... Bow Mastery.. for free?

[Artoomis]

I think that, instead of it being, as you suspect, either a mistake or something that they did on purpose; that it's probably something they either definitely meant to do, or something that they messed up and should fix.

ROFL.

How are those two things different??

a mistake = something that they messed up and should fix

something that they did on purpose = something they either definitely meant to do

You are saying the exact same thing!!

 

[aurance]

ROFL.

How are those two things different??

a mistake = something that they messed up and should fix

something that they did on purpose = something they either definitely meant to do

You are saying the exact same thing!!

(Pssst - that was the joke.)

 

[Eldorian]

I am not sure that I can agree with this statement.

The statement is either true or it isn't.

 

[deleteme123456]

This statement is false.

 

[Jhaelen]

The statement is either true or it isn't.

Well, can it be anything but true?

If it was done unintentionally, they made a mistake, right?

 

[abyssaldeath]

Well, can it be anything but true?

If it was done unintentionally, they made a mistake, right?

Maybe they unintentionally got it correct by mistake?

 

[KarinsDad]

I agree with the OP.

Feats should be balanced. Having the identical feat for a different weapon without prereqs is bad design. Aren't any of the original designers reviewing the new material?

 

[WalterKovacs]

I agree with the OP.

Feats should be balanced. Having the identical feat for a different weapon without prereqs is bad design. Aren't any of the original designers reviewing the new material?

However if they felt the original feats were underpowered (or overly restrictive to be more precise) then wouldn't it be bad design to continue making the same mistake?

 

[Jhaelen]

Maybe they unintentionally got it correct by mistake?

Hrhr, that wouldn't affect the correctness of the statement

Being correct by mistake would still be a mistake, albeit one that turned out to be correct...

The statement can only be incorrect if they didn't make a mistake _and_ did it unintentionally.

Woah, I'm starting to get dizzy...

 

[AngryPurpleCyclops]

I agree with the OP.

Feats should be balanced. Having the identical feat for a different weapon without prereqs is bad design. Aren't any of the original designers reviewing the new material?

The lack of uniformity is probably not good unless they felt there was a significant reason. I think maybe the reason is there are a lot of melee types who have a bow back up and they already suck at ranged combats because dex is not a good stat for them. Making more feats to distance the gap between real archers and strength warriors trying to use a bow probably gets problematic at high levels making the fighters bow nearly worthless.

However if they felt the original feats were underpowered (or overly restrictive to be more precise) then wouldn't it be bad design to continue making the same mistake?

if that's the case they need to errata the old feats. It's a bad idea to start power creeping on some builds while leaving the others in a position to be affected by MAD.