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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="evilbob" data-source="post: 3627974" data-attributes="member: 9789">I disagree with these ideas.Sure, you may have some players grab certain feats in order to purchase others and buy feats a certain way, but this happens all the time without purchasing feats for XP.  Planning character progression is a big part of D&D for many people.  I don't think this disproportionally favors those folks, nor does it encourage min/maxing any more than the standard rules.  5k XP is a steep price, but it works for those who are willing to pay it to have more feats.As for the Toughness example:  what you really mean is, "Toughness will never, ever be worth a feat."  No one gets Toughness now, and no one will get it for 5k XP, either - that's not a problem with the system, that's a problem with the feat.  Are some feats worth more than others?  Sure they are.  Do the feats prereqs and other factors all come into play to make them balanced out?  If they're well-written, they do.  Just because you can purchase a feat for 5k XP at level 6 doesn't mean you're going to get Greater Weapon Focus any faster (in fact, it means you'll take longer to get it, since you're leveling slower).As I said before, the idea of purchasing feats for XP still seems like an interesting one.  Controlling unchecked player expenditure is the issue.  I like the idea that you can only purchase as many extra feats as you have levels (or hit dice, one might say).  That does a good and simple job of keeping it contained.  The only real problem left - in my opinion - is how to balance the guy who bought 3 feats and is a level or more behind and is gaining MORE XP per encounter than the guy who didn't buy any feats.  Not sure how to handle this mechanically, since it seems to favor those who buy feats.</blockquote>

Verification