Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ChrisCarlson" data-source="post: 6888976" data-attributes="member: 6801216">I don't see how that is anything more than an opinion. Certainly not defensible with any kind of hard facts. Just conjecture and assumption.Bonus actions to do what, exactly? Because having more than one way to use your bonus action is not 'waste'. Its diversification. Its flexibility. I can tell you this from experience. My assassin/shadow monk/feypact warlock has a slew of bonus action options. All great. All very useful. In varied and different ways. I'm rarely without a satisfying thing to do with my bonus action. If all I had was &quot;hit it again,&quot; there'd be many circumstances in actual play where I would have missed out on using my bonus action effectively.How about, while you are taking whatever bonus action attack feat you need to catch up to me, I'll take Sentinel (now I'll get more opportunities to make reaction attacks!). Or Alert (Never surprised, and didn't someone just mention how devastating it is not to go first...). Or, heck, I could just take +2 CON (more HPs, +1 Con saves, +1 AC).This infatuation with requiring two characters--built differently--to take the same feat keeps missing the point. When they reach a point to access a feat, they are each given a discrete option. No different than when they were given a choice at 3rd level to pick their path. These discrete choices are what separate characters, and even their players.And you keep wanting to make sure these two intentionally divergent PCs make arbitrarily similar choices, in a key place designed to customize and separate from others, just so that you can prove one is better than the other? That's not how things work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ChrisCarlson, post: 6888976, member: 6801216"] I don't see how that is anything more than an opinion. Certainly not defensible with any kind of hard facts. Just conjecture and assumption. Bonus actions to do [i]what[/i], exactly? Because having more than one way to use your bonus action is not 'waste'. Its diversification. Its flexibility. I can tell you this from experience. My assassin/shadow monk/feypact warlock has a slew of bonus action options. All great. All very useful. In varied and different ways. I'm rarely without a satisfying thing to do with my bonus action. If all I had was "hit it again," there'd be many circumstances in actual play where I would have missed out on using my bonus action effectively. How about, while you are taking whatever bonus action attack feat you need to catch up to me, I'll take Sentinel (now I'll get more opportunities to make reaction attacks!). Or Alert (Never surprised, and didn't someone just mention how devastating it is not to go first...). Or, heck, I could just take +2 CON (more HPs, +1 Con saves, +1 AC). This infatuation with requiring two characters--[i]built differently[/i]--to take the same feat keeps missing the point. When they reach a point to access a feat, they are each given a discrete option. No different than when they were given a choice at 3rd level to pick their path. These discrete choices are what separate characters, and even their players. And you keep wanting to make sure these two intentionally divergent PCs make arbitrarily similar choices, in a key place designed to customize and separate from others, just so that you can prove one is better than the other? That's not how things work. [/QUOTE]

Verification