Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SabreCat" data-source="post: 5516001" data-attributes="member: 76245">The main thing I want to see happen with feats is meaningful choice. When I look at a feat, I don't ever want to think &quot;Why would I ever want this?&quot; (e.g. most Tribal feats) or &quot;Why would I ever not want this?&quot; (e.g. ___ Expertise, Resilient Focus). Remove the cruft, and either remove the must-haves or build them into the levelup progression.Secondarily, I'd like not to have to sacrifice combat prowess for skill challenge/out-of-combat capability. I can ask a DM up-front how much of each is likely to be important in her game, but things don't always come out as planned. It'd be nice to have skill/breadth-of-character picks come from a different pool than the killing-things-and-taking-their-stuff pool.To refine it further, I'd like &quot;feats&quot; to resemble the plain-English term they borrow. A feat is some spectacular display of strength or skill. A feat should give me some new, clever capability or upgrade an existing capability in a way that makes people sit up and take notice. &quot;Ooh, you can do that?&quot; Buying off penalties, situational bonuses, and new tricks are the sweet spot of feat design, for me. D&amp;D4 feats as they stand, as Mr. Schwalb accurately describes, are all over the place as far as what they do and mean.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SabreCat, post: 5516001, member: 76245"] The main thing I want to see happen with feats is meaningful choice. When I look at a feat, I don't ever want to think "Why would I ever want this?" (e.g. most Tribal feats) or "Why would I ever [i]not[/i] want this?" (e.g. ___ Expertise, Resilient Focus). Remove the cruft, and either remove the must-haves or build them into the levelup progression. Secondarily, I'd like not to have to sacrifice combat prowess for skill challenge/out-of-combat capability. I can ask a DM up-front how much of each is likely to be important in her game, but things don't always come out as planned. It'd be nice to have skill/breadth-of-character picks come from a different pool than the killing-things-and-taking-their-stuff pool. To refine it further, I'd like "feats" to resemble the plain-English term they borrow. A feat is some spectacular display of strength or skill. A feat should give me some new, clever capability or upgrade an existing capability in a way that makes people sit up and take notice. "Ooh, you can [i]do[/i] that?" Buying off penalties, situational bonuses, and new tricks are the sweet spot of feat design, for me. D&D4 feats as they stand, as Mr. Schwalb accurately describes, are all over the place as far as what they do and mean. [/QUOTE]

Verification