Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 7316711" data-attributes="member: 2629">#1: Avoid feat taxes.&nbsp; I don't want any feats in the game that are a &quot;must have&quot; for certain broad categories of characters, like GWM is a near requirement for two handed characters.&nbsp; Feats should give distinction to the PC, not be a required feature to be 'competitive'.&nbsp; This unfortunately eliminates several concepts from feats, such as feats that add bonuses to hit or add to damage broadly.&nbsp; #2: It has to give something unique to the PC that will be felt often.&nbsp; A once per LR ability is just too rare to really feel like something substantial. #3: It has to be good enough that someone will take it.&nbsp; Giving us a list of 1000 new feats when 999 of them allow your PC to raise 999 different types of grass is not really giving us 1000 new feats.&nbsp; At most it is giving us one.#4: It can't be too narrow.&nbsp; Races may get one or two feats to give them advanced racial abilities, but I'm not a fan of giving out feats that only 5% of PCs can qualify to get.&nbsp; I don't want a feat for shortswords, or a feat for wizards that cast fire spells.&nbsp; I'd rather have a feat that works with piercing weapons or a feat that works with fire, lightning or thunder spells.&nbsp; #5: It has to be quick to implement.&nbsp; Adding a role to every attack is out of the question (as in, &quot;If you hit with a hammer, the target must also make a strength saving throw or....)&nbsp; Something that requires a lot of interpretation is bad, as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 7316711, member: 2629"] #1: Avoid feat taxes. I don't want any feats in the game that are a "must have" for certain broad categories of characters, like GWM is a near requirement for two handed characters. Feats should give distinction to the PC, not be a required feature to be 'competitive'. This unfortunately eliminates several concepts from feats, such as feats that add bonuses to hit or add to damage broadly. #2: It has to give something unique to the PC that will be felt often. A once per LR ability is just too rare to really feel like something substantial. #3: It has to be good enough that someone will take it. Giving us a list of 1000 new feats when 999 of them allow your PC to raise 999 different types of grass is not really giving us 1000 new feats. At most it is giving us one. #4: It can't be too narrow. Races may get one or two feats to give them advanced racial abilities, but I'm not a fan of giving out feats that only 5% of PCs can qualify to get. I don't want a feat for shortswords, or a feat for wizards that cast fire spells. I'd rather have a feat that works with piercing weapons or a feat that works with fire, lightning or thunder spells. #5: It has to be quick to implement. Adding a role to every attack is out of the question (as in, "If you hit with a hammer, the target must also make a strength saving throw or....) Something that requires a lot of interpretation is bad, as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification