Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jknevitt" data-source="post: 2608222" data-attributes="member: 20330">I'll chime in on this one (being the DM in question).The point of the feat was something highly specialized that allowed a character to do something that characters are normally unable to do (isn't that what Feats are about?).There are quite a few classes that allow something like this (the Skullclan Hunter and Rich Bulew's Divine Trickster are two that come to mind immediately) so it was our aim to come up with something similar to those abilities, but in Feat form.There seems to be a big issue over prereqs. They're flexible. There's also a bit of discussion of whether this kind of feat should be allowed at all. That has me curious.A Sneak Attack is not a Critical. It is only classified as such when it comes to creatures that are immune to Criticals (ie "Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks."). This feat would only allow an undead creature to be Sneaked, not Criticalled. Or, if you want to word it differently, to do extra damage equal to a rogue's SA bonus.Splitting hairs combined with bad wording in the first place. Don't think of it as a physical point on the undead's body. Think of it as mystically striking the center of the undead's (un)essence of being. As a rogue (or whatever) with this Feat goes up in levels and increases their Sneak Attack, they also learn how to more effectively focus that special strike to do more damage.</blockquote>

Verification