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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Silam" data-source="post: 9889538" data-attributes="member: 7055898">Thanks for the thoughtful replies.Sure, that certainly happened to me. One of my 2014 builds relying on a Life Cleric dip was busted and converting it to 2024 was not super attractive. (Thankfully we kept that particular campaign in 2014 <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="😅" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f605.png" title="Grinning face with sweat    :sweat_smile:" data-shortname=":sweat_smile:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /><img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤪" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f92a.png" title="Zany face    :zany_face:" data-shortname=":zany_face:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> …)I think very few feats are going to be attractive to all classes and that’s fine. In fact, it’s a bit of design smell if a feat is attractive to all builds. Maybe the feat is super carefully designed to appeal in a perfectly balanced way to all classes… but most likely the feat is simply overpowered and that’s why it’s useful to everyone.I guess that’s true… I have played very few characters all the way to 20 or epic levels. Though personally I still enjoy planning my builds to 20, even though I know full well the odds of getting there are low. It gives me a sense of direction. It may be a "shoot for the moon and if you miss you’ll still end up somewhere among the stars" kinda thing <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤔" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f914.png" title="Thinking face    :thinking:" data-shortname=":thinking:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> I think there is a misunderstanding there. Universal is a bit too grandiose. There is a big space of opportunity between "such universality that every build could want it" and "it’s a subclass so too bad if you belong to another class, cuz it ain’t it for you, sucka!"…Basically, any feat that appeals to more than one class but less than all classes is a win in my book.There is a lot of arcane caster-type stuff that should be made compatible with both Wizards and Sorcerers (e.g., Elemental Adept). If that stuff lands in a subclass, then by definition it either cannot work for both, or it has to be redone for both parent classes, which means redundant bloat.That’s why the Path of the Lich is attractive. It should be available to Sorcs and Wizards. I have grief about many details of the Lich Path just like everyone else (the main one being that it should not end at level 12, it should end with an Epic Boon), but I still like the general idea, if it could be polished.I definitely do NOT want the Path of the Lich to be universally attractive. If it is, then that means it’s overpowered or otherwise badly designed.That may be true. But when you say "for me", does it mean:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">For my builds, I’m not interested in sinking 2+ feats into something, but I’m fine looking the other way if the option exists, or…</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">For my game, I’m concerned it’ll be utterly broken if that thing appears and even just a single player at my table picks it for their build?</li> </ol>I’m a fan of prereq-free feats too.Hopefully, the above clarifies things regarding universality…</blockquote>

Verification