Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 5787992" data-attributes="member: 1465">I agree on the highlighted part, but you make it sound like it's a bad thing <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> It was just part of the design &amp; balancing. I rather imagine that the 3ed designers balanced the fighter against barbarian, paladin an ranger, the class features of which are quite stereotypical, and figured out a balance between the fighter's number of feats and the number and magnitude of the other martial classes' features.It's a pity really, that the good starting idea of fighter-only feats never really developed. Perhaps the designers were too often thinking that every new feat must have been available to everyone for the sake of &quot;realism&quot;. But this is a kind of shortsight in terms of what the rules mean! Just because there's a feat called &quot;Whirlwind Attack&quot; it doesn't mean that someone without the feat is forbidden from describing her PC as doing that kind of attack, the only thing you cannot do without the feat is replicating the mechanic. The other shortsight was to purposefully avoid class levels as feat requirements as much as possible. Why? It seemed elegant and realistic to avoid that but then they could have easily made tons of fighter-only feat... and everyone knows how hard it was to bravely stay single-class into high fighter levels.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 5787992, member: 1465"] I agree on the highlighted part, but you make it sound like it's a bad thing :) It was just part of the design & balancing. I rather imagine that the 3ed designers balanced the fighter against barbarian, paladin an ranger, the class features of which are quite stereotypical, and figured out a balance between the fighter's number of feats and the number and magnitude of the other martial classes' features. It's a pity really, that the good starting idea of [I]fighter-only[/I] feats never really developed. Perhaps the designers were too often thinking that every new feat must have been available to everyone for the sake of "realism". But this is a kind of shortsight in terms of what the rules mean! Just because there's a feat called "[B]Whirlwind Attack[/B]" it doesn't mean that someone without the feat is forbidden from [I]describing [/I]her PC as doing that kind of attack, the only thing you cannot do without the feat is replicating [I]the mechanic[/I]. The other shortsight was to purposefully avoid class levels as feat requirements as much as possible. Why? It seemed elegant and realistic to avoid that but then they could have easily made tons of fighter-only feat... and everyone knows how hard it was to bravely stay single-class into high fighter levels. [/QUOTE]

Verification