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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 6116437" data-attributes="member: 14506">I think it is extremely simple. Feats are just like spells. Meaning, spells can be defense boosts, they can be offensive punches, and most importantly they can be utility effects. Feats are just like that. They fill each of those niches, just like a spell can. I do not buy the feats should not give bonuses argument. What are they for then? Just like a wizard, when he levels up they have to choose between all three of those choices, offense, defense, and utility. So should the feat selection go as well.My interpretation of how spells and feat go. Feats auto-scale, spells you have to memorize at a higher level to get a scaling effect. Feats auto-scale? Yes, the martial die type increases. Granted I would implement it differently than they have it but the core is sound. I think an effective way to think of feats is as powerful cantrips. At low level a feat only can add +1dX and at higher level it adds bigger bonus. It naturally scales. Spells on the other hand, other than cantrips which appear to auto-scale, need to be slotted into a higher level spell slot to get a bonus. This flip, from 3e spells auto-scaling and feats being static, will go a long way to balancing the martial/spellcaster divide. I am fine with everyone having access to martial feats too. So long as the scaling mechanic for feats is reserved to martial characters (fighter and rogue types). Suppose everyone got a martial die to use their feat effects and fighters and rogues had much bigger effects because they have many more martial dice. This does not exclude a cleric from taking a martial feat but it does limit the effectiveness of the feat due to their less than stellar martial dice. Instead they may look elsewhere, to magic feats or utility feats. So scaling feats have to be there to match the scalability of spells.</blockquote>

Verification