Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tiornys" data-source="post: 4738541" data-attributes="member: 17633">The problem with this idea is that it promotes flipped builds, where you emphasize the secondary statistic of a class at the cost of the primary, relying on this feat to make up the lost to-hit.&nbsp; So, your Warlords can now have amazing riders on their powers sacrificing the hit chances that a Str-optimized Warlord currently has.&nbsp; Orb wizards can max their Wis without worrying as much about their Int.&nbsp; Etc.That's not, of course, the intent of the change, but it is the optimizer's response to it.t~edit: also, since some classes (and builds) get more oomph out of their secondary stats than others, you also make those classes/builds comparatively more powerful than those which currently do well with a very high primary stat and moderate secondary/tertiary stats.&nbsp; Warlords, for example, gain much more from the proposed feat than Rogues do.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tiornys, post: 4738541, member: 17633"] The problem with this idea is that it promotes flipped builds, where you emphasize the secondary statistic of a class at the cost of the primary, relying on this feat to make up the lost to-hit. So, your Warlords can now have amazing riders on their powers sacrificing the hit chances that a Str-optimized Warlord currently has. Orb wizards can max their Wis without worrying as much about their Int. Etc. That's not, of course, the intent of the change, but it is the optimizer's response to it. t~ edit: also, since some classes (and builds) get more oomph out of their secondary stats than others, you also make those classes/builds comparatively more powerful than those which currently do well with a very high primary stat and moderate secondary/tertiary stats. Warlords, for example, gain much more from the proposed feat than Rogues do. [/QUOTE]

Verification