Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Erechel" data-source="post: 7359446" data-attributes="member: 6784868">I think that there are "soft" feats and "hard" feats. Soft ones are the features that make your player to make something better than average, and provide an example of how it could work without the feat. Hard ones are the features that cover things that a player couldn't possibly attempt without a specific feature. There is no beef between the two of them, if they are used right.An example of each one of them:Ritual Caster: Hard feat. You can't use ritual magic without a proper feature or training, and you can also add new spells!Skulker: Soft feat. You can do better something that usually requires a skill check: your success is automatic.The problem isn't that soft feats and hard feats exist. Hard feats put a limit on what a player could try within the fantasy world. And that's a good thing: there are some people that could do things that you can't, and there are things that are just impossible. The problem comes when you codify Hard Feats for things that anyone could theoretically try; say, when you stablish a feat tax for something entirely plausible. Let's say, for example, using dirty tricks like launching sand to the eyes of the oponent. A proper way to build something like that would be a soft feat: you could use a dirty trick as a bonus action, or you have advantage on dirty tricks. If the only way you could even try to use a dirty trick were via feat, you are severely hampering player creativity and out-of-the-box thinking. This was pretty much a problem for a few prior editions, happily solved in this one.</blockquote>

Verification