Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bogmad" data-source="post: 6165875" data-attributes="member: 6695559">Not sure I'd like race homogenization. I don't think it's something that would fly with a lot of people.I like the two &quot;ability score&quot; increase idea.&nbsp; Maybe +2 to two scores is still overpowered, but +1 to four abilities is better than +1 to all.Also, the ability to have an &quot;arcane archer&quot; or other feat available at 1st level to ONLY humans seems a little weird. What about an optional rule so that races could forego their ability score increases to gain a feat as well?&nbsp; Maybe you restrict the initial feat list that a race could select at first level so that an elf could select arcane archer, magic initiate, etc; a dwarf could select charger, toughness and so on. I like the feats well enough that it's a shame you have to level up so much before you finally get to play the archetype you want to playAlso why even call them feats anymore?&nbsp; Seems like specialty is finally the right word to use.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bogmad, post: 6165875, member: 6695559"] Not sure I'd like race homogenization. I don't think it's something that would fly with a lot of people. I like the two "ability score" increase idea. Maybe +2 to two scores is still overpowered, but +1 to four abilities is better than +1 to all. Also, the ability to have an "arcane archer" or other feat available at 1st level to ONLY humans seems a little weird. What about an optional rule so that races could forego their ability score increases to gain a feat as well? Maybe you restrict the initial feat list that a race could select at first level so that an elf could select arcane archer, magic initiate, etc; a dwarf could select charger, toughness and so on. I like the feats well enough that it's a shame you have to level up so much before you finally get to play the archetype you want to play Also why even call them feats anymore? Seems like specialty is finally the right word to use. [/QUOTE]

Verification