NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MagicSN" data-source="post: 7713723" data-attributes="member: 6784745">At our gametable we usually handle skills like that the player describes what the character tries to achieve. If it is an action or bonus action or movement action or whatever the GM decides on the situation and what makes sense for the situation (some things players want to do might not be possible or only with disadvantage). This way of playing makes for interesting play - but it also makes the new feats quite uninteresting. Many of the things offered (asides from the spells and the double-proficiency) is something we would allow without the feat as well,depending on DC, roll, situation and description on how the character will do this ;-) Okay, some are above what we would allow, like the Medic and stuff... As an example: What speaks against achieving the hide+move with just a stealth check, but the player needs to describe exactly how he performs this and the GM sets a DC based on how good/logical this description is and he needs a really good roll for it? Another example would be frightening a creature with the intimidation skill... if the player RP's what his character is doing good - why not allow him to roll for it without the feat? Personally I always think it is not a good design to have actions which "only can be done if you have a specific feat/skill/whatever". If it makes sense for a character to do something the system should allow that he can try it. Though some characters might be able to do it more easy than others. [MENTION=6704138]User_Undefined[/MENTION]: >I agree in principle, but have a question for you. You say you'd let  characters without the feat do these moves. Would you still let them do  the >moves as a bonus action? Because that is what a lot of these feats allow. You can do what other characters can, just faster/better. At least, that's >how I see it.         As a feat you can either get something you can do to be able to do it as a bonus action or you can get a feat to be able to do something which without the feat you cannot do at all. What do you take? ^^ </blockquote>

Verification