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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7437685" data-attributes="member: 6785785">So how should they go about addressing that dissatisfaction? Do you think they need to go with the "tall order" Zapp mentioned in the OP? Do you share the concerns cited? Some, all?I've had the occasion to run into the same issues. I just don't think that those issues are nearly as meaningful for my game than for his. I'll ask again, because I'm curious for your answer but you edited it out: Would the combat oriented feats be more important in a game with more combat or a game with less?Meh, if you think that disagreeing with someone is taking a shot at them, then sure, I took a shot. I don't think so. they want balance as it relates to DPR. That desire is the direct cause of their dissatisfaction. They have a problem because DPR is their main concern. If the players didn't worry about parity in the DPR area, then when the multiclassed warlock/sorcerer used his Exploitation Blast to do 846 points of damage in one round, the other players would simply say "wow, impressive" and there would be no issue. Not at all. I think they can solve the issue. I think the game is customizable enough to get the results they want. However, if they're not willing or able to seek solutions and try things out, then my follow up advice would be to try an edition or game that was more supportive of their desired playstyle. Sure, but you can always add more. You're missing my point. The Feat isn't necessary to create a Robin Hood type character. Not unless you thought such a character couldn't exist prior to 3E and the introduction of Feats. the -5/+10 aspects of those feats...and the ones that grant extra attacks, as well...don't really add anything to a character concept. I can make a Robin Hood type character without them. No one looks at a Robin Hood movie and thinks "wow he must have done +10 damage on that shot!" Now, to relate back to Zapp's OP....he feels that these feats are necessary because otherwise the Fighter and other martials may fall behind on DPR compared to certain casters. So, let's say that his group agreed to not play those cross class combos that resulted in the overpowered cantrips....if they did that, then the -5/+10 feats can go. Alternatively, instead of removing those Feats, you could simply grant anyone the ability to take -5 on an attack to grant +10 to damage. This would work for martials and for cantrip casters. Sure, I'd agree with you there. I just think that given the other design goals of scaling the numbers and bounded accuracy and the like that the -5/+10 bits are out of place. My guess on their inclusion is that they felt there would be backlash if there were not 3E style feats included. I remember looking over the Feat list when 5E first came out, and being kind of surprised with how much of a departure the feats seemed to be. Then I saw Great Weapon Master and I felt comforted. That was my reaction at the time....now I wish they had ditched them. Or maybe designed a feat that worked more like Weapon Specialization, where it can be selected by anyone, and they can choose the weapon they want to use it with.</blockquote>

Verification