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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Treebore" data-source="post: 3365443" data-attributes="member: 10177">I integrated feats into my game. Everyone can attempt feats, but now it requires a roll to pull it off. TN 12 for class related feats (IE power attacks, cleave are TN 12 for fighters, metamagic feats are TN 12 for spellcasters) with the CL typically being the HD/level of the opponenet against whom the feat is being used against. For spellcasters the CL is the level the spell is modified to according to the 3E SRD.So now feats aren't always in effect, and are actually "pulling out all the stops" kind of useage. IE when the battle gets tough they start attempting to pull off feats to swing the tide of battle in their direction.I am probably going to make them BtH dependent rather than level dependent for fighter type maneuvers/feats, but leave them level related for spellcasters attempting meta magic type feats. That way the fighter will still have that 1 BtH edge over the other fighter type classes. I am also thinking of adding their specialization bonus to the check as well. The only thing holding me bac is deciding if I want the Ranger to have the same benefit from their racial enemies.Another way I have been thinking about using feats is esentially the same as in 3E. The big difference is that the player and I construct the "feat chain" at character creation based on character concept. Then that is how they have to play it.I won't make them stick to the feat chain, but if they want to change something its going to have to fit with the characters history, not because they found something better. In other words, if they want to change character concept (feats) it will have to be due to campaign story events (ie character is actually impacted by life events). I will not allow changes to the feat chain simply because a newly discovered feat is cooler/more powerful.Anyways, that is what I do, and what I am thinking of doing in the future.</blockquote>

Verification