Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 8567015" data-attributes="member: 23484">For me, the real issue comes with the feat chains, and giving a feat as part of backgrounds. Feat-chains by themselves are potentially viable -- and in a sense exist already:moderately armored -- medium armor mastermodertaely armored -- shield master  are both "chains", though it is trivial with class choice to bypass the first part of the chain. By giving a feat as part of a background feature, this is really just shutting off options to most players without a certain background by four levels. The second-in-sequence feats additionally have a prerequiste of levels, which is not true of any other feat. (This I presume, is to prevent Variant humans from starting as knights in their first level), with a background a d feat choice.) The whole thing just smacks of making exceptions to a structure that is for the most part balanced: -- intro feat chains-- intro mechanical abilities (including a feat) in background features-- intro spell effects via a feat up to 5 levels early (level 5 commune at character level 4), countered by-- intro recovery on 1d4 long rests (any cycle longer than "per long rest")That's four exceptions (at least). Whether or not it is balanced, it just feels like bad game design.</blockquote>