Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="karolusb" data-source="post: 5279081" data-attributes="member: 83359">You start with every class has this, and then go into how most classes in fact don't.&nbsp; It makes for a shaky point in my mind.&nbsp; &nbsp;In truth I would prefer &quot;free&quot; fixes to these problems, but that isn't what we have, what we have is feat fixes.&nbsp; And we have a working feat fix.&nbsp; Poor design of the slayer aside.&nbsp; If you accept the move away from variable primary stat classes (which you must if you don't reject the game past PHB1).&nbsp; Then accepting OA based on a stat you have a reason to have is a natural progression.&nbsp; I would prefer a unified rational fix to 50 ad-hoc ones.&nbsp; I dislike that most characters have to give up one of thier 2 power slots to do what they should do by default, and dislike even worse that a handful of classes aren't given that option.&nbsp; &nbsp;Wizards already don't know how to use any weapon worth using, have poor HP, low defenses, bad surges, etc.&nbsp; There are more than enough reasons to never declare a charge as a wizard (I have never seen a wizard charge), that this doesn't need to be on the list.&nbsp; &nbsp;As to it being a +6 to three seperate actions, consider it this way, would you trade expertise for training?&nbsp; If you would I have to think your grasp of the mechanics is not solid enough for me to be concerned with your opinion.&nbsp; Excepting a few bizarre builds (that almost certainly aren't using non-power MBA's anyway) charges come up maybe once an encounter, if you win initiative, and start far away, and really want to be in melee.&nbsp; OA's come up exactly as often as your GM wants (most of my GM's have leaned towards 0 as the optimal number).&nbsp; And the fact that most people suck at granted attacks doesn't encourage the use of that warlord build in my experience.&nbsp; &nbsp;+6 for three types of attacks which you will almost never make.&nbsp; Really not a very good feat as was (which is why off the Charop boards it is pretty rare on character sheets).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="karolusb, post: 5279081, member: 83359"] You start with every class has this, and then go into how most classes in fact don't. It makes for a shaky point in my mind. In truth I would prefer "free" fixes to these problems, but that isn't what we have, what we have is feat fixes. And we have a working feat fix. Poor design of the slayer aside. If you accept the move away from variable primary stat classes (which you must if you don't reject the game past PHB1). Then accepting OA based on a stat you have a reason to have is a natural progression. I would prefer a unified rational fix to 50 ad-hoc ones. I dislike that most characters have to give up one of thier 2 power slots to do what they should do by default, and dislike even worse that a handful of classes aren't given that option. Wizards already don't know how to use any weapon worth using, have poor HP, low defenses, bad surges, etc. There are more than enough reasons to never declare a charge as a wizard (I have never seen a wizard charge), that this doesn't need to be on the list. As to it being a +6 to three seperate actions, consider it this way, would you trade expertise for training? If you would I have to think your grasp of the mechanics is not solid enough for me to be concerned with your opinion. Excepting a few bizarre builds (that almost certainly aren't using non-power MBA's anyway) charges come up maybe once an encounter, if you win initiative, and start far away, and really want to be in melee. OA's come up exactly as often as your GM wants (most of my GM's have leaned towards 0 as the optimal number). And the fact that most people suck at granted attacks doesn't encourage the use of that warlord build in my experience. +6 for three types of attacks which you will almost never make. Really not a very good feat as was (which is why off the Charop boards it is pretty rare on character sheets). [/QUOTE]

Verification