Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5703194" data-attributes="member: 22779">Why take Craft Armor and not, say, Craft Wands?  After all, Craft Wands is directly related to the crafter.  Just because your group happened to accept bad rules doesn't make the rules good.I mean, in your example, you talk about bribing NPC's.  How often is your group dropping several thousand GP's on a bribe?  Often enough that it should cost a feat?  Really?How is that not directly benefiting my character?  I now have an organization I can draw upon in game.  I have contacts.  I have a history within that setting that I can leverage in game.  Additionally, this does absolutely nothing to benefit anyone else, unless, I suppose, they come from the same monastery.  Here is a perfect example of spending character resources for something that directly benefits my character.Now this is a mechanic that I like.  Trail of Cthulu is full of this sort of thing.  4e, actually, is as well since many of the powers can be used to affect other characters.  OTOH, I can spend that point on ME as well.  I have the choice.  Your example here is flawed since Craft Armor can't actually be used by the wizard to directly benefit him.  He has no choice.Umm, what?  How does having the use of a character only a level or two behind me not quallify as a direct benefit.  A cohort does what I tell it to.  A cohort does not obey anyone else.  It is typically under my direct control, within some limitations.  This feat is considered one of the most powerful feats for all the reasons you list, all of which my character is the direct beneficiary.Me, I think you're really stretching here.  Again, how often is the party going to need to A) bribe someone B) only be able to bribe someone with magic armor and C) have enough available cash and time to actually do so?  I'm going to say that this is nowhere near often enough to justify burning a feat on plus the xp costs.It's forced because only the casters can do it, and, for the most part, the caster who chooses to do it can never actually benefit from it.  True, he doesn't have to take the feat, but, then that option is never available.IOW, for the group to be able to do this, the wizard has to take one for the team.  Granted, the cleric could do this, and at least he can directly benefit from it, but, again, is it going to be used enough to actually justify the feat?  You build magic armor for the group.  Ok, fine, that's probably 3 suits.  Now, you won't do it again for 4 levels, because that's how long it takes to get to the next "plus".  A feat that you only use every four levels, that costs you xp and money and generally benefits everyone else BUT you is a poorly designed feat.Note, I'm not talking about the magic item crafting system in general.  I do like that actually.  I think that groups should have that option.  I'm talking about these feats in specific.</blockquote>

Verification