Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 6351692" data-attributes="member: 5143">Here's the deal.&nbsp; I like &quot;blandness&quot;.&nbsp; There's a reason feats are an optional rule in the first place.&nbsp; I want people concentrating on their character's personality.&nbsp; I find the only way to make people do that is by minimizing the amount of mechanics on their character.&nbsp; The reason both 3.5e and eventually 4e drove me insane is because the game became ABOUT the mechanics.&nbsp; As I said before, your class, race and background didn't matter nearly as much as your feats which were the meat and potatoes of your character.&nbsp; Sure, you got BAB, skills and hitpoints from your class...but that wasn't anywhere near as cool as the ability to get free trip attempts on all your attack rolls or add poison damage to all of your attacks.So because of that, players obsessed over feats...they planned their entire character just to qualify for feats or to get the final feat in a feat chain.5e is attempting to make feats entirely optional and equal to never taking feats at all.&nbsp; The only way to do that is to make sure the &quot;coolness&quot; of having a special ability no one else gets is factored into the balance.&nbsp; I want my players to look at the list of feats and HONESTLY consider taking all stat bumps.I can tell you that people ARE taking feats in my games.&nbsp; There is always at least one or two feats that someone feels their character would be incomplete without.&nbsp; The rest they take as stat bumps.&nbsp; I like that.&nbsp; Feats are taken because they fit the character not simply because taking them is always better than a stat bump.&nbsp; To me, stat bumps should be the default.I agree.&nbsp; You were suggesting that you needed to REWARD people for taking the feat.&nbsp; If there is a reward, you take the option that rewards you rather than the one that doesn't.&nbsp; There shouldn't be a reward to taking one option.&nbsp; You take it because you feel it is best for your character.My two weapon fighter will take the feat because I'd like to fight every round of combat with 2 weapons and being able to draw only one weapon a round doesn't really fit my image of him.&nbsp; I'd also like to use a longer weapon as his primary.&nbsp; It would be a better idea mechanically to just add +2 dex.&nbsp; I won't do it though, because the &quot;coolness&quot; of the feat makes it more valuable for me.To me, that's precisely the sweet spot that feats need to hit.&nbsp; Useful for those people who really want the ability they provide...not useful for anyone else.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Majoru Oakheart, post: 6351692, member: 5143"] Here's the deal. I like "blandness". There's a reason feats are an optional rule in the first place. I want people concentrating on their character's personality. I find the only way to make people do that is by minimizing the amount of mechanics on their character. The reason both 3.5e and eventually 4e drove me insane is because the game became ABOUT the mechanics. As I said before, your class, race and background didn't matter nearly as much as your feats which were the meat and potatoes of your character. Sure, you got BAB, skills and hitpoints from your class...but that wasn't anywhere near as cool as the ability to get free trip attempts on all your attack rolls or add poison damage to all of your attacks. So because of that, players obsessed over feats...they planned their entire character just to qualify for feats or to get the final feat in a feat chain. 5e is attempting to make feats entirely optional and equal to never taking feats at all. The only way to do that is to make sure the "coolness" of having a special ability no one else gets is factored into the balance. I want my players to look at the list of feats and HONESTLY consider taking all stat bumps. I can tell you that people ARE taking feats in my games. There is always at least one or two feats that someone feels their character would be incomplete without. The rest they take as stat bumps. I like that. Feats are taken because they fit the character not simply because taking them is always better than a stat bump. To me, stat bumps should be the default. I agree. You were suggesting that you needed to REWARD people for taking the feat. If there is a reward, you take the option that rewards you rather than the one that doesn't. There shouldn't be a reward to taking one option. You take it because you feel it is best for your character. My two weapon fighter will take the feat because I'd like to fight every round of combat with 2 weapons and being able to draw only one weapon a round doesn't really fit my image of him. I'd also like to use a longer weapon as his primary. It would be a better idea mechanically to just add +2 dex. I won't do it though, because the "coolness" of the feat makes it more valuable for me. To me, that's precisely the sweet spot that feats need to hit. Useful for those people who really want the ability they provide...not useful for anyone else. [/QUOTE]

Verification