Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="cmbarona" data-source="post: 4761155" data-attributes="member: 71281">1) My big gripe, which developed some time back in 3.5, was the disparity of skill feats vs. combat feats. It makes people who want to be the jack of all trades (e.g., a Rogue in one of my games) definitively less effective at combat than those who don't care one lick what they can or can't do outside of combat, and vice versa. It effectively ends up being yet another dividing point among the group: in combat, these people shine; outside of combat, these people shine; and never the two shall meet. I really wish they had separated skill feats from combat feats, and given everyone two different pools from which to draw.&nbsp;2) MAD classes, although these seem to have been fixed in PHB 2 (which still leaves the PHB classes suffering from this lagging a bit...)&nbsp;3) Arbitrary feat stat requirements. I'm looking at you, weapon mastery. The classes which which focus on these stats will qualify almost automatically, and those that do not focus on those stats will sometimes suffer significantly trying to qulify for them, or simply will not qualify for them at all.&nbsp;4) Some of the carry-over that makes implements different from weapons. If anything, this edition could have been the one to treat implements like weapons. Unfortunately, they didn't quite make the leap, and things are too entrenched in the current system to effectively go back and change things.&nbsp;All in all, I don't mind D&amp;D being combat heavy; that's just one of the hallmarks about this particular game, just as other RPGs focus on other areas of the whole RPG experience.&nbsp;I also think they actually managed to fix a lot of stuff I didn't like about previous editions, which are too numerous (and off-topic) to list here.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="cmbarona, post: 4761155, member: 71281"] 1) My big gripe, which developed some time back in 3.5, was the disparity of skill feats vs. combat feats. It makes people who want to be the jack of all trades (e.g., a Rogue in one of my games) definitively less effective at combat than those who don't care one lick what they can or can't do outside of combat, and vice versa. It effectively ends up being yet another dividing point among the group: in combat, these people shine; outside of combat, these people shine; and never the two shall meet. I really wish they had separated skill feats from combat feats, and given everyone two different pools from which to draw. 2) MAD classes, although these seem to have been fixed in PHB 2 (which still leaves the PHB classes suffering from this lagging a bit...) 3) Arbitrary feat stat requirements. I'm looking at you, weapon mastery. The classes which which focus on these stats will qualify almost automatically, and those that do not focus on those stats will sometimes suffer significantly trying to qulify for them, or simply will not qualify for them at all. 4) Some of the carry-over that makes implements different from weapons. If anything, this edition could have been the one to treat implements like weapons. Unfortunately, they didn't quite make the leap, and things are too entrenched in the current system to effectively go back and change things. All in all, I don't mind D&D being combat heavy; that's just one of the hallmarks about this particular game, just as other RPGs focus on other areas of the whole RPG experience. I also think they actually managed to fix a lot of stuff I didn't like about previous editions, which are too numerous (and off-topic) to list here. [/QUOTE]

Verification