yo! so iv been looking around on some YT vids and websites and more then a few suggested Heavy Armor Master as a feat to pick up. To me it looks bad like not useless bc its a half feat but only 3 damage just doesnt sound like enough to pick up. is there something im missing? or are they crazy or is this just a mid feat
It's definitely a solid feat. Yeah, it's just three damage, but it's three damage each and every single time you take bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage. It adds up. Plus, there aren't a whole lot of great choices for Strength half feats, so it'd be at or near the top if my list if I had a heavy armor-clad character with an odd Strength score.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I took a random core rules creature at CR10, which happens to be the Stone Golem. It does 3d8+6 Bludgeoning per attack. Reducing that by 3 would be a 15.3% reduction in damage. That's not to be sniffed at - it's approximately the same as imposing Disadvantage on attack roles, statistically.
This one is obviously one that loses potency over time. A Goblin does 1d6+2, so it loses, on average, 35.3% damage, while a Tarrasque can do 4d12+10, so only an 8.3% reduction. You also are more likely to come across monsters that can do magical attacks etc, so it definitely loses potency over time. However, it's not to be sniffed at. Even an 8.3% reduction against the Tarrasque could easily mean you get to stay in the fight for an additional round. At level 1, it won't be uncommon that you'll just no-sell attacks outright because they're not beating your threshold of 3 damage (one in six successful attacks from a Goblin will just completely whiff because of it).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I took a random core rules creature at CR10, which happens to be the Stone Golem. It does 3d8+6 Bludgeoning per attack. Reducing that by 3 would be a 15.3% reduction in damage. That's not to be sniffed at - it's approximately the same as imposing Disadvantage on attack roles, statistically.
This one is obviously one that loses potency over time. A Goblin does 1d6+2, so it loses, on average, 35.3% damage, while a Tarrasque can do 4d12+10, so only an 8.3% reduction. You also are more likely to come across monsters that can do magical attacks etc, so it definitely loses potency over time. However, it's not to be sniffed at. Even an 8.3% reduction against the Tarrasque could easily mean you get to stay in the fight for an additional round. At level 1, it won't be uncommon that you'll just no-sell attacks outright because they're not beating your threshold of 3 damage (one in six successful attacks from a Goblin will just completely whiff because of it).
I wouldn't dismiss it as useless.
with that in mind would it be worth taking if i was in a game that plans on going into the later levels? 15 to 20
Cleric - Abjuration Wizard multiclass. Feat reduces damage, ward blocks damage, you can have Mage Armour, Absorb Elements and Shield for AC boosting and elemental damage reduction. Throw in Stoneskin to reduce the physical damage further. Plus a Sanctuary and healing spells when you need them. Especially if you're Life Cleric.
You'll be quite tanky.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
That's a very complex question. There are a ton of factors involved. There are additional questions that need to be asked after that - What feats are available to you? What kinds of enemies will you likely be facing? Is your Strength odd or even? What class are you? What is your current build? How do you see your character and what's your vision for them? What do you have already?
That's all ignoring the big question? Are you starting at L15 and working up to L20? Or are you saying that you're starting at L1 and hope to end somewhere between L15 and L20? That really changes the answer.
It's also very much worth pointing out the sober truth - campaigns very rarely get that high, if starting from L1 (similarly low level). The vast majority never get past L5, and there's no benefit to a plan that you'll never see come to fruition. If you're starting low, I would not expect to reach L15-20. Assume you'll get to about L10 (that's around where most "successful" campaigns reach in my experience).
It really depends on your build and your game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
That's a very complex question. There are a ton of factors involved. There are additional questions that need to be asked after that - What feats are available to you? What kinds of enemies will you likely be facing? Is your Strength odd or even? What class are you? What is your current build? How do you see your character and what's your vision for them? What do you have already?
That's all ignoring the big question? Are you starting at L15 and working up to L20? Or are you saying that you're starting at L1 and hope to end somewhere between L15 and L20? That really changes the answer.
It's also very much worth pointing out the sober truth - campaigns very rarely get that high, if starting from L1 (similarly low level). The vast majority never get past L5, and there's no benefit to a plan that you'll never see come to fruition. If you're starting low, I would not expect to reach L15-20. Assume you'll get to about L10 (that's around where most "successful" campaigns reach in my experience).
