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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 288307" data-attributes="member: 537">Well, I'm a big fan of bonus feats, because they allow lots of flexibility. If I was designing 3.1E or 4E, I'd make all the classes have bonus feats like the fighter, but with different sets of feats to choose from. Right now the fighter is extremely customisable, but you can't really say that about the barbarian or paladin, or even the cleric and sorc.Yep, I don't know why they left that out. (Well, I do know why; it's because they were trying to recreate the 1E monk. But I digress. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )True, the martial artist will still need better stats on average than a fighter. What I've done to address this issue is to make feats that swap around attribute bonuses so that low stats don't matter so much. Consider Weapon Finesse, which lets you add your Dex bonus to attacks instead of Str. There are a couple of feats that let you use Wis instead of Str for damage, or Wis instead of Con for hit points and Fort saves. You could make more along these lines.And because I'm perfectly happy with the quasi-mystical thing, I don't have to torture myself thinking up "realistic" rationales for these feats. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification