Remove Size requirements in feats

[Brit O]

For a few select feats, like awesome blow, I hated that there was a size requirement listed as a prereq.

Remove the size requirements, since the size is required by the effect anyway. This applies to almost any feat, and I'm not aware of any feats that are just "Oh, you're large. +1 to natural armor"

For example, Awesome blow requires the target to be at least a size smaller than you. Well a medium character can still use it on Goblins, so why does he need to be large to get the feat? The large prereq only told me that players shouldn't have it, but that's boring.

[Locworks]

What other core/OGL feats did you have in mind?

[Selgard]

Size is a requirement designed to keep core players from taking the feat. since [monster] isn't a subtype, it's about the best way they have.

-S

[Nameless]

In the case of Awesome Blow, I wouldn't mind seeing the prerequisite changed to Str 17+ or something along those lines. Then it could be reachable for strong melee-oriented PCs who could knock Goblins and Kobolds flying! It seems like an enjoyable time for that particular PC.

This is by no means a necessary change, but it seems like it might be enjoyable. As long as the PC knows that it won't come in *that* handy when he takes it. How often do you fight Small or smaller foes?

[Brit O]

Selgard wrote:

Size is a requirement designed to keep core players from taking the feat. since [monster] isn't a subtype, it's about the best way they have.

-S

But I don't see why certain players shouldn't benefit from the same choices. It's like saying players can never have DR, and that was practically the truth except for Barbarian until finally they released a bunch of spells and such.

Monster-Only feats tell me that monster's need an advantage over the players and have access to special abilities the players can't have. That stinks, especially since players strive to make interesting concepts.

I too like the idea of batting goblins and kobolds around the battlefields and into distressing situations. Its not like that feat is particularly powerful too since RAW its a single hit that moves the monster. Only in interesting battlefields such as the Glassworks or the Thistletop Briars make it a fun and worthwhile concept. (both RotRL)

Honestly this is the only one I can think of right now, but in a lot of the supplemental material I think there's a few more like Swarm Fighting (Complete Warrior?) and the like. I don't see why Dwarves can't swarm fight giants like goblins can swarm fight, same principle different scale.

Just a little addendum or something since all it does is open more existing possibilities without rewriting every feat.

[Brit O]

PS, I understand the Swarm Fighting sharing spaces part can't work, but the other bonuses part could. Again, this still works since I'm sure the first part says 'Small' which implies that it can't work for medium creatures, while the second part as written isn't based on size. Which is perfect btw.

[LazarX]

Brit O wrote:

Monster-Only feats tell me that monster's need an advantage over the players and have access to special abilities the players can't have. That stinks, especially since players strive to make interesting concepts.

Yes they do, monsters are generally out-numbered and you don't want every single feat that you'd design for a monster available to a player race.

Just because a concept is interesting is not sufficient reason to allow it.

As for swarm fighting again D+D is largely about the heroic path, the few and elite frequently against the brutish and the many. A group of 4 to 6 pcs who probably all aren't going to be dwarven fighters, is a poor base for a swarm. It's also not really part of the typical PC fighter who generally thrives on personal glory not hive tactics.