Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 9492468" data-attributes="member: 23484">...case in point. See, this doesn't make sense to me. I see how preferring the 2024 wording of the prerequisite and letting it take precendent over the wording of the Tasha's feat creates this outcome, but it seems such an elaborate effort on the part of the designers for such a minimal effect.They developed a whole class feature in order to invalidate a single, underpowered feat? That outcome is improbable enough to me that it leads me to look for a different explanation, and I find one: the feat creates an exception to the general applicability of the (new) Fighting Style prerequisite. The result of my proposal is a weak feat, which (as you go on to say) no one is likely going to want.But the situation you describe is not, in my view, comparable what you suggest for the Tasha's feat. The feats without the +1 are, on balance, going to be weaker, but they still do something. With the interpretation you propose for Fighting Initiate, the feat does nothing, I think. And that is unique, and again makes me ask if there is perhaps an alternative interpretation that makes sense. And I think there is.&nbsp; If a table includes pre-2024 content, yes, some feats are going to be weaker, particularly those without an ASI. But they are still viable choices, as (I believe) Fighting Initiate is, with the reading I suggested.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Stew, post: 9492468, member: 23484"] ...case in point. See, this doesn't make sense to me. I see how preferring the 2024 wording of the prerequisite and letting it take precendent over the wording of the Tasha's feat creates this outcome, but it seems such an elaborate effort on the part of the designers for such a minimal effect. They developed a whole class feature in order to invalidate a single, underpowered feat? That outcome is improbable enough to me that it leads me to look for a different explanation, and I find one: the feat creates an [I]exception[/I] to the [I]general[/I] applicability of the (new) Fighting Style prerequisite. The result of my proposal is a weak feat, which (as you go on to say) no one is likely going to want. But the situation you describe is not, in my view, comparable what you suggest for the Tasha's feat. The feats without the +1 are, on balance, going to be weaker, but they still do something. With the interpretation you propose for Fighting Initiate, the feat does nothing, I think. And that is unique, and again makes me ask if there is perhaps an alternative interpretation that makes sense. And I think there is. If a table includes pre-2024 content, yes, some feats are going to be weaker, particularly those without an ASI. But they are still viable choices, as (I believe) Fighting Initiate is, with the reading I suggested. [/QUOTE]

Verification