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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7226303" data-attributes="member: 71699">I considered that. What I would draw attention to is that if we split up the whole ASI feats and let their parts be recombined at a rate of 2/4 levels, then it will be harder to predict what is possible. So the "designability" of the system will be lower. That said, we also need to agree on goals. Here I am aiming to support players to explore the part of the design space under each pillar that they are interested in. To some extent, that's based on the known archetypes that RPG players seem to gravitate toward. I believe that block feats is the safest way to do that because it lets us assert X comes with Y, and the investment to have X come with Z is much higher.You can see how Crossbow Expert + Sharpshooter even at a cost of 4 stat points was high on the power curve. Imagine if you could ignore the parts that are less relevant and cherry-pick the parts you want to exploit? Same goes for Great Weapon Master. The critical hit/reduce to 0 part is far down the power curve compared to the -5/+10 on every attack. Imagine I could combine that part with some or all of the pieces of Polearm Master!? And then of course we'll also have to contend with points buy character finessing the stat increases. It may be that offering three choices with half feats as I do here goes too far, and two would be safer!It's not that such problems can't be resolved. But only the design cost will be higher. It would need a lot more analysis and playtesting to ensure the bugs are out of the system.</blockquote>

Verification