 + Constitution modifier rather than Dexterity modifier
- 1d4 + Strength bludgeoning damage rather than slashing damage on unarmed strikes
As such, the feature is almost certainly balanced compared to official options.
However... there may be a slight unbalance in the fact that Constitution is used for the Armor Class. Typically, gaining such high effective Hit Points (EHP) requires investment in both Constitution (for the Hit Points) and Dexterity or Strength (for the Armor Class). Your feature allows similar range of EHP for just Constitution. This may not be too problematic since a character almost always has to invest in a different ability for the purposes of attacks or spells anyway, but it is a consideration that may reveal itself to be especially strong during playtesting.
At first, I considered whether it would be better to just use...
10 + Dexterity modifier + Constitution modifier
...to require two ability scores to reach the same Armor Class, but that would be substantially stronger for characters who have access to ample Ability Score Increases to reach beyond the 13 + Constitution modifier limits (characters like Dexterity-based fighters, rangers, and rogues). It may be more balanced in this way, or may be overpowered. I would probably playtest both versions.
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
More than likely, this is balanced
Your features almost directly mirror the features of the Dragon Hide feat.
- The same ability increase except offering Wisdom instead of Charisma
- AC of 13 + Constitution modifier rather than Dexterity modifier
- 1d4 + Strength bludgeoning damage rather than slashing damage on unarmed strikes
As such, the feature is almost certainly balanced compared to official options.
However... there may be a slight unbalance in the fact that Constitution is used for the Armor Class. Typically, gaining such high effective Hit Points (EHP) requires investment in both Constitution (for the Hit Points) and Dexterity or Strength (for the Armor Class). Your feature allows similar range of EHP for just Constitution. This may not be too problematic since a character almost always has to invest in a different ability for the purposes of attacks or spells anyway, but it is a consideration that may reveal itself to be especially strong during playtesting.
At first, I considered whether it would be better to just use...
10 + Dexterity modifier + Constitution modifier
...to require two ability scores to reach the same Armor Class, but that would be substantially stronger for characters who have access to ample Ability Score Increases to reach beyond the 13 + Constitution modifier limits (characters like Dexterity-based fighters, rangers, and rogues). It may be more balanced in this way, or may be overpowered. I would probably playtest both versions.
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
$endgroup$
More than likely, this is balanced
Your features almost directly mirror the features of the Dragon Hide feat.
- The same ability increase except offering Wisdom instead of Charisma
- AC of 13 + Constitution modifier rather than Dexterity modifier
- 1d4 + Strength bludgeoning damage rather than slashing damage on unarmed strikes
As such, the feature is almost certainly balanced compared to official options.
However... there may be a slight unbalance in the fact that Constitution is used for the Armor Class. Typically, gaining such high effective Hit Points (EHP) requires investment in both Constitution (for the Hit Points) and Dexterity or Strength (for the Armor Class). Your feature allows similar range of EHP for just Constitution. This may not be too problematic since a character almost always has to invest in a different ability for the purposes of attacks or spells anyway, but it is a consideration that may reveal itself to be especially strong during playtesting.
At first, I considered whether it would be better to just use...
10 + Dexterity modifier + Constitution modifier
...to require two ability scores to reach the same Armor Class, but that would be substantially stronger for characters who have access to ample Ability Score Increases to reach beyond the 13 + Constitution modifier limits (characters like Dexterity-based fighters, rangers, and rogues). It may be more balanced in this way, or may be overpowered. I would probably playtest both versions.
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
edited 2 days ago
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
answered Apr 24 at 12:19
David CoffronDavid Coffron
41.1k3140296
41.1k3140296
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f146743%2fis-this-homebrew-racial-feat-stonehide-balanced%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
I don't get the action/bonus action mechanics. Most "alternative AC" just lets you use an optional calculation for AC. And "if you aren't wearing armor" would be redundant; you can use the armor calc, or the stonehide calc, at any point. Is there a reason behind that?
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:43
$begingroup$
The 2nd bullet is not a permanent change unlike dragon scales. It takes an action to "assume a stony appearance" and gain the AC boost.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 13:48
$begingroup$
For fluff reasons I assume? It needs rewording; as it stands, the stony appearance isn't attached to the AC change. (nor is the unarmed strike) I don't see any balance impact at all from those extra clauses (other than you cannot, say, wear "leather armor of stealth" and use your ability)
$endgroup$
– Yakk
Apr 24 at 13:49
$begingroup$
More than just fluff...also a slight nerf. A character runs the risk of losing the AC boost once becoming incapacitated. I made edits as you suggested.
$endgroup$
– Unaligned Ooze
Apr 24 at 14:07
1
$begingroup$
I would probably reword the bottom bullet to say that they may use d4 damage for unarmed strikes. Otherwise if you have a character like a monk who get's progression on their unarmed damage dice you would get a conflict where the monk could do d6 or some other higher damage but this feat states they only do d4, and technically the feat is more exact then the monk's class feature...
$endgroup$
– dsollen
Apr 24 at 19:51