It really depends on your build and your game.
i am lucky to be at a table of people who iv played with before a on a few campaigns so theres a good chance its going to the higher levels. we also had no free starting feat or items and started at 1 at 3 rn and going to 15 to 20
currently Race: V human (telekinetic feat plus 1 int) Class: Fighter Subclass: Psi warrior Level: 3 Level up style: XP Stats (point buy): S16 D8 Con16 I16 W8 Char8 current build: chain mail, Greatsword, 10GP and just other basic starter gear like short bow and shield. future plans for them? i want to really lean into the telekinetic side of the class so i want to max out my int prob with the first two ASIs fighters get.
Just a bit min-maxed on the ability scores, I see.
Generally speaking, it's considered more advisable to make sure you're boosting your main stat's ability mod at level 4; honestly a Psi Warrior doesn't need INT as much as STR but regardless there's a lot to be said for passing on the feat at 4; fortuitously you get an additional ASI at level 6, so maybe consider grabbing the feat then unless you want to either max STR early or start bumping INT. Regarding how useful the feat itself will be, assuming your DM doesn't pull out a lot of oddball monsters with odd attacks and you find yourself tanking a lot, you'll get good mileage out of the damage reduction.
The problem with the feat is that it does not scale, but monster damage scales aggressively, particularly at higher levels. Though some of that scaling comes from an increased number of attacks from the monsters, which, in turn, makes the feat better, at higher levels, Wizards focuses more on increasing damage output per attack than on ever-increasing numbers of attacks, This means the feat drastically starts dropping in efficacy, particularly in the level 15-20 range - you are reducing the same amount of damage per turn, but the damage just keeps getting bigger.
Overall, I would say it is a poorly designed feat - it feels like a feat designed with published adventures in mind, and thus is overly focused on the low and mid tiers of play. Wizards has admitted their over-focus on the adventure range of levels was a mistake; I think this feat is a victim of that mistake.
That does not mean there is not utility in taking it - but you probably have better ways to boost your strength and better things to do with limited feat selection if you believe this campaign will last until high levels.
Having had a character with it, its value really tapered off around level 10. At that point lots of attacks are magical, or from a magical weapon, and just bypass the DR. Good feat if you take it at level 4, kind of ok at 8, after that it really starts to suffer. Of course, that will be campaign dependent, largely based on the monsters you fight. Could be unused earlier or later if you’re in a high or low magic world.
The 1D&D version they proposed seemed to fix the magic part, and I think the damage scaled better. So if the campaign is going on for a while and you can respec to the new version in 6 months, then it’s really one to consider.
yo! so iv been looking around on some YT vids and websites and more then a few suggested Heavy Armor Master as a feat to pick up. To me it looks bad like not useless bc its a half feat but only 3 damage just doesnt sound like enough to pick up. is there something im missing? or are they crazy or is this just a mid feat
Well you haven't told us anything about your character class or species, to include what is your plan for him/her/it.
Heavy amor is just bad anyway. It's cumberson and noisy. Unless it is a plus magical, the best AC you are going to get out of it is 18 if you don't use a shield. At least the feat reduces damaged by 3 hitpoints and deflects a killing strike against your team member. This would probably be okay for the first two or three levels, when most of your enemies are doing an avg of 3pts of damage anyway. After that you should be discussing with your DM to get magical armor and/or a shield.
yo! so iv been looking around on some YT vids and websites and more then a few suggested Heavy Armor Master as a feat to pick up. To me it looks bad like not useless bc its a half feat but only 3 damage just doesnt sound like enough to pick up. is there something im missing? or are they crazy or is this just a mid feat
Well you haven't told us anything about your character class or species, to include what is your plan for him/her/it.
Heavy amor is just bad anyway. It's cumberson and noisy. Unless it is a plus magical, the best AC you are going to get out of it is 18 if you don't use a shield. At least the feat reduces damaged by 3 hitpoints and deflects a killing strike against your team member. This would probably be okay for the first two or three levels, when most of your enemies are doing an avg of 3pts of damage anyway. After that you should be discussing with your DM to get magical armor and/or a shield.
That's a very complex question. There are a ton of factors involved. There are additional questions that need to be asked after that - What feats are available to you? What kinds of enemies will you likely be facing? Is your Strength odd or even? What class are you? What is your current build? How do you see your character and what's your vision for them? What do you have already?
