Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5898725" data-attributes="member: 59506">I'll post here what I posted at WotC:&nbsp;As concerns making Feats that address all three pillars in a single Feat: I also see a potential problem with the possibility of Feats having overlapping benefits. For instance, the Power Attack example providing an Intimidation bonus...what happens when in the process of designing another feat, an intimidation bonus seems appropriate for it also - ultimately leading to two (or more) different feats that provide an intimidation bonus. Do you instead find some other bonus for the Feat to avoid the overlap, and possibly run into the problem of having the Feat provide a bonus to something that really doesn't seem related at all to the Feat; do you just throw out what would be an interesting Feat because you can't make it support all three pillars; or do you go ahead with the Feat and figure out a way to combine bonuses (or nullify redundant bonuses...which would seem like a defacto penalty)...?It's a tough question.&nbsp;With the first one (finding another bonus), you could end up with a lot of Feats that seem to provide a bonus or have mechanics that seem divorced from it's description (fluff)...and we've been down that road before.&nbsp;With the second (throwing out the feat), you run into what Evil_Reverend alread said in the blog...less Feats.&nbsp; IMO, it would be more than just &quot;less feats&quot;, it would be very few feats.&nbsp; I think we could end up with a game that has too few options (which can be just as bad or worse than too many).&nbsp;With the third (combining or nullifying bonuses), you run into the design and play problem aspect that 3E had to deal with...stacking bonuses.&nbsp; You'd need rules for what bonuses can stack, which one's can't, what priority each bonus type has, or maybe even some funky math formula where the first bonus is full, subsequent bonuses are 1/2, 1/4, etc.I like the &quot;concept&quot; of having a Feat support all three pillars, but in practice I think it might end up being more trouble than beneficial.At the risk of adding extra complication to character creation, I think I'd prefer having a different delivery mechanism for each pillar.&nbsp;<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses&nbsp; &nbsp; B-)" data-shortname="B-)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="El Mahdi, post: 5898725, member: 59506"] I'll post here what I posted at WotC: As concerns making Feats that address all three pillars in a single Feat: I also see a potential problem with the possibility of Feats having overlapping benefits. For instance, the Power Attack example providing an Intimidation bonus...what happens when in the process of designing another feat, an intimidation bonus seems appropriate for it also - ultimately leading to two (or more) different feats that provide an intimidation bonus. Do you instead find some other bonus for the Feat to avoid the overlap, and possibly run into the problem of having the Feat provide a bonus to something that really doesn't seem related at all to the Feat; do you just throw out what would be an interesting Feat because you can't make it support all three pillars; or do you go ahead with the Feat and figure out a way to combine bonuses (or nullify redundant bonuses...which would seem like a defacto penalty)...? It's a tough question. With the first one (finding another bonus), you could end up with a lot of Feats that seem to provide a bonus or have mechanics that seem divorced from it's description (fluff)...and we've been down that road before. With the second (throwing out the feat), you run into what Evil_Reverend alread said in the blog...less Feats. IMO, it would be more than just "less feats", it would be very few feats. I think we could end up with a game that has too few options (which can be just as bad or worse than too many). With the third (combining or nullifying bonuses), you run into the design and play problem aspect that 3E had to deal with...stacking bonuses. You'd need rules for what bonuses can stack, which one's can't, what priority each bonus type has, or maybe even some funky math formula where the first bonus is full, subsequent bonuses are 1/2, 1/4, etc. I like the "concept" of having a Feat support all three pillars, but in practice I think it might end up being more trouble than beneficial. At the risk of adding extra complication to character creation, I think I'd prefer having a different delivery mechanism for each pillar. B-) [/QUOTE]

Verification