Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5288330" data-attributes="member: 51942">There's two different type of static bonus feats.  There are those that make a night-and-day difference and are essentially required - i.e. expertise and other similar feat bonuses to attack.  These are Not Good, clearly.  However, there are also feats such as Weapon Focus that don't clearly overshadow other choices.I think a variation in complexity is a good thing.  I help some of my friends build PC's - particularly those that aren't that interested in detailed tactics.  It's not that easy to come up with builds that work; and those that do depend on things like Weapon Focus - things that always work and don't depend on weird combo's or situations that require complex tactical interaction between party members or set-ups to satisfy various conditional bonuses.I think conditional bonuses should be kept to a minimum.  There's really too many of them anyhow; and powers impose too many short-term variations anyhow - feats don't need to add to that.  If he's bloodied... if I'm bloodied... With combat advantage... if ally is adjacent... if enemy is not adjacent... If I hit last turn... If I was hit last turn... If I marked the enemy... If I cursed an enemy... If I am marked... etc.  It's too much.  And though I understand how it happened to evolve for balance reasons, feats that add their bonuses on only the first attack in a round or some such thing are just terrible - anything I can precompute on my character sheet is one less hassle during the game.Basically, this:Another good feature of static feats is that they impose a certainly baseline usefulness.  Weapon Focus is a great example of that.</blockquote>

Verification