That's all ignoring the big question? Are you starting at L15 and working up to L20? Or are you saying that you're starting at L1 and hope to end somewhere between L15 and L20? That really changes the answer.
It's also very much worth pointing out the sober truth - campaigns very rarely get that high, if starting from L1 (similarly low level). The vast majority never get past L5, and there's no benefit to a plan that you'll never see come to fruition. If you're starting low, I would not expect to reach L15-20. Assume you'll get to about L10 (that's around where most "successful" campaigns reach in my experience).
It really depends on your build and your game.
i am lucky to be at a table of people who iv played with before a on a few campaigns so theres a good chance its going to the higher levels. we also had no free starting feat or items and started at 1 at 3 rn and going to 15 to 20
currently Race: V human (telekinetic feat plus 1 int) Class: Fighter Subclass: Psi warrior Level: 3 Level up style: XP Stats (point buy): S16 D8 Con16 I16 W8 Char8 current build: chain mail, Greatsword, 10GP and just other basic starter gear like short bow and shield. future plans for them? i want to really lean into the telekinetic side of the class so i want to max out my int prob with the first two ASIs fighters get.
yo! so iv been looking around on some YT vids and websites and more then a few suggested Heavy Armor Master as a feat to pick up. To me it looks bad like not useless bc its a half feat but only 3 damage just doesnt sound like enough to pick up. is there something im missing? or are they crazy or is this just a mid feat
Well you haven't told us anything about your character class or species, to include what is your plan for him/her/it.
Heavy amor is just bad anyway. It's cumberson and noisy. Unless it is a plus magical, the best AC you are going to get out of it is 18 if you don't use a shield. At least the feat reduces damaged by 3 hitpoints and deflects a killing strike against your team member. This would probably be okay for the first two or three levels, when most of your enemies are doing an avg of 3pts of damage anyway. After that you should be discussing with your DM to get magical armor and/or a shield.
Without magic or a shield, the best you're going to get out of medium or light armor is 17 unless you take Medium Armor Mastery and wear half-plate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Heavy armor mastery is amazing at low levels, and isn't bad at high levels... just not as impressive as it is at low levels (get it at level 1 on a variant human and you might as well be doubling your hit points; in tier 3-4 it's more like a 10% increase. 10% increase on a half-feat isn't bad, just not spectacular).
I mean... At higher levels I'd argue it still isn't bad since a lot of melee feats don't scale to begin with and being able to reduce incoming damage at all is pretty solid. Plus it's an easy house rule to say that it works on magical P/S/B damage so that you're feat isn't invalidated if everyone is suddenly running around with magic attacks.
Plus as a fighter you have the ASI options to actually take non S rank talents if you're concerned about it.
To put it another way, it's proportionally less good at high levels, but by then the opportunity cost of taking it has also gone down because you've already gotten several stat boosts and potentially other feats as well.
In my games, the main issue is that nonmagical damage becomes pretty rare at high levels. Unless the campaign is specifically geared towards it, high-powered PCs just don't take on nonmagical threats at that level of play. So I wouldn't take it in a high level campaign. But your campaign may be different.
Depends a lot on what's encountered; even classic high end stuff like Fiends and Dragons have a fair amount of basic PSB in their damage mix. Might not be a good pick if you're building starting at the mid teens, but for a running campaign it's gonna be solid for a while and it's hard to call how much fall-off you'll get later.
Depends a lot on what's encountered; even classic high end stuff like Fiends and Dragons have a fair amount of basic PSB in their damage mix.
Over the course of a three round combat, an ancient red dragon is assumed to use its breath weapon once against two targets, use its multiattack twice, and use 9 legendary actions; call that 5x tail, 2x wings against 2 targets. This is a total of
Breath Weapon: 182. Each point of Dexterity save in excess of +3 reduces this total by 4.5.
Bite (x2), Claw (x4), Tail (x5): 233. Each point of AC in excess of 17 reduces this total by 11.7, so a +1 AC feat would save about 12 damage. HAM, by comparison, reduces damage by 3 per hit; if we assume 9 hits, that's 27 damage.
Wings (x4): 68. Each point of Dexterity save in excess of +4 reduces this total by 3.4. It is arguable whether HAM does anything, HAM works against attacks and this does not have an attack roll but does have Attack in the name of the ability. It is probably not supposed to work.
