Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="fuzzlewump" data-source="post: 4973692" data-attributes="member: 63214">The feat is still better than anything else. If it was +1/+2/+3 to attacks against only BLOODIED creatures (i.e., only got the benefit half the time) it'd still be better than most feats.Yes, you can say there's no math problem all you want, it doesn't matter. The feat is still more powerful than most others. That's what makes it a feat &quot;tax.&quot; Yes, you can ignore the best feat in the game, but you don't have to be an optimizer to look at a feat that says &quot;+1 to attacks on undead with radiant attacks&quot; then to &quot;+1 scaling on attacks, period&quot; to realize the latter is ridiculously better. It's really not a question of casual versus optimizer at all. I mean, do you defend the Wizard with low intelligence (14 or so) as a casual player not really knowing and think that having an 16-20 is optimizing? It's really just an obvious choice of &quot;oh, this is clearly much better.&quot; It's not like tons of number crunching had to happen for anyone to realize +1/+2/+3 to attacks is better than anything else.I certainly agree that it's a boring feat, but that's why I give it out for free.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="fuzzlewump, post: 4973692, member: 63214"] The feat is still better than anything else. If it was +1/+2/+3 to attacks against only BLOODIED creatures (i.e., only got the benefit half the time) it'd still be better than most feats. Yes, you can say there's no math problem all you want, it doesn't matter. The feat is still more powerful than most others. That's what makes it a feat "tax." Yes, you can ignore the best feat in the game, but you don't have to be an optimizer to look at a feat that says "+1 to attacks on undead with radiant attacks" then to "+1 scaling on attacks, period" to realize the latter is ridiculously better. It's really not a question of casual versus optimizer at all. I mean, do you defend the Wizard with low intelligence (14 or so) as a casual player not really knowing and think that having an 16-20 is optimizing? It's really just an obvious choice of "oh, this is clearly much better." It's not like tons of number crunching had to happen for anyone to realize +1/+2/+3 to attacks is better than anything else. I certainly agree that it's a boring feat, but that's why I give it out for free. [/QUOTE]

Verification