Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5594673" data-attributes="member: 7006">I think you might have misunderstood what I meant by &quot;smaller fraction of the game&quot;.&nbsp; What I meant was that some feats apply to a smaller cross-section of the game mechanics, whereas others apply more universally.For instance, Prime Strike grants a ranger a +1 bonus to attack rolls only when no other creatures are within 3 squares of the target.&nbsp; Whereas Expertise grants a +1 bonus to all the ranger's attack rolls with his specific weapon.&nbsp; Thus many people would claim Expertise is a &quot;boring&quot; feat and Prime Strike is an &quot;interesting&quot; one... because you can't use Prime Strike as often so it seems more &quot;special&quot;, and presumably because Prime Strike has a &quot;fluffier&quot; name, since it describes the smaller cross-section of the game mechanics it applies to.And that's what I consider to be absurd.&nbsp; Players try and justify why Prime Strike is fluffier by going all into their &quot;character concepts&quot; and saying things like they want their ranger to play like an avenger and always trying to pull their target away from the group... and thus Prime Strike helps facilitate that.&nbsp; However, they are completely ignoring the fact that they can still play their character exactly the same way even if they have Expertise instead of Prime Strike, since in both cases each feat still gives them nothing more than a +1 bonus to attack.&nbsp; The only difference is that Prime Strike FORCES the player to play his character by his concept of pulling his target away from everyone else... whereas Expertise means he has to force *himself* to play that way instead.&nbsp; And apparently, some people want the game to force them to roleplay their character concepts... not roleplay them just because roleplaying is fun.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 5594673, member: 7006"] I think you might have misunderstood what I meant by "smaller fraction of the game". What I meant was that some feats apply to a smaller cross-section of the game mechanics, whereas others apply more universally. For instance, Prime Strike grants a ranger a +1 bonus to attack rolls only when no other creatures are within 3 squares of the target. Whereas Expertise grants a +1 bonus to all the ranger's attack rolls with his specific weapon. Thus many people would claim Expertise is a "boring" feat and Prime Strike is an "interesting" one... because you can't use Prime Strike as often so it seems more "special", and presumably because Prime Strike has a "fluffier" name, since it describes the smaller cross-section of the game mechanics it applies to. And that's what I consider to be absurd. Players try and justify why Prime Strike is fluffier by going all into their "character concepts" and saying things like they want their ranger to play like an avenger and always trying to pull their target away from the group... and thus Prime Strike helps facilitate that. However, they are completely ignoring the fact that they can still play their character exactly the same way even if they have Expertise instead of Prime Strike, since in both cases each feat still gives them nothing more than a +1 bonus to attack. The only difference is that Prime Strike FORCES the player to play his character by his concept of pulling his target away from everyone else... whereas Expertise means he has to force *himself* to play that way instead. And apparently, some people want the game to force them to roleplay their character concepts... not roleplay them just because roleplaying is fun. [/QUOTE]

Verification