Do you want variety or bonuses in your feats?

[twilsemail]

I understand what you're asking in the OP, but I think the wording of the actual post will skew your results to a point that the poll is useless. If you'd presented Option 1 as "Feats should present all varieties of options, including mathematical ones" then you'd probably get results that more accurately represented popular opinion.

While the first doesn't say "All feats should give mathematical bonuses" it does come off that way, at least to me.

I voted for #1 even though I tend to prefer flavorful feats over number bonuses.

 

[Mengu]

I'm forced to vote for mathematical feats, but that doesn't completely represent where I stand. I'd like to see the separation of design spaces like [MENTION=59057]UngeheuerLich[/MENTION].

And...

Your post lacks basic comprehension. Try reading the OP before posting to the thread.

No need to be rude. Particularly since you said:

If you don't like that, feel free to discuss why in the thread

 

[Ryujin]

The more that I think about it, the more that I want numeric bonus combat feats to come at some sort of penalty. Want the good; you get the not so good.

So yes; include feats with mathematical bonuses.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

The question is completely orthogonal to my position. So I can't justly answer it in the poll. In general, I prefer that the mathematical options be highly curtailed, possibly to elimination altogether, but this is based more on dealing with the inevitable bloat and power creep, and also the handling time of derived values, rather than seeing anything intrinsicly wrong with having math options themselves.

In other words, having mathematical options in feats puts the design on a slippery slope, but I'm not the type to reject a thing merely because it can slide. Or even because in the past, it has, in fact, slidden.

I do think that the more fiddly and narrow the circumstances, the less compelling niche mathematical options become. Obviously, feat bonuses that always apply get around this problem, but that highly limits what you can do. To give an example, if you said my choices were between lots of stackable flavorful feats that gave things such as +1 with cold powers on alternate Tuesdays, and then things like the current Expertise ...

then my answer is that I prefer that we chunk all of them completely, and instead have flavorful feats that don't stack, but give significant bonuses in somewhat limited circumstances. A feat gives you +2/+3/+4 to hit targets vulnerable to fire. If you are a mage with cold spells, you think this has lots of flavor and take it. If you are a warrior that has lots of experience fighting such creatures, you think this has appropriate flavor, and you take it.

Note that this only works if you get rid of the stackable, nit-picky stuff. Not to mention the math fix stuff. And it has some minor issues, which is why they tried to get around them by having the stackable, nit-picky stuff. But if you don't let them stack, and you let people pick a decent amount of them, then in a given combat, you pick the one that makes the most sense, and use that. For that combat, you can forget about the rest.

Of course, I think it would be better to come up with something more compelling than the chance to hit. Even damage bonuses are better. But that is what the topic I started is about.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Also, it is fairly obvious that we got to this point due to circular thinking. Something like:

People like taking lots of feats. It gives variety to the character. They like getting stuff every level, and having lots of feats is a way to do that. But if they get lots of feats, then each feat can only do so much. And if each feat can only do so much, then they have to stack to (eventually) matter very much. So for any given thing, we'll have to break it down into mulitple feats. You take 3 to 5 of them, and you finally get this variety that you want.

The way out of that trap is to simply step off the circle.

 

[keterys]

How exactly do you balance something like Light Sword Expertise with say... Linguist?

You don't. There just is no comparison from a balance standpoint.

How do you balance Arcane Mutterings with Stinking Cloud?

You put them in entirely different buckets, is what 4e design tells us.

Interesting, right?

 

[MrMyth]

Your post lacks basic comprehension. Try reading the OP before posting to the thread.

The idea here is to polarise people and see where they sit, on one side of the fence or the other. This is why this is a binary poll. If you don't like that, feel free to discuss why in the thread or make another poll.

Do you... really need to insult people when they respond precisely as you have asked them to respond?

Anyway, count me in as well on not agreeing with either option. For myself, I tend towards the options over the bonuses, but think there is room for either. Ideally, I'd like two seperate tracks - feats and talents, or something like that. Gain a feat every even level, gain a talent every odd level, etc. That way we don't have these disparate elements competing for the same resource, and for me, that would make a very big difference.

 

[Kzach]

No need to be rude. Particularly since you said:

Yes, by all means discuss the subject. Unge wasn't discussing anything, he was telling me I should've given him another option, which is something I addressed in the OP.

If you, he, or anyone else, wants a poll with more options, nothing is stopping any of you from making one.

 

[Ryujin]

... and then they took the 'math fix' attack feats, turned them into feat bonuses from untyped bonuses, and made a bunch of little stackable feats, unstackable.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Unge wasn't discussing anything, he was telling me I should've given him another option, which is something I addressed in the OP.

Actually he was discussing something. He was offering up a third valid possibility for feats, he just did it exceedingly succinctly.