So, that's a base of 485 damage, which obviously a fighter isn't going to tank, but if we assume the damage is being split between four characters and he's taking 25%, 121 damage is feasible in tier 3. Assuming a level 14 character (starts with 115 hit points from Con 14 and 14d10)
Tough increases his ability to take damage by 28. This is clearly the strongest performer... but it's a full feat.
HAM increases his ability to take damage by 7 (since he's only being hit by 25% of the damage, he only gets 25% of the bonus)
Fighting Initiate (Defense) increases his ability to take damage by 3 (+1 AC)
Resilient (Dex) doesn't do much, because a lot of the bonus is wasted since his base dex save is likely terrible.
Defensive Duelist is okay if for some reason you're using a rapier and you don't have some other high value reaction, it's probably going to save your from one hit for ~20.
No other defensive tricks spring to mind, though I could certainly have forgotten some.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
yo! so iv been looking around on some YT vids and websites and more then a few suggested Heavy Armor Master as a feat to pick up. To me it looks bad like not useless bc its a half feat but only 3 damage just doesnt sound like enough to pick up. is there something im missing? or are they crazy or is this just a mid feat
It's definitely a solid feat. Yeah, it's just three damage, but it's three damage each and every single time you take bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage. It adds up. Plus, there aren't a whole lot of great choices for Strength half feats, so it'd be at or near the top if my list if I had a heavy armor-clad character with an odd Strength score.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I took a random core rules creature at CR10, which happens to be the Stone Golem. It does 3d8+6 Bludgeoning per attack. Reducing that by 3 would be a 15.3% reduction in damage. That's not to be sniffed at - it's approximately the same as imposing Disadvantage on attack roles, statistically.
This one is obviously one that loses potency over time. A Goblin does 1d6+2, so it loses, on average, 35.3% damage, while a Tarrasque can do 4d12+10, so only an 8.3% reduction. You also are more likely to come across monsters that can do magical attacks etc, so it definitely loses potency over time. However, it's not to be sniffed at. Even an 8.3% reduction against the Tarrasque could easily mean you get to stay in the fight for an additional round. At level 1, it won't be uncommon that you'll just no-sell attacks outright because they're not beating your threshold of 3 damage (one in six successful attacks from a Goblin will just completely whiff because of it).
I wouldn't dismiss it as useless.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
with that in mind would it be worth taking if i was in a game that plans on going into the later levels? 15 to 20
Cleric - Abjuration Wizard multiclass. Feat reduces damage, ward blocks damage, you can have Mage Armour, Absorb Elements and Shield for AC boosting and elemental damage reduction. Throw in Stoneskin to reduce the physical damage further. Plus a Sanctuary and healing spells when you need them. Especially if you're Life Cleric.
You'll be quite tanky.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
That's a very complex question. There are a ton of factors involved. There are additional questions that need to be asked after that - What feats are available to you? What kinds of enemies will you likely be facing? Is your Strength odd or even? What class are you? What is your current build? How do you see your character and what's your vision for them? What do you have already?
That's all ignoring the big question? Are you starting at L15 and working up to L20? Or are you saying that you're starting at L1 and hope to end somewhere between L15 and L20? That really changes the answer.
It's also very much worth pointing out the sober truth - campaigns very rarely get that high, if starting from L1 (similarly low level). The vast majority never get past L5, and there's no benefit to a plan that you'll never see come to fruition. If you're starting low, I would not expect to reach L15-20. Assume you'll get to about L10 (that's around where most "successful" campaigns reach in my experience).
It really depends on your build and your game.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
i am lucky to be at a table of people who iv played with before a on a few campaigns so theres a good chance its going to the higher levels. we also had no free starting feat or items and started at 1 at 3 rn and going to 15 to 20
currently
Race: V human (telekinetic feat plus 1 int)
Class: Fighter
Subclass: Psi warrior
Level: 3
Level up style: XP
Stats (point buy): S16 D8 Con16 I16 W8 Char8
current build: chain mail, Greatsword, 10GP and just other basic starter gear like short bow and shield.
future plans for them? i want to really lean into the telekinetic side of the class so i want to max out my int prob with the first two ASIs fighters get.
Just a bit min-maxed on the ability scores, I see.
