Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5898682" data-attributes="member: 54877">I don't completely disagree with that, but I'd say that all of 3E/4E feats suffer from a granularity problem. Namely, they are too fine grained, which makes them difficult to balance well, and leads to having a lot of them, which feeds into the first problem yet again.&nbsp;Pick an edition with feats. Take all the feats produced. Ruthlessly go through them, combining some of them (and bits of some of them) into a few &quot;super feats&quot;. Aim to end up with around 10% of the original total (ignoring the third party side of the bloat). Whatever bits are left, throw away. Reduce character feat acquisition. That won't be perfect, but I can almost guarantee that over the universe of all D&amp;D characters made, the feats will be significantly more evenly distributed than is current.&nbsp;Or, if you prefer, think of feats on a balance scale, and generously rank them as something like zero to 2, with zero being &quot;absolutely worthless&quot; and 2 being &quot;banworthy overpowered&quot;. The vast majority of feats will rank somewhere between .5 and 1.4, rounding off to 1--i.e. worth one feat--even though we know full well they are not. With really narrow feats, it's hard to change something that is inherently around a .5 into a .9 or 1 or 1.1.&nbsp;Make &quot;super feats,&quot; and this gets a lot easier. The feats have such a wide scope, that if you've got feats ranging from zero to 10, you want most of them to end up around 5, then getting something from 8 to 5.3 or from 3 to 4.9 is not that hard. And even if you screw up and end up with a few 4s and 6s, it's not that big of a difference.&nbsp;Not that this is foolproof, as the history of D&amp;D classes can attest. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />&nbsp;Their theme/feat direction seems to be aiming for at least one side of this fix.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5898682, member: 54877"] I don't completely disagree with that, but I'd say that all of 3E/4E feats suffer from a granularity problem. Namely, they are too fine grained, which makes them difficult to balance well, and leads to having a lot of them, which feeds into the first problem yet again. Pick an edition with feats. Take all the feats produced. Ruthlessly go through them, combining some of them (and bits of some of them) into a few "super feats". Aim to end up with around 10% of the original total (ignoring the third party side of the bloat). Whatever bits are left, throw away. Reduce character feat acquisition. That won't be perfect, but I can almost guarantee that over the universe of all D&D characters made, the feats will be significantly more evenly distributed than is current. Or, if you prefer, think of feats on a balance scale, and generously rank them as something like zero to 2, with zero being "absolutely worthless" and 2 being "banworthy overpowered". The vast majority of feats will rank somewhere between .5 and 1.4, rounding off to 1--i.e. worth one feat--even though we know full well they are not. With really narrow feats, it's hard to change something that is inherently around a .5 into a .9 or 1 or 1.1. Make "super feats," and this gets a lot easier. The feats have such a wide scope, that if you've got feats ranging from zero to 10, you want most of them to end up around 5, then getting something from 8 to 5.3 or from 3 to 4.9 is not that hard. And even if you screw up and end up with a few 4s and 6s, it's not that big of a difference. Not that this is foolproof, as the history of D&D classes can attest. :p Their theme/feat direction seems to be aiming for at least one side of this fix. [/QUOTE]

Verification