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: 7228070" data-attributes="member: 71699">They cut "loaded" from the third benefit. Meaning that the crossbow didn't need to be loaded using a character's free interaction in between their attack action and their bonus action.I hadn't thought about the "cheese" criticism. What I was focused on was simplifying handling it at the table. If it is 5 attacks per 2 turns, then per RAW one must remember which number of attacks on which turns, and also when the sword is available for AoOs and when it isn't. That seemed far too clunky. One could easily write it (as perhaps the original authors intended) so that you get to snap off one shot with your "loaded" hand crossbow and then it is all sword work. That seems rather underwhelming for the price of a feat. How about just writing that into the hand crossbow itself? "Snapshot. When you use the attack action with a weapon in one hand, you can use a bonus action to fire a loaded weapon with snapshot in the other hand." The ammunition rule would then prevent you doing that again until you either had a hand free, or took time out to reload.Perhaps a better way to put it would be "Most of the rules are focused on combat, so these rules pay attention to that context".I marked them like that so that it would be clear that they're being balanced differently from the Whole and Half-ASI feats. Notionally, the whole and half ASI feats should all end up being worth an ASI. Whereas the taxed feats can be worth less than an ASI because we're facilitating but not advantaging the thing they unlock. That is in order to reserve that thing for the classes it is core to, like skills for Bards and Rogues, and heavy armour for fighters.That could be better. The idea is to only change things that are badly costed or over/underpowered.Absolutely. Reducing it to once per turn is huge.Those sound like quite good suggestions. Do you think downgrading the cover is right? Or obviating it completely. Crit threshold improvement is in Champion making that path more appealing, so it is risky to put it into a feat and also punishes that archetype for then taking that feat.My thinking is that characters can only benefit from half of the feat (as they can't wear heavy and medium armour at the same time). And then Smith's Tools is a very minor benefit - worth less than a third of a feat. The concept is that with your knowledge and tools you customise your armour, which seemed to me to make some sense of sticking HAM and MAM into the same feat. HAM and MAM could be left split up as they are in RAW, but then I would still believe they need +1 stat increase to match the value of a full ASI.It's good having your input into evaluations so for your reference, in RAW an ASI appears to me to be worth -Strength +1 to save, attack, damage, manoeuvre DCs and athletics; unlocks chainmail, splint and plate; +2’ long jump, +1’ high jump, +15 lbs carrying; unlocks barbarian, fighter and paladin multiclassDexterity +1 to save, AC, initiative, attack, damage, manoeuvre DCs, acrobatics, sleight of hand, stealth and thieves’ tools; unlocks fighter, monk, ranger and rogue multiclassConstitution +1 to save, HP/level, days without food, roll versus thirst, minutes holding breathIntelligence +1 to save, spell attacks, spell DCs, prepared spells, arcana, gaming, history, investigation, nature and religion; unlocks Wizard multiclassWisdom +1 to save, spell attacks, spell DCs, prepared spells, animal handling, insight, medicine, perception and survival; unlocks cleric and druid multiclassCharisma +1 to save, spell attacks, spell DCs, prepared spells, deception, intimidation, performance and persuasion; unlocks bard, paladin, sorcerer and warlock multiclass</blockquote>

Verification