DrSpunj
Explorer
Nail said:I'm afraid I'm not following much of what you and Ouini are working on right now.....in part because I'd like to stick to Core....and in part because I know how "assigning points to abilities" can be of dubious value. (Seriously.)
Well, realize we're only really categorizing feats into two types. Originally I was using Combat & non-Combat, while ouini has tried organizing instead along themes and has a Base cost and an Expansion cost. If you're truly going to use the sheet to see how things balance the classes you really must use some sort of guideline to compare abilities. After all, is Nature Sense really equivalent in value to a Fighter Bonus feat? In your opinion, it may be, but it's a question that needs to be answered.
Nail said:Still, it's fun playing with your spreadsheet, DrSpunj, expecially when everything is simple and transparent!
Thanks!

Nail said:It seems pretty clear that most classes fall into a narrow range. That's good! (and expected, right!!?)
Usually that's true, though depending upon how you organize/classify the class abilities, some are definitely out of whack. As you noted the Druid & Ranger both come out looking pretty good. With the Druid I'm sure that's accurate. With the Ranger, well, I'd agree that he's a bit on the high side, but not so much as the Druid, IMO. The Bard also can look too good depending on how you organize his abilities.
Nail said:Except the Ftr, of course. So: we change the Ftr, eh?
I am!

Thanks.
DrSpunj