Generally speaking, it's considered more advisable to make sure you're boosting your main stat's ability mod at level 4; honestly a Psi Warrior doesn't need INT as much as STR but regardless there's a lot to be said for passing on the feat at 4; fortuitously you get an additional ASI at level 6, so maybe consider grabbing the feat then unless you want to either max STR early or start bumping INT. Regarding how useful the feat itself will be, assuming your DM doesn't pull out a lot of oddball monsters with odd attacks and you find yourself tanking a lot, you'll get good mileage out of the damage reduction.
The problem with the feat is that it does not scale, but monster damage scales aggressively, particularly at higher levels. Though some of that scaling comes from an increased number of attacks from the monsters, which, in turn, makes the feat better, at higher levels, Wizards focuses more on increasing damage output per attack than on ever-increasing numbers of attacks, This means the feat drastically starts dropping in efficacy, particularly in the level 15-20 range - you are reducing the same amount of damage per turn, but the damage just keeps getting bigger.
Overall, I would say it is a poorly designed feat - it feels like a feat designed with published adventures in mind, and thus is overly focused on the low and mid tiers of play. Wizards has admitted their over-focus on the adventure range of levels was a mistake; I think this feat is a victim of that mistake.
That does not mean there is not utility in taking it - but you probably have better ways to boost your strength and better things to do with limited feat selection if you believe this campaign will last until high levels.
The Heavy Armor Master feat is quite good especially more at low level than high level where DR3 is not as impactful.
Perhaps it would be better if the DR scaled with PB. But that is neither here nor there.
Having had a character with it, its value really tapered off around level 10. At that point lots of attacks are magical, or from a magical weapon, and just bypass the DR. Good feat if you take it at level 4, kind of ok at 8, after that it really starts to suffer.
Of course, that will be campaign dependent, largely based on the monsters you fight. Could be unused earlier or later if you’re in a high or low magic world.
The 1D&D version they proposed seemed to fix the magic part, and I think the damage scaled better. So if the campaign is going on for a while and you can respec to the new version in 6 months, then it’s really one to consider.
Well you haven't told us anything about your character class or species, to include what is your plan for him/her/it.
Heavy amor is just bad anyway. It's cumberson and noisy. Unless it is a plus magical, the best AC you are going to get out of it is 18 if you don't use a shield. At least the feat reduces damaged by 3 hitpoints and deflects a killing strike against your team member. This would probably be okay for the first two or three levels, when most of your enemies are doing an avg of 3pts of damage anyway. After that you should be discussing with your DM to get magical armor and/or a shield.
i didnt in the original post but i did later
Without magic or a shield, the best you're going to get out of medium or light armor is 17 unless you take Medium Armor Mastery and wear half-plate.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Heavy armor mastery is amazing at low levels, and isn't bad at high levels... just not as impressive as it is at low levels (get it at level 1 on a variant human and you might as well be doubling your hit points; in tier 3-4 it's more like a 10% increase. 10% increase on a half-feat isn't bad, just not spectacular).
I mean... At higher levels I'd argue it still isn't bad since a lot of melee feats don't scale to begin with and being able to reduce incoming damage at all is pretty solid. Plus it's an easy house rule to say that it works on magical P/S/B damage so that you're feat isn't invalidated if everyone is suddenly running around with magic attacks.
Plus as a fighter you have the ASI options to actually take non S rank talents if you're concerned about it.
To put it another way, it's proportionally less good at high levels, but by then the opportunity cost of taking it has also gone down because you've already gotten several stat boosts and potentially other feats as well.
In my games, the main issue is that nonmagical damage becomes pretty rare at high levels. Unless the campaign is specifically geared towards it, high-powered PCs just don't take on nonmagical threats at that level of play. So I wouldn't take it in a high level campaign. But your campaign may be different.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Depends a lot on what's encountered; even classic high end stuff like Fiends and Dragons have a fair amount of basic PSB in their damage mix. Might not be a good pick if you're building starting at the mid teens, but for a running campaign it's gonna be solid for a while and it's hard to call how much fall-off you'll get later.
Over the course of a three round combat, an ancient red dragon is assumed to use its breath weapon once against two targets, use its multiattack twice, and use 9 legendary actions; call that 5x tail, 2x wings against 2 targets. This is a total of
So, that's a base of 485 damage, which obviously a fighter isn't going to tank, but if we assume the damage is being split between four characters and he's taking 25%, 121 damage is feasible in tier 3. Assuming a level 14 character (starts with 115 hit points from Con 14 and 14d10)