Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
It’s LAUNCH DAY For The Pathfinder 2 Playtest!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 7756486" data-attributes="member: 37579"><p>That's nice. </p><p>Where did they say that? </p><p></p><p>Was it a a blog? Twitch? Twitter? A comment to a forum post? </p><p>They've done a single official update: <a href="http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5ll03?Your-First-Adventure" target="_blank">http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5ll03?Your-First-Adventure</a> It doesn't mention volley. </p><p></p><p>Not that I don't believe you or am calling you a liar. But without a citation it's just hearsay. </p><p>I've been doing the forum game too long to just outright believe "the designers said xxx", because it's too easy for people to read one thing and take away what they want. Or drift into friend-of-a-friend territory. </p><p></p><p></p><p>That's not even <em>remotely</em> what I was saying. </p><p></p><p>I'm totally okay with martials getting exclusive stuff. Asking for generic feats doesn't mean <em>all</em> feats have to become generic. That's a false dichotomy. </p><p></p><p>Firstly, yes, I want the generic combat feats left generic. Right now there are <em>zero </em>generic combat feats. Generic feats are mostly skill and utility based. And lots of feats are inevitably just going to be reprinted again and again in the classes. We also don't need four or five variants of Double Slice that all do functionally the same thing but are in different classes. That's just bloat and wasted space. </p><p>We've literally seen this once before, with 4th Edition powers. You inevitably end up with a dozen feats that all do almost identical things but just have different names.</p><p>Just make them generic, print them once, and use the extra space to make something class specific. </p><p></p><p>Yeah, martials need their own stuff. Heck, I think more than anything fighters need some exclusive class features. I love unique elements in 5e, like Action Surge and Second Wind.</p><p>I always argued that fighters should get to choose from weapon/ armour specialisation as a baked-in class feature. Rogues get sneak attack, barbarians get range, rangers get favoured enemy, and fighters can specialise. Fighters should be the best with weaponry. They should get better than anyone else with their favoured weapons, and unlock special talents and techniques with weapons they have. Weapon stunts. And, yes, class feats would be a cool way to do that. </p><p></p><p>But the way to make a cool and interesting fighter is NOT to take a bunch of generic feats and just make them exclusive to the fighter. That doesn't make the fighter more like a fighter. That just makes the fighter more like everyone else. Making it so the cleric can't make attacks of opportunity as that's a fighter feature doesn't make the fighter cooler. It's generic and unoriginal. It's the epitome of lazy design. Instead, make the fighter's attacks of opportunity matter more and do cooler things! </p><p>Plus... the playtest already has rangers, paladins, and rogues sharing feats with the fighter. There's no guarantee that fighters won't slowly lose all their features. What they need is distinct fighter only class features that can be augmented and improved by feats, like the ranger and paladin have.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jester David, post: 7756486, member: 37579"] That's nice. Where did they say that? Was it a a blog? Twitch? Twitter? A comment to a forum post? They've done a single official update: [url]http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5ll03?Your-First-Adventure[/url] It doesn't mention volley. Not that I don't believe you or am calling you a liar. But without a citation it's just hearsay. I've been doing the forum game too long to just outright believe "the designers said xxx", because it's too easy for people to read one thing and take away what they want. Or drift into friend-of-a-friend territory. That's not even [I]remotely[/I] what I was saying. I'm totally okay with martials getting exclusive stuff. Asking for generic feats doesn't mean [I]all[/I] feats have to become generic. That's a false dichotomy. Firstly, yes, I want the generic combat feats left generic. Right now there are [I]zero [/I]generic combat feats. Generic feats are mostly skill and utility based. And lots of feats are inevitably just going to be reprinted again and again in the classes. We also don't need four or five variants of Double Slice that all do functionally the same thing but are in different classes. That's just bloat and wasted space. We've literally seen this once before, with 4th Edition powers. You inevitably end up with a dozen feats that all do almost identical things but just have different names. Just make them generic, print them once, and use the extra space to make something class specific. Yeah, martials need their own stuff. Heck, I think more than anything fighters need some exclusive class features. I love unique elements in 5e, like Action Surge and Second Wind. I always argued that fighters should get to choose from weapon/ armour specialisation as a baked-in class feature. Rogues get sneak attack, barbarians get range, rangers get favoured enemy, and fighters can specialise. Fighters should be the best with weaponry. They should get better than anyone else with their favoured weapons, and unlock special talents and techniques with weapons they have. Weapon stunts. And, yes, class feats would be a cool way to do that. But the way to make a cool and interesting fighter is NOT to take a bunch of generic feats and just make them exclusive to the fighter. That doesn't make the fighter more like a fighter. That just makes the fighter more like everyone else. Making it so the cleric can't make attacks of opportunity as that's a fighter feature doesn't make the fighter cooler. It's generic and unoriginal. It's the epitome of lazy design. Instead, make the fighter's attacks of opportunity matter more and do cooler things! Plus... the playtest already has rangers, paladins, and rogues sharing feats with the fighter. There's no guarantee that fighters won't slowly lose all their features. What they need is distinct fighter only class features that can be augmented and improved by feats, like the ranger and paladin have. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
It’s LAUNCH DAY For The Pathfinder 2 Playtest!
Top