Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 544417" data-attributes="member: 8461">On the mention of feats, I wanted to point out that most people seem to think that feats designed with intrinsically high-level prerequisites are somehow unfair. The reactions to seeing such high-power-with-high-prerequisite feats seem to be &quot;now my DM has more to give his high-level NPCs to screw us over!&quot; or &quot;It's gonna take me forever to get that!&quot; I vaguely recall that there were quite a few people on Monte's message boards who had trouble swallowing the concept of the Eldritch feats he introduced in the BoEM series.Ironically, this is probably the attitude taken by a large degree of the people who complain that there isn't any real reason to push past 10th level.The way I see it, things like Eldritch feats are exactly what the game needs more of. High-level (and epic level, but thats beyond what is being discussed here) should be when your character has seriously started to become unique. You've had progressively more levels, more feat choices, more bonus ability points, etc., to branch out from something common. It's natural that better, stronger options should be open to you then, things that lower-level characters are in awe of, or even don't fully understand.And of course, thats not even taking into account things like prestige classes, and new spells, but thats beyond what I was talking about.On a related note, my own campaign ran from February 2000 to March 2001, but not during June-August 2000 since we were off on summer break. We had about four players, though &quot;guest&quot; players came and went semi-regularly, and the campaign stopped around 13th level. I suppose it takes the wind out of what I was semi-ranting about above to mention that I fell pretty much perfectly in the research demographic. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:"&nbsp; data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 544417, member: 8461"] On the mention of feats, I wanted to point out that most people seem to think that feats designed with intrinsically high-level prerequisites are somehow unfair. The reactions to seeing such high-power-with-high-prerequisite feats seem to be "now my DM has more to give his high-level NPCs to screw us over!" or "It's gonna take me forever to get that!" I vaguely recall that there were quite a few people on Monte's message boards who had trouble swallowing the concept of the Eldritch feats he introduced in the BoEM series. Ironically, this is probably the attitude taken by a large degree of the people who complain that there isn't any real reason to push past 10th level. The way I see it, things like Eldritch feats are exactly what the game needs more of. High-level (and epic level, but thats beyond what is being discussed here) should be when your character has seriously started to become unique. You've had progressively more levels, more feat choices, more bonus ability points, etc., to branch out from something common. It's natural that better, stronger options should be open to you then, things that lower-level characters are in awe of, or even don't fully understand. And of course, thats not even taking into account things like prestige classes, and new spells, but thats beyond what I was talking about. On a related note, my own campaign ran from February 2000 to March 2001, but not during June-August 2000 since we were off on summer break. We had about four players, though "guest" players came and went semi-regularly, and the campaign stopped around 13th level. I suppose it takes the wind out of what I was semi-ranting about above to mention that I fell pretty much perfectly in the research demographic. :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]

Verification