Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="timbannock" data-source="post: 3861092" data-attributes="member: 17913">Certainly IMHO...I thought when I first looked at 3.0 that Feats were the fighter's cool powers, seems as a significant majority of them were directly related to combat and combat rules.&nbsp; Then it seemed like feats got stolen from the fighter, and soon there were feats that made wizards and sorcerers just as good in melee, or feats that made druids or clerics better than the fighter at thwacking things.3.5 seemed to bring the feats back to the fighter with PHB2 (as well as Comp Warrior, but that should be obvious).It feels to me like this was part of the design philosophy of 3.0 that just ended up falling by the wayside when feats could become such a huge way to give any character a way to break, defy, or bend the rules in this way or that.&nbsp; I'm not sayings feats are broken, or any specific type of feats are, but, as a whole, a lot of feats are a way for a character to do &quot;something that you can't normally do&quot; with what you have, whether it be a class, race, or other limitation.Anyway, my point is: I think crazy cool maneuvers should continue to be feats.&nbsp; I don't think gravity-defying super-maneuvers should be feats in the Core Rules, but they are perfectly acceptable in some settings/genres.&nbsp; Martial characters should have access to cool manuevers -- whether or not they are gravity-defying super-maneuvers -- just like wizards have lots of spells and rogues have lots of skills and everybody else has their thing.&nbsp; Cool maneuvers could simply be the new versions of spring attack, or whirlwind strike, or whatever...they don't need to be supernatural to be cool (or effective).Sorry for the rambling.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="timbannock, post: 3861092, member: 17913"] Certainly IMHO... I thought when I first looked at 3.0 that Feats [I]were[/I] the fighter's cool powers, seems as a significant majority of them were directly related to combat and combat rules. Then it seemed like feats got stolen from the fighter, and soon there were feats that made wizards and sorcerers just as good in melee, or feats that made druids or clerics better than the fighter at thwacking things. 3.5 seemed to bring the feats back to the fighter with PHB2 (as well as Comp Warrior, but that should be obvious). It feels to me like this was part of the design philosophy of 3.0 that just ended up falling by the wayside when feats could become such a huge way to give any character a way to break, defy, or bend the rules in this way or that. I'm not sayings feats are broken, or any specific type of feats are, but, as a whole, a lot of feats are a way for a character to do "something that you can't normally do" with what you have, whether it be a class, race, or other limitation. Anyway, my point is: I think crazy cool maneuvers should continue to be feats. I don't think gravity-defying super-maneuvers should be feats in the Core Rules, but they are perfectly acceptable in some settings/genres. Martial characters should have access to cool manuevers -- whether or not they are gravity-defying super-maneuvers -- just like wizards have lots of spells and rogues have lots of skills and everybody else has their thing. Cool maneuvers could simply be the new versions of spring attack, or whirlwind strike, or whatever...they don't need to be supernatural to be cool (or effective). Sorry for the rambling. [/QUOTE]

Verification