Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 6464045" data-attributes="member: 61155">Ok, I appreciate the clarification about talents. At first, it sounded like you were saying a talent was, &quot;Any feat without a stat bump OR this list of utility stat bump feats&quot;. Saying that it is those lists, without the stat bump benefit, does make more sense. And yet... I think this newest design would make for a functional class, but I'm still not entirely sure it is an interesting one. The clarification about the talents make them more reasonable, but it still doesn't seem to be something to build a class around. (In particular, it means your final archetype benefits are &quot;get the remaining talents that you weren't interested in taking earlier.)Notably, if all the archetype does is give you extra feats, or features from other classes, it just doesn't feel like it is fitting the proper role for an archetype. You can get those elements *already*, either via feats themselves or multiclassing. An archetype that does nothing but snag abilities from other classes just doesn't make sense to me. Sure, you have something along those lines with Eldritch Knight, for example - it is about giving casting. But it still does something unique with it via all of its special abilities. Similarly, I can understand wanting to use the 'utility feats' since they are already there, rather than designing new elements. But personally, I like the fact that I can have a Champion with the &quot;Remarkable Athlete&quot; feature and a Thief with the &quot;Second Story Work&quot; ability and a Ranger with the &quot;Athlete&quot; feat, and they all feel slightly distinct from one another. Archetypes, by and large, seem to be about focus. Having one about diversifying... I'm not saying it is a bad idea. I like it, conceptually. I'm just having trouble really seeing how to make it work. If your goal is to just have them represent an experienced traveler, it feels like you can already do that just via background and feats alone. I really feel like a better approach for a Scout is to figure out what they should excel at, and build from there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MrMyth, post: 6464045, member: 61155"] Ok, I appreciate the clarification about talents. At first, it sounded like you were saying a talent was, "Any feat without a stat bump OR this list of utility stat bump feats". Saying that it is those lists, without the stat bump benefit, does make more sense. And yet... I think this newest design would make for a functional class, but I'm still not entirely sure it is an interesting one. The clarification about the talents make them more reasonable, but it still doesn't seem to be something to build a class around. (In particular, it means your final archetype benefits are "get the remaining talents that you weren't interested in taking earlier.) Notably, if all the archetype does is give you extra feats, or features from other classes, it just doesn't feel like it is fitting the proper role for an archetype. You can get those elements *already*, either via feats themselves or multiclassing. An archetype that does nothing but snag abilities from other classes just doesn't make sense to me. Sure, you have something along those lines with Eldritch Knight, for example - it is about giving casting. But it still does something unique with it via all of its special abilities. Similarly, I can understand wanting to use the 'utility feats' since they are already there, rather than designing new elements. But personally, I like the fact that I can have a Champion with the "Remarkable Athlete" feature and a Thief with the "Second Story Work" ability and a Ranger with the "Athlete" feat, and they all feel slightly distinct from one another. Archetypes, by and large, seem to be about focus. Having one about diversifying... I'm not saying it is a bad idea. I like it, conceptually. I'm just having trouble really seeing how to make it work. If your goal is to just have them represent an experienced traveler, it feels like you can already do that just via background and feats alone. I really feel like a better approach for a Scout is to figure out what they should excel at, and build from there. [/QUOTE]

Verification