Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hakkenshi" data-source="post: 288502" data-attributes="member: 5457">wolff96, I really like your house rule, and I'd definitely add it to my list of modifications to make for the monk.Wolfen Priest, ready your action all you like, you still have a 20% miss chance on my monk <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=";)" />And no, as pointed out by wolff96, it STILL proves nothing.As for the customizability of feats, I find that feats fail to impress after a while. Class abilities should out-feat the feats. They should be to feats what feats are to skills. Spellcasting is one such ability, Rage is another. If I'm playing a monk, I don't WANT the fighter to be able to out-jump, out-evade, and out-everything me because he has feats that give him my class abilities.That leads to a classless system which, IMHO, ruins the out-of-game individuality of characters.Now, a special ability progression like the rogue's is the ultimate system. You have CLASS-SPECIFIC abilities, but one rogue might have entirely different ones than another. If that is in fact what you propose, then I'm all for it. Just not the "feat-based character"...that's just insipid for me.</blockquote>