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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ourchair" data-source="post: 5568115" data-attributes="member: 85362">Same here. I liked the original vision, which was that races that could have been scary, esp. if they were designed according to 2e/3e lines (Thri-Kreen, Dragonborn) instead got nerfed, so that if you wanted to expand a defining aspect of that race (multiple limbs, breath weapons) you used feats.But at the same time, I didn't like the fact that I'd end up compromising my ability to make my build power-functionally competitive with other characters of my own class because I didn't take certain class feats.I mean it feels like a waste of a feat to put 'riders' onto a racial power when you can add more functionality to your base class.Currently, I'm playing a Tiefling Psion and I've deliberately avoided getting Clever Tail and Bloodhunter stuff. Why? They just make my character do cute and useful things that are fundamentally situational. I feel like I get more from MCing into Wizard, which allowed me to save a class skill slot for another skill and get the Arcana Training for free, making me more skillful, and allowing me to develop a robust 'scholar' fluff/flavor for my character. Also, feats like Imperious Majesty allow me to substitute a weak stat with a strong one in determining my Initiative and let me slap atk roll penalties in addition to my debuffs as a controller.In other words, I think feats should target race or class, provide benefits that have useful intersections between two, but as captainspud noted, should never have a requirement of both. What makes me choose a feat is one which allows me to apply one of my race-class strengths to a NEW situation, rather than add bonuses to SPECIFIC situation.</blockquote>

Verification