[Feats] smetzger, I'd appreciate your help

[Olidammara]

I don't review every little gaming bit on the 'Net as thorough as I could, so maybe I've just missed this: Can you point me to a list of feats from WotC products that have been rated or weighed for their game balance?

Every time a new D&D product is released, there's a lot of chat about how this item is unbalanced or that aspect is broken or yada yada yada too powerful. There's gotta be a consensus opinion or ratings system somewhere.

 

[Crothian]

Actually, I don't think there really is.

 

[gfunk]

Check out this website,

http://www.dmsmiscellany.com/judge/featsearch.asp

 

[Crothian]

Check out this website,

http://www.dmsmiscellany.com/judge/featsearch.asp

Eh, the biggest problem is it's all opinionated and many of the ones I saw I don't really agree with.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Eh, the biggest problem is it's all opinionated and many of the ones I saw I don't really agree with.

Yup. Every man's entitled to an opinion. But one that isn't well argued or justified is not one to get excited about.

 

[James McMurray]

Who is the moron(s) behind that website? A couple of things I saw in just a brief perusal that leads me to believe these guys have no clue:

1) They say that the Relics and Rituals feat Chain Spell had already been done by WotC. Since Relics and Rituals came out before Tome and Blood, I find that hard to believe.

2) They claim Circle Kick has not been changed by erratta. First, it didn't need to be, the wording is clear, and second, there has been a clarification erratta issed.

3) They think Eschew Materials require should require +1 level. As if anyone would take it if it did.

4) They think a sorcerer can find no more useful feat than Extra Spell.

 

[CRGreathouse]

They claim Circle Kick has not been changed by erratta. First, it didn't need to be, the wording is clear, and second, there has been a clarification erratta issed.

The site hasn't been updated in ages - this is likely why.

On occasion, I'll find feats I disagree with (like the ones you pointed out). When I did, I just sent them in with my explanation of why I think they're too powerful or not too powerful. Since it's not really updated any more, I don't do this.

What's really good about the site is that it gives a description of why it is/isn't OK - this second perspective is very useful.

 

[maransreth]

The Netbook of Feats has a list of all the feats from the SRD (which is the PHB, DMG, MM and Psionics Handbooks) and a rating for each feat. They dont give thoughts but a rating from 1 to 5 for each feat. And what each category corresponds to can be found in the book itself.
They can't give comments about the splatbooks, as they aren't SRD, but at least you get comments about the standard ones.

Their site is: http://www.datadeco.com/nbofeats/ .

 

[smetzger]

I don't review every little gaming bit on the 'Net as thorough as I could, so maybe I've just missed this: Can you point me to a list of feats from WotC products that have been rated or weighed for their game balance?

Other than the netBook of Feats which has rated all the OGC WOTC feats plus all the feats that have been contributed, I am unaware of a good source for rating the different feats.

The netBook of Feats has told me that they are planning on eventually doing all the OGC feats. However, they are way behind in there reviews of submitted feats; so I wouldn't hold my breath.

I think that the netBook of feats rating system is quite good. I think that it would be great if 5 intelligent and level headed people who know the rules got together and rated different feats using the netBooks system. In the mean time the best we have is my polls, which run about a feat a weak. I am keeping track of the averages but not the comments.

*:> Scott

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I think that if you want to do this properly, you'll need more than 5 guys, and the won't only have to know the rules, but they should have quite a bit acual gaming experience as well. Before you can really rate that, I think you got to have seen it in action, preferably by more than one character.