parcival42's page

Could you please cancel my subscription to Pathfinder Modules.
Thank you.

I'm a Data Content Manager for a well known porn company's website. Seriously.

Could you please cancel my Pathfinder Chronicles subscription?
Thank you.

I think there's some interesting ideas with these combat feats, but I think it needs more work. I like the idea of chaining feats, and trying to set up a sequence of moves, but some things, like the Dodge - Mobility - Spring Attack progression don't necessarily make sense as presented in the alpha rules. It might be kind of cool to have several options at any given stage of a chain, but that would probably get way too complicated.

I think that if they are set on doing feat chains (ones that make sense rather than ones like Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack), that having multiple options at each level of the chain is paramount. Otherwise repetiveness sets in as you continually use the same 3 maneuvers every 3 rounds. Kinda like now with, "I Power Attack" over and over, without mant other combat options.

If you're going to have chains, those chains need options. The base ability should be something fundamental, such as Power Attack, that can be used every round and remain useful at all levels of play.

The feats building from the base should definitely be "better" without being circumstantial. Otherwise, the Combat feats will be more like Tactical feats, allowing mediocre to great effects that can be used only in certain situations. If I use Smack I want to know that I'll be able to use Power Slam or Backhand in the next round, and that it will be worth it. Some kind of garuntee has to be given.

One problem with this model, and I even think with the 3 feat chain model also, is the investment of feats. Perhaps they could be set up like Tactical feats. I take Smack. Next time I get a feat choice I take Power Slam, and the next time I take Dragon Tail Cut/Pain Hammer, which grant you the two seperate benefits. That costs you 3 feats rather than 4. Perhaps, if the feats were powerful enough to justify, the feat sink of 4 feats would be worth it...

Smack
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
Power Slam Backhand
/ \ / \
/ \ / \
Dragon Tail Cut Pain Hammer BAM! B*tch Slap

Sorry for the stupid feat names...

[OK, didn't know the beautiful tree I created would collapse...imagine a wonderful, symetrical tree of feats...]

I thought this was a nice addition. We've seen characters in movies do stuff similar to this, so I'm glad they conceptualized it into a feat.

As far as balanced, I'd say it is because of the feat sink and lack of shield.

I hate this whole concept. It just needs to be scrapped.

It hamstrings the melee classes for no real good reason.

It would be like telling a wizard that to cast the fireball, you first must cast Create Fire, then cast Shape Fire, and only then can you cast Fireball.

I am not sure at all what the point of this rule is. My assumption is it is supposed to keep fighters from becoming too powerful in melee. But that is what they are SUPPOSED to do. If I spend a precious Feat choice on a feat, then by golly I want to use that feat.

Otherwise just scrap feats all together.

Amen, brother, amen.

This is my biggest gripe about their "fixes". Doesn't make much sense and nerfs the combat classes for no good reason.

I think the combat feats are a horrible. They spread the functionality of some of the "old feats" out across multiple feats, basically nerfing the fact that everyone gets 3 extra feats over the course of their careers. On top of that, you can only use ONE combat feat per round. You can't rapid shot and precise shot at the same time? You can't use dodge and mobility and spring attack at the same time? I understand that they've changed the functionality of some of these, but, unfortunately they've made them more complex to use and harder to keep track of.

Actually, they've gone for the 4E "per encounter" model in a surreptitious fashion. By having to use power, I mean feat, A in the first round, feat 2 in the second, and feat 3 in the third round, they are effectively relegating certain powers to be used once or twice a combat.
Would the Pathfinder RPG break if we used the feats that we're used to using?

At first I really liked the changes I saw. I thought the changes to the races, classes and skills were great. I was ecstatic when I saw the changes to the fighter and rogue, the two classes most people thought were underpowered compared to the spellcasting classes. But then I got to the feat chapter.

I think the combat feats are a horrible. They spread the functionality of some of the "old feats" out across multiple feats, basically nerfing the fact that everyone gets 3 extra feats over the course of their careers. On top of that, you can only use ONE combat feat per round. You can't rapid shot and precise shot at the same time? You can't use dodge and mobility and spring attack at the same time? I understand that they've changed the functionality of some of these, but, unfortunately they've made them more complex to use and harder to keep track of.

Actually, they've gone for the 4E "per encounter" model in a surreptitious fashion. By having to use power, I mean feat, A in the first round, feat 2 in the second, and feat 3 in the third round, they are effectively relegating certain powers to be used once or twice a combat.
Would the Pathfinder RPG break if we used the feats that we're used to using?