Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6914633" data-attributes="member: 12731">To me that's backwards thinking. You don't include feats into a combat-heavy campaign because you want everybody to take those -5+10 feats.If you include feats, no matter what focus it has, you do so because you hope that opt-in feature increases choice and variation, yes?Well, if you agree to that I gotta say those feats mean design not working as intended, because in a combat-heavy campaign those feats are too good compared to the alternatives (other feats, no feats).Actually, when I think about it, I have a hard time coming up with any style of campaign improved by opting for feats with your criteria in mind.That is because I do not consider a campaign to be "improved" by adding a set of options where there are a very small subset which is clearly Best in Class for your style of campaign.In contrast, my ideal opt-in rules module such as feats, would include half a dozen equally attractive feats for the combat pillar, half a dozen equally attractive feats for the explore pillar, and half a dozen equally attractive feats for the social pillar.By your definition of design as intended, Aaron, I would say there ARE several feats working well, but that the -5+10 feats are not among them.</blockquote>