Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jacob Lewis" data-source="post: 7984246" data-attributes="member: 6667921">You do realize when I say that feats are overrated, I mean that people put too much value in them, right? Because that's exactly what you're doing here, and it's illustrating my point. Some feats can be too good to pass up, but only certain ones. And herein lies the problem for me.I'd say every Fighter with GWM plays and is portrayed the same as every other Fighter with GWM. Does that make sense?The illusion of making of choice isn't really a choice. If you're playing a front-line warrior-type with a two-handed weapon, GWM becomes the obvious choice for every player. It is too good to pass up. And because there are so few opportunities to select a feat, few people are going to pick otherwise.This applies to every other specialized feat, as well. A character focused on ranged attacks will almost always take Sharpshooter, a character focused on defense will take Heavy Armor Master, etc. These feats are not encouraging anyone to be original; they're just smoke and mirrors. If you want more creativity, try encouraging players to come up with ideas without special boons, or mechanics, or options gained at levels.Understandable, and there's nothing bad or wrong with that. I just think that the current expectation for feats seems... I dunno, distracting? Keep in mind, I'm used to them from previous editions, which had their own shortcomings. I wish they had been differently, but I understand why they are done this way for 5e. It is a minimalist approach (as much as any D&amp;D game that includes feats, at least). I'll explain this a little more responding to another reply I saw.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jacob Lewis, post: 7984246, member: 6667921"] You do realize when I say that feats are overrated, I mean that people put too much value in them, right? Because that's exactly what you're doing here, and it's illustrating my point. Some feats can be too good to pass up, but only certain ones. And herein lies the problem for me. I'd say [I]every [/I]Fighter with GWM plays and is portrayed [I]the same as every other Fighter with GWM[/I]. Does that make sense? The illusion of making of choice isn't really a choice. If you're playing a front-line warrior-type with a two-handed weapon, GWM becomes the obvious choice for every player. It is too good to pass up. And because there are so few opportunities to select a feat, few people are going to pick otherwise. This applies to every other specialized feat, as well. A character focused on ranged attacks will almost always take Sharpshooter, a character focused on defense will take Heavy Armor Master, etc. These feats are not encouraging anyone to be original; they're just smoke and mirrors. If you want more creativity, try encouraging players to come up with ideas without special boons, or mechanics, or options gained at levels. Understandable, and there's nothing bad or wrong with that. I just think that the current expectation for feats seems... I dunno, distracting? Keep in mind, I'm used to them from previous editions, which had their own shortcomings. I wish they had been differently, but I understand why they are done this way for 5e. It is a minimalist approach (as much as any D&D game that includes feats, at least). I'll explain this a little more responding to another reply I saw. [/QUOTE]

Verification