Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="fearsomepirate" data-source="post: 8269542" data-attributes="member: 7021420">Actual text of the feat:&quot;When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, quarterstaff, or spear...&quot;So no off-hand attack allowed, as we made the off-hand attack part of the Attack action. Now, if you try to rules-lawyer this, this is a house rule draft, remember? That means I can change the text of the feat to make it clear. I'd rather revise a feature slightly than reintroduce the bonus action economy.As for the fact that the monk sacrificed stats to get a damage bump, fine by me. I don't care. That's what feats are for.I disagree that this is a balance issue. If Blade Song hadn't been a bonus action from publication time, and Shadow Blade popped up in round 1, I don't think anybody would have really noticed or cared or particularly seen it as an issue. But, if it is an issue, I collapsed the bonus action down to a spell class, so make Bladesong such a spell.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="fearsomepirate, post: 8269542, member: 7021420"] Actual text of the feat: "When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, quarterstaff, or spear..." So no off-hand attack allowed, as we made the off-hand attack part of the Attack action. Now, if you try to rules-lawyer this, this is a house rule draft, remember? That means I can change the text of the feat to make it clear. I'd rather revise a feature slightly than reintroduce the bonus action economy. As for the fact that the monk sacrificed stats to get a damage bump, fine by me. I don't care. That's what feats are for. I disagree that this is a balance issue. If Blade Song hadn't been a bonus action from publication time, and Shadow Blade popped up in round 1, I don't think anybody would have really noticed or cared or particularly seen it as an issue. But, if it is an issue, I collapsed the bonus action down to a spell class, so make Bladesong such a spell. [/QUOTE]

Verification