-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Rule of the Three (1st of May)
- Thread starter gweinel
- Start date
Szatany
First Post
Looks like the simple feats will be for you. Pick a theme, apply 3 or 4 static bonuses to some actions or defenses, and you're done.
Mattachine
Adventurer
I like the theme-as-feat-list idea.
1. For folks that don't want feats, all the DM has to do is pick the default theme (or maybe a choice of two) for each class. That essentially makes the feats into class features, and you don't need to worry about "feat bloat".
2. For folks that don't want to be shoehorned into a theme, pick the theme for flavor and perhaps an initial feat, then choose the rest of your feats as you want, ignoring the theme.
As for rogues, I hope they retain something of the skill monkey approach, with some choice involved (rogues have had significant skill choice since 2e).
As for monsters, templates were a mixed bag in 3e. They were sometimes applied in strange ways, became a min-max tool for players, and they sometimes produced unexpectedly overpowered or underpowered monsters. On the other hand, templates were often thematically cool, and most were easy to apply.
I do like 4e's monster role and advancement system. It makes it easy to increase or decrease a monster's level in my head.
1. For folks that don't want feats, all the DM has to do is pick the default theme (or maybe a choice of two) for each class. That essentially makes the feats into class features, and you don't need to worry about "feat bloat".
2. For folks that don't want to be shoehorned into a theme, pick the theme for flavor and perhaps an initial feat, then choose the rest of your feats as you want, ignoring the theme.
As for rogues, I hope they retain something of the skill monkey approach, with some choice involved (rogues have had significant skill choice since 2e).
As for monsters, templates were a mixed bag in 3e. They were sometimes applied in strange ways, became a min-max tool for players, and they sometimes produced unexpectedly overpowered or underpowered monsters. On the other hand, templates were often thematically cool, and most were easy to apply.
I do like 4e's monster role and advancement system. It makes it easy to increase or decrease a monster's level in my head.
FATDRAGONGAMES
First Post
Ditto, I was hoping feats would be a modular add-on, not a core feature.
Gold Roger
First Post
I. I think themes will work much better in actual play than they look on paper. I've played with many casual players who'd rather just pick a evocative path, than some random abilities.
I liked feats in 3.5 until the bloat was stifling (these days I wouldn't allow bloat-I play core books only PCs). In 4th, almost all feats where uninspiring and unnecessary.
I can see myself using themes as player, despite being an old 3.5 optimizer.
II. Rogue getting one or two extra skills I suspected. Rogue only skills, I'll have to see. Rogue only trapfinding always felt jarring and artificial to me.
III. I hope they stick to the ambition of providing plenty of ways to customize monsters.
I liked feats in 3.5 until the bloat was stifling (these days I wouldn't allow bloat-I play core books only PCs). In 4th, almost all feats where uninspiring and unnecessary.
I can see myself using themes as player, despite being an old 3.5 optimizer.
II. Rogue getting one or two extra skills I suspected. Rogue only skills, I'll have to see. Rogue only trapfinding always felt jarring and artificial to me.
III. I hope they stick to the ambition of providing plenty of ways to customize monsters.
Aren't non-optional feats the same as class abilities?
Similar Threads
