Re: {kjd-exp} *Weakening* feats

DougL <lampert.doug@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 29, 10:50 pm, Keith Davies <keith.dav...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
DougL <lampert.d...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 29, 9:38 pm, Keith Davies <keith.dav...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Make the type of feat come of the CLASS level not character level.

This is where d20 modern screwed up, single classes get a talent or
feat EVERY level, but multiclasses get 0-2 a level depending. Given
how important feats and talents are to their power in modern this
results in unballanced characters in ways they shouldn't want.

This is why I made it character level. Every level you get one and only
one. Class feats apply to the class you took the level in, general
feats *may* apply to the class you took the level in ('general' in this
case means 'unconstrained' rather than [General]), and racial feats may
apply to the class you took (especially if the class would be considered
'favored' -- your racial feats fit well with it).

Say I think barbarian feats are crap but that fighter feats are
golden. Basing type on character level you multiclass Barbarian and
Fighter, chosing to take fighter levels EVERY time a class feat is
due!

By your system I can build a Bbn12/Ftr7 with NO Barbarian feats at all
and 7 Ftr feats!

By mine he gets the same number of total feats but gets the same 5
Barbarian class feats as any level 12 Bbn and the same 3 Ftr feats
(assuming Ftrs don't get extra feats as a class feature) as any level
7 Ftr.

A poor example, perhaps. The feat lists between 'barbarian' and
'fighter' would look quite a bit alike. In fact, I expect to drop
barbarian -- it's a fighter with a bigger hit die, less armor, faster
movement, rage, and a different skill set. This can *all* be done (IMC)
through feat management.

Now, wizard vs. fighter (caster vs. martial) might be a more meaningful
comparison, or fighter vs. rogue (martial vs. skill)... but even then I
don't think I have a problem with a character leaning more toward one or
the other. Multiclassing at all trades power for flexibility; unless he
finds a sweet combination of feats that support each other -- which
mostly happens when you stay in a single 'class' of feats, rather than
drawing from more than one -- he's going to be spanked in the niches of
either of the other two.

The Wiz12/Ftr7 who focuses on fighter feats is probably going to take a
beating any time he runs up against a Wiz19 or Ftr19.

[1] I extended the spell list beyond ninth level to account for
metamagicked high-level spells.

Try:

Character level 1 grants a bonus racial and general feat.

Class levels 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 grant general feats.
Class levels 1, 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 20 grant class feats.
Class levels 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, and 19 grant racial feats.

This would lead -- for multiclass characters -- to a glut of class,
general, or race feats.

So? Shouldn't taking a level in a class GENERALLY mean enough of a
commitment to take a class feat?

I don't see why not, no.

Now, this makes *some* sense at low level (take a level of wizard,
gain a class feat, then a level offighter geta class feat, etc.) but
it means you don't gain general or racial feats until later.

So? Your development is obviously emphasising class based versatility,
not your racial heritage or single class ability. It is GOOD to have a
multiclass be forced to take some feats related to each class, reduces
the chances of cherrypicking classes for one special talent with
minimal cost.

Okay.

Postponing the general feats doesn't offend me (you're busy changing
tracks when you multiclass), losing the racial feats is a trifle irksome
(yes, the same logic applies but it doesn't seem as right). Getting
several racial feats in a row ("I'm developing my inner dwarf") doesn't
seem right either.

How often do you seriously expect someone to advance to level 4 three
times in a row in different classes?

Not too often, no. Fair point.

In any case at the end of doing this he STILL has no more racial feats
than a single class of lower level, he's just catching up on his
Dwarfness now that he isn't racing to pick up entirely new classes
every week.

Mm.

I'm willing to go either way on it. I like the way I initially
presented better, but your suggestion doesn't offend me -- I'd play in a
game that did it that way.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Sometimes my brain is a very strange
keith.davies@xxxxxxxxxxxx to live in."
keith.davies@xxxxxxxxx -- Dana Smith
http://www.kjdavies.org/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Endless Dorkness
    ... But if they've got better skills, ... I'd think that the fighter would be a solo-type fighting ... other takes feats that depend on him having others around who are ... A mid to high level NCO NPC ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Endless Dorkness
    ... but see no reason to worry about it. ... other takes feats that depend on him having others around who are ... The first fighter does well out of formation, ... The skirmisher/special forces skill set focusses on ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: 3.x: rebalancing fighters vs spellcasters vs monsters
    ... and the casters are either going for the instant kill, ... The only thing that separates Fighters from the other guys is feats. ... Fighter in PF PAs for less than a Cleric in 3.5. ... it's sort of flavorless (how are warblades supposed to be ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: |[4E] The Devils in the Details
    ... What's an unusually powerful build for Fighter? ... causing lots of damage. ... There's also the archery feats plus magical bow, ... the martial adepts -- you don't have those other feats available. ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Question! Oriental Adventures - Martial Arts
    ... on an unarmed fighter build. ... AoO from unarmed attack) and the option of applying deadly damage. ... even with my expanded feats: ... the fighter is lagging the monk. ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)