It seems that it would make more sense for them to be "on" all the time.
|
I also noticed this.
Maybe the combat feat list needs to be separated into feats that are always on or at least don't count against the 'one per round' rule and those that do count for the 'one per round' rule.
Or some of the lesser combat feats should be reduced to general feats that still qualify for the fighters extra feats?
SM
I also noticed this.
Maybe the combat feat list needs to be separated into feats that are always on or at least don't count against the 'one per round' rule and those that do count for the 'one per round' rule.
Or some of the lesser combat feats should be reduced to general feats that still qualify for the fighters extra feats?SM
That's my thinking exactly. For instance, Dodge.
Director of Games
|
It seems that it would make more sense for them to be "on" all the time.Nah. If you're adopting a stance that prevents armor from messing with your spells, you can't also be adopting a stance that puts you in position to use other combat feats. It's all about having to move in a certain way to accomplish a specific result (or, in this case, avoid a specific hindrance).
Epic Meepo is right here. It is also an added cost to getting this otherwise "very tricky to get" benefit.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Arcane Armor Training/Mastery.. it means you know how to casts spells wearing armor. But in order to do it, you need to be "focused" on casting the spell in the armor so you don't make a mistake. If you're putting extra attention/care into reducing your spell failure, then you're not in the "defensive stance" that allows you to get a +1 dodge bonus from Dodge.
Edit: Bah.. Jason beat me to it.
It feels kind of strange to me because most of the other combat feats feel like something you actively do, while this feels like a passive benefit. But honestly, I don't see it being a huge issue for anyone who's not a gish.
I guess the stance thing makes sense. Is there some balance issue behind this or something?
I'm GMing a character who is a fighter/wizard, and I was originally tempted to make these feats non-combat feats. after a while, I've changed my mind.
Before: Making them combat feats meant that he couldn't use his other combat feats like Cleave, Backswing etc in the same round.
After: Realized that Cleave, Backswing etc involve actions which wouldn't let you cast spells anyway... thus, making them combat feats actually makes sense.
I could see a Wizard choosing per round whether to use something like Wind Stance or his Armor Training, depending on whether he was fleeing or facing Rogues or something.