Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6028839" data-attributes="member: 6689464">Actually it only brings about it's non-specialness. It brings out the &quot;this is the combat pool and this is the everything-else-pool&quot; situation whihc is very undesirable. NWPS had combat and non combat options, the same for 3.x feats and to some extent 4e feats, but non-combat feats ended up being extremely poor in comparison to the mandatory feats, this got compounded since the reduced skill list forced a lot of things that were gothen through skillpoints to become obtainable by feats. Getting an extra language was relatively easy in 3.x, you just sacrificed a trivial amount of skill points, +1 to one skill on a single level might or may not be too much, however when the same language has to compete with a mandatory +1 to hit or to a defense which happens only every two levels, things obviously get nasty. But we don't need a combat silo and a non comabt silo for this to work, we need two pools indeed but they have to be a &quot;big abilities pool that you can only draw at certain levels&quot; and a &quot;smaller abilities pool that you can draw every level/more often&quot; and then have the different abilities clasiffied on the appropriate pool and given a fair cost. Arbitrariously labeling the big ones as &quot;comabt only&quot; and the small ones as &quot;everything else but not quite&quot;, only brings needless rigidness and makes certain character concepts impossible or unviable.It is very important they keep the &quot;math feats&quot; to a minimum or even get rid of them altogether, no feat should give a boring &quot;bonus to hit&quot; or anything similar, those things get out of hand pretty fast and are extremely boring, worse they start feeling compulsory and is then when people will begin insisting you cripple your character by not taking them and start labeling you a scrub that cares not about the group on the slightest if you chose not to take them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MoonSong, post: 6028839, member: 6689464"] Actually it only brings about it's non-specialness. It brings out the "this is the combat pool and this is the everything-else-pool" situation whihc is very undesirable. NWPS had combat and non combat options, the same for 3.x feats and to some extent 4e feats, but non-combat feats ended up being extremely poor in comparison to the mandatory feats, this got compounded since the reduced skill list forced a lot of things that were gothen through skillpoints to become obtainable by feats. Getting an extra language was relatively easy in 3.x, you just sacrificed a trivial amount of skill points, +1 to one skill on a single level might or may not be too much, however when the same language has to compete with a mandatory +1 to hit or to a defense which happens only every two levels, things obviously get nasty. But we don't need a combat silo and a non comabt silo for this to work, we need two pools indeed but they have to be a "big abilities pool that you can only draw at certain levels" and a "smaller abilities pool that you can draw every level/more often" and then have the different abilities clasiffied on the appropriate pool and given a fair cost. Arbitrariously labeling the big ones as "comabt only" and the small ones as "everything else but not quite", only brings needless rigidness and makes certain character concepts impossible or unviable. It is very important they keep the "math feats" to a minimum or even get rid of them altogether, no feat should give a boring "bonus to hit" or anything similar, those things get out of hand pretty fast and are extremely boring, worse they start feeling compulsory and is then when people will begin insisting you cripple your character by not taking them and start labeling you a scrub that cares not about the group on the slightest if you chose not to take them. [/QUOTE]

Verification