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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dave2008" data-source="post: 8647364" data-attributes="member: 83242">I wasn't trying to correct you as I wasn't making a comment about current or past implementations. I was talking about the concept . I was very clear, not sure how you missed that.I simply don't understand how you fail to see that is bad implementation, not design. A feat chain does not require any of its feats to be stronger or weaker than any other feats.  IF that happens it is poor implementation of the feat chain concept or simply a poorly designed feat.  It doesn't mean feat chains are bad design.  I skipped 3e, so referencing 3e is of no use to me.No, that is definitely not what I intended and I really don't see why one would jump to this conclusion based on what I wrote.  But we all have our baggage I guess.  I will try to be more clear:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think 5e should have unencumbered feats (feats with no prerequisites, links, or "chains")<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">These should be the majority of feats.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think linked feats that enforce a theme could be interesting.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I do not think this should be all or even a majority of feats.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think this could be an interesting way to add some mechanical heft to setting elements.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think these could be a method to get a flavor of multiclassing without actually multiclassing.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I think you can create these without invalidating other options and player creativity.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I do not think having a few feat chains in setting books or even few in the PHB is the designers controlling all themes in all settings in all games.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The feat chains are optional. You still have normal feats and ASI as an option.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You have every option you have now, + a few feat chain options.</li> </ul></li> </ul>I was never arguing what was in the UA. I have always asked about the general concept of feat chains.  From the beginning. If you missed that, I think I have made that clear now.  I am rarely interested in how WotC presents something more than I am of the idea.What I am proposing is that we have everything we have now + some feat chains. That is quite literally adding more customization to the current game. I am not talking about restricting the existing feats. Heck, I think it might be possible to develop open ended feat chains that are plug and play.  Again, I am not talking about the implementation in 3e or this UA, but the concept of thematically linked feats.Yes, I understand that part, if you are cutting the game off at 10th (my group is currently 15th), but what did you mean by "unused"?If I select a feat chain it would be because I want those two feats. Just like how I might select a subclass because I want the features of that subclass that I get at 3rd, 9th, 13th, and 17th. I would expect to use them.</blockquote>

Verification