Feats & Fighters

[shamsael]

Is it me, or is there only one decent feat in the article: Martial Cross-Training?

 

[TwoSix]

Is it me, or is there only one decent feat in the article: Martial Cross-Training?

Scoundrel Training is ok. Although it seems to me that Martial Cross-Training lets you gain a multi-class power (since it says an encounter attack power of your class), whereas Scoundrel Training doesn't (as it explicitly says rogue encounter power).

 

[Saeviomagy]

The Fighter, for instance, can waste 3 feats (and lose an encounter power) to get one use of power strike that functions something like a modest-level encounter power. Three feats for what amounts to an even trade.

3 feats? I see powerful strike and power strike specialization...

Incidentally - is it me or does it look like you can take powerful strike then martial cross training to swap your lowest level encounter power for a higher level one? Same for the rogue ones.

 

[Klaus]

The class feature feats are, in some cases, unprecedented feat taxes.

The Fighter, for instance, can waste 3 feats (and lose an encounter power) to get one use of power strike that functions something like a modest-level encounter power. Three feats for what amounts to an even trade.

The Knight or Slayer, OTOH, can pay a one-feat tax, turn in one of several Power Strikes (no great loss), to get a high-level (up to his level) fighter encounter power. Quite possibly a decent trade, if the power does something unique enough (any Close Burst encounter power, for instance).

The Rogue and Theif, OTOH, can trade backstab for an encounter power or vice-versa, for only one feat.

So, the fighter gets some of it's premier powers nerfed in one article, and is feat-taxed at tripple the rate of the Knight/Slayer or Rogue/Theif. That sends a message.

No, the Weaponmaster can spend one feat to swap one encounter power for Power Strike. An even trade.

He can also spend one additional feat to gain the benefits of Weapon Specialization, which aren't trivial.

 

[Aegeri]

I was thinking about this before, but it infinitely amuses me that nearly 3 years on from the release of 4E we're still nerfing things from the original players handbook.

That says something.

 

[Mentat55]

Incidentally - is it me or does it look like you can take powerful strike then martial cross training to swap your lowest level encounter power for a higher level one? Same for the rogue ones.

The prerequisite for Martial Cross-Training is the Improved Power strike class feature, and the Powerful Strike feat does not grant you that. The same wording applies for the backstab swap feats.

 

[Mentat55]

I was thinking about this before, but it infinitely amuses me that nearly 3 years on from the release of 4E we're still nerfing things from the original players handbook.

That says something.

Indeed, I think the PHB1, for all its warts, still produced five of the most potent classes (and their associated powers) in the game: fighter, rogue, ranger, warlord, and wizard.

 

[TwoSix]

Indeed, I think the PHB1, for all its warts, still produced five of the most potent classes (and their associated powers) in the game: fighter, rogue, ranger, warlord, and wizard.

Wouldn't all of those (over)potent classes and powers be among said warts?

 

[Wednesday Boy]

I'm probably missing something but why would you take a "School of Magic..." feat instead of playing a Mage to begin with? Just so you could retain Ritual Casting? (Which you could pick up with a different feat.) Or for the one extra cantrip? I feel like I must be missing something.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Maybe they're just trying to illustrate that the Ritual Caster feat isn't such a bad deal after all.