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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9349400" data-attributes="member: 93670">While true, that's not addressing the point I was makingThis feels like you are moralizing through a roleplay vrs rollplay sort of jab or you are not making a clear enough  point to see how it has anything to do with the post you quoted.In fact you are so far from the point I'm not even sure how to explain where you got lost.This I can explain & it's not entirely an "optimizer" issue, despite the implications of post <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/75-feats-not-nearly-enough.704247/post-9349318" target="_blank">219</a>, the problem is a rotten core design that was created from  the quest for simplicity & efforts at eroding niche protection.  I'll get back to this after covering your other questions though☆.I did see the playtest versions of feats, did you see the spoilered links in my sig where I even talk about some of them?  There is very little if anything in those feats or the classes & spells that makes room to do anything about why the problems with 5e feat nonchoice exist for many classes☆Back to your question about build level specialization question, hopefully I can cover all of the bases.  In short there is the rot problem at the core.  What was once the result of choices in things like spell selection equipment & feats was largely moved out of forking paths of specialization into more general areas of design space like the spells themselves & base classes.  Although I think his videos tend to oversimplify certain things in order to arrive at a desired result, dndunoptimized made a video recently talking about good spells vrs bad spells  [spoiler="here"]The video is long & the selected spells are focused exclusively on the questionable metric of damage. The specifics in it are not the point I'm making[MEDIA=youtube]VJ6jdXRQOzM[/MEDIA][/spoiler]What is lacking in that video is any attention towards how something like a glass cannon/blaster & a "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTBpVGeJLzI" target="_blank">god wizard</a>" distinguish themselves from one another in ways that might make other spell choices solid options or how the raw damage comparison depends heavily on this & that to really unlock the potential.  That's taken to such a degree that I can confirm that he doesn't even mention class or subclass beyond "two wizards".  With so much moved out of branching specialization to a general default in the class or spell there's no room or reason to  specialize.   You can see how clear that is in the way that video doesn't even try questioning the value of spells like web slow & so on, why would it when the game's math is designed for PCs  of such a low bar as ones deliberately unoptimized with no feats & no magic items.If you go back to 3.x you can quickly see how significant the loss is by quickly comparing the kinds of feats that casters are likely to find valuable based on the niche of their build.  Now 5e ran far from that state where a feat made a big difference in the path a PC's niche takes even if Alice & bob are both playing the same class to different ends..  Instead now you have many classes who are left with a choice between a couple feats that are really designed for someone else like warcaster with two out of its three bullet point features being designed for a melee weapon using melee ranged gish  & resilient con  because might as well or resilient con then warcaster.  While that comparison is most obvious for casters across those two editions it's still pretty much a stark nonchoice even for 5e's better served melee builds when you look at how visceral it was.Sooooo.... If wotc's not going to be expanding the venn diagram of valid niches for feats to slot into beyond "bob uses a pole arm" "Alice uses a greatsword" & "Dave uses a longbow" it's really not going to matter much to jump from 42 to 75 feats if the 33 new ones are trash tier "I don't have anything else for my first feat, might as well be this" or further padding the options for builds that already differentiate themselves through feats</blockquote>

Verification