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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Eldorian" data-source="post: 4704115" data-attributes="member: 10504">I'm not arguing this anymore.  That isn't what Smeelbo meant, as far as I can tell.  Believe what you want to believe. 16 vs 20 is just as bad as 14 vs 18.  Some people think anything less than 20 is subpar.  I think 20 is too much to spend for most concepts. You're not understanding what relative means.  How is 40% hit rate failing, but 50% hit rate pulling your weight, if default sort of optimal character is 50 or 60%?  Your argument is flawed.  You basically state that it is OK to have major discrepancies in power among the players, as long as the DM compensates by giving better gear to the crappier designed characters.  How is that fair to the player of the better character?  Acquisition of treasure is a longstanding goal of DnD adventurers.A DM should design encounters to be challenging to the whole party, and if there is a situation where a challenge to the whole party is actually easy for one character's part but annoyingly difficult for another, then there is something wrong with the game.The point is that this feat does not improve the game.  If it was meant to fix the discrepancy between player attack bonuses and monster defenses as you level up, then the implementation is flawed.  A better method would be to errata the level up chart in the PhB.It was obviously not meant to bring poorly designed characters up to par with the better ones, as feats aren't really that scarce and the better designed characters can take these feats too.</blockquote>

Verification