Search results

I find these two sentences hilariously ironic. Well done!

This is a false dilemma fallacy. You pre-presume a "truth", that is only your opinion, then proceed to explain that a "fix" should be acceptable to all.

Heck, I might even consider a houserule to give every starting character one free pick from this list. Everyone gets something special to set them apart or highlight their capabilities. Yeah. I think I like that.

Agreed. I even see the opposite being true. Reducing the need to multiclass, because you want expertise, means potentially less rogue dipping. Which reduces rogue dilution. Everyone taking a level of rogue, to be good at a skill or two, is what weakens rogues in my book. Now PCs can have another...

I think people sometimes get a little too myopically focused on the stat score, rather than the modifier that is actually being applied. Being a d20 system, the very least of us (ability score 3!) has a 20% disadvantage, and the best (ability score 20) a 25% advantage, respectively, over...

My minor concern, with the way the feats are presented, is the possibility that a PC might already have expertise in a skill before they have access to the feat. I mean, presume a player wants his rogue to be a great acrobat. So at 1st-level he takes the skill and expertise in it. Then, at...

Not quite. Ironically, my argument was in countering the Chicken Littles' claiming the feat is clearly broken and flawed and must be corrected. Which is obviously not true, because plenty of game groups have no problem with it. I'd appreciate not having my argument re-purposed or misapplied...

Define, "no". Considering the feat in question does zero to increase your damage under numerous circumstances, I'd say your definition leaves us all wanting. I suggest taking a step back and evaluate whatever point it is you think you are trying to make. Because right now it is tragically...

"Vastly". Uh, no. Nice try though. Nice. And that proves you don't get my point. You are going to have to define "good at" first. Because from the sound of it, I don't think you grasp what "good at" actually means. At least, WRT 5e and its benchmarks and tolerances. If GWF is the...

I remember playing in a campaign for a while at a FLGS last year. One of the players had a half-orc fighter with GWF and a greataxe. He loved to use the -5/+10 feature. Every time he missed narrowly, I would point out that he would have hit without the penalty. It became a running gag. Everyone...

What kind of power? Best at what? Just because you built to try and deal more damage, in a specific circumstance, doesn't make you better at everything. Other than doing more damage to low AC melee-ranged targets. But that's a pretty narrow window to declare winning D&D over, IMO. You certainly...

I'd go so far as to argue that we have no evidence that "the masses" even have a problem with the feats in question. A handful of squeaky wheels, on a forum site like this, does not "the masses" make.

The DM of our last campaign (OotA) thought the same. He changed it (along with SS). I don't personally think the feats are as big an issue, but that's fine. I joined the campaign after it started so it was already established. But no one had given to trying the houseruled version. So eventually...

???

You have an appropriate moniker, IMO. Yikes. Because lemme axe you something. Who's "common sense" are we talking about? What exactly needs to kept in "control"? And while we're at it, here's another one: Who's "fun"? Games don't have fun. The people playing them do.

I'm just curious who's deciding what creatures a particular PC spellcaster has seen...

Objecting? I play a half-elf assassin/monk who is very dexterous, but has only an 8 strength. However, I took expertise in Athletics. Because, even though he may not be muscularly strong, he's a nimble climber, skilled swimmer and even has a decent ability to trip or throw an opponent (a la his...

Joe playing himself in that movie was so great!

Let me be clearer as well (I hope). I agree. However, I am of the opinion that you are conflating player cooperation and teamwork with character cooperation and teamwork. As I believe is fostered by your next point: Unless you'd like to clarify who exactly is doing the "dragging"? And what you...

Yeah. I even said as much, myself. Kinda the whole basis of the point I was making. Thus why I'm still unsure if I was the intended quotee.