Round IV is OVER

[Rystil Arden]

THey are allowed, they are not okay.

Says the guy who promised in another thread to vote off a feat just because I said I liked it?

 

[KB9JMQ]

Another vote for diehard

 

[Crothian]

Says the guy who promised in another thread to vote off a feat just because I said I liked it?

just say you like Armor Prof Heavy or something....

 

[Particle_Man]

Go away for the weekend and you miss three rounds. Uhm, Snatch Arrows can go. Deflect Arrows has gone already, so everything with it as a prerequisite should be gone as well.

Pinotage

Monks can get Def. Arrows as a class ability. Would that still allow for Snatch Arrows as a possibility? Or is this limiting monk's choices as well, so that they *have* to take combat reflexes instead? If that is also eliminated, what do monks do?

 

[Rystil Arden]

just say you like Armor Prof Heavy or something....

Are you kidding, I love Armour Proficiency Heavy! Why, in one 3.0 campaign, I convinced the DM that it shouldn't require the other Armour Proficiencies, and so my single-classed Telepath went around in Full Plate and an Exotic Weapon and pretended to be a Fighter/Bard...and she fought significantly better than the fighter, even though I put my highest stats in Charisma and such...

I don't really like Armour Proficiency Heavy, but my story is true

 

[VirgilCaine]

Great Cleave

Seriously - by the time you get this feat, what are the chances of you dropping the opponent you target with your Cleave attempt, allowing you to actually make use of it?

Hmmm. Half-Orc Barbarian, 20 Str, say a +2 Str item, +4 when raging, so that is... (26) +8 to hit and damage, +12 damage with a two-handed weapon [and what barbarian doesn't have one?], +1 for a magic weapon... +13 damage? Gee, hit someone a time or two and gee, I get a free attack?

 

[Zappo]

I'm voting for Heavy Armor Proficiency. Hmm, do I waste three feats (out of just seven I'll have before 20th level) getting all armor proficiencies - or do I get a fighter level, thus getting it and gaining a feat in the process (not to mention martial weapons)?

 

[Insight]

I'm really torn between the armor proficiencies and Leadership. What to do... what to do...

Well, based on how it has been used in my current campaign, I'm voting for Leadership! Not because it sucks, but because it's too good. For the cost of a single feat, you get a cohort who is only 2 levels lower than your main character, not mention another pool of Hit Points and actions per round. And if you make your cohort a healer, free healing for your character during combat.

Now in a previous thread about Leadership, I have seen campaigns where the cohorts are not combat characters. They provide out of combat benefits, such as free spellcasting, item identifications, etc., and that would be ok for the cost of a feat. But since such is not inherently stated in the feat description, I am voting off Leadership as horribly broken.

 

[Wild Gazebo]

Are you guys honestly suggesting Leadership should go before Martial Weapon Proficiency? I'm puzzled.

I think a lot of these decisions are really based on play style rather than game design. Even though I would like to say I chose Leadership because it was poorly designed I have to admit to myself that I am more of a roleplay intensive gamer who chooses strange feats to fit a concept...including a wizard who wields a large halberd at first level. So, a lot of these powergame mentalities concerning: well why would you do this....when this is more effective really just seems silly to me. In fact, I think I have used every feat that has been voted off...and have been baffled by a couple of them. So, it realy just comes down to how you approach things...as a DM, PC, or simply play style.

Hope that clears things up for ya.

 

[Zappo]

I am more of a roleplay intensive gamer who chooses strange feats to fit a concept...including a wizard who wields a large halberd at first level.

I like to make strange combinations as well, and I still think that using a feat to get a weapon proficiency is bad. My last wizard-with-weapon was a multiclass, which (with the new PrCs) is both more effective and a better fit for the concept.

Edit: rereading that, I think it might sound as a "my character is better than yours" post. Eek, no no... I meant that weapon prof as a feat is a suboptimal choice even when roleplaying considerations are involved: in most cases, a character who multiclasses is both more powerful and a better mechanical representation of the underlying character concept. I can think of some characters which, RP-wise, are better represented by taking a feat rather than multiclassing, but they aren't many.