Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5786569" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I felt that AoOs for everyone slowed game play too much, but I wanted something there for people who wanted to control the battlefield, protect their friends, and the like.I kept them in my (unrecognizably modified) SRD-based RPG, but I made them a feat. If you want the advantage of reach weapons, take the feat. If you want the advantage of protecting your allies, take the feat. If you want the extra attack just to get more damage through, take the feat.Then again, my game is point-buy (and classless), and feats cost 3 points (you get 15 per hit die). If you want a base attack, it's 3 points (capped at hit die +1). If you want a feat, it's 3 points. If you want a base save (Fort, Ref, or Will), it's 1 point (capped at hit die +1). If you want a spell-like ability (level 1 spells of one thread [school of magic]), it's 8 points.Just some prices to put things into perspective. If a feat is only 1/5th of a level, it's not a huge investment (like feats were in 3.X). I think that AoOs serve a very good purpose, but it'd be nice if every level 1 guard or soldier didn't get an AoO when you moved past them. Some, sure. But I see looking for openings in combat as a skill, and a feat is a good representation of that skill.Not sure how I'd implement it in other systems, honestly. Feats are just too few and far between sometimes. Whether you're feat starved or not just depends on the character concept. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5786569, member: 6668292"] I felt that AoOs for everyone slowed game play too much, but I wanted something there for people who wanted to control the battlefield, protect their friends, and the like. I kept them in my (unrecognizably modified) SRD-based RPG, but I made them a feat. If you want the advantage of reach weapons, take the feat. If you want the advantage of protecting your allies, take the feat. If you want the extra attack just to get more damage through, take the feat. Then again, my game is point-buy (and classless), and feats cost 3 points (you get 15 per hit die). If you want a base attack, it's 3 points (capped at hit die +1). If you want a feat, it's 3 points. If you want a base save (Fort, Ref, or Will), it's 1 point (capped at hit die +1). If you want a spell-like ability (level 1 spells of one thread [school of magic]), it's 8 points. Just some prices to put things into perspective. If a feat is only 1/5th of a level, it's not a huge investment (like feats were in 3.X). I think that AoOs serve a very good purpose, but it'd be nice if every level 1 guard or soldier didn't get an AoO when you moved past them. Some, sure. But I see looking for openings in combat as a skill, and a feat is a good representation of that skill. Not sure how I'd implement it in other systems, honestly. Feats are just too few and far between sometimes. Whether you're feat starved or not just depends on the character concept. As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]

Verification