Hello Paizonians.
I was wondering, if with the advent of new products, perhaps Paizo could make feats available every level instead of every 2 levels, There are so many feats to choose from (not to mention some of them even become mandatory), it would give players a bit more leeway in which feats to choose, heck, they could even take those feats usually no body takes, but that can add a bit of flavor to your character (such as deceitful). It would also ease with some feats chains (cough** whirlwind attack, cough**).
Hello Paizonians.
I was wondering, if with the advent of new products, perhaps Paizo could make feats available every level instead of every 2 levels, There are so many feats to choose from (not to mention some of them even become mandatory), it would give players a bit more leeway in which feats to choose, heck, they could even take those feats usually no body takes, but that can add a bit of flavor to your character (such as deceitful). It would also ease with some feats chains (cough** whirlwind attack, cough**).
I generally agree, I often find myself with 3 or 4 times the number if desired feats versus slots to fill them. However this change would radically unbalance the fighter class who is already getting to be pretty weak after level 13 or so. I think you would also have to give the fighter some new toys to play with. I thihk fighters should get the ability to swap feats like wizards swap spells. Every morning you sit in your clockwork orange movie chair and play jet li films until you master the style you want for the day.
while i agree with the feat swap, fighters needing more tricks is moot since they themselves get more feats as well.
Maybe add an option to learn feats, like you suggested like a wizard, and swap out, it would be like the spellbook mechanic but for feats hehe.
Back during 3.5 my group would run feat every level games on occasion for fun. You get some super awesome OP characters, but sometimes it can really unbalance the game. It really depends on the players.
I can tell you right now that it is extremely unlikely that this will happen in the current edition of the game. There's just too much in place to make such a sweeping change at this point, especially considering feat progression is a core game mechanic. That said, you should feel free to use such a progression in your own game; adapting the game to one's preferences has always been an important part of the hobby.
while i agree with the feat swap, fighters needing more tricks is moot since they themselves get more feats as well.
Maybe add an option to learn feats, like you suggested like a wizard, and swap out, it would be like the spellbook mechanic but for feats hehe.
Right, that is why it takes away from the fighter, why would you take fighter when you get the feats anyway? The whole point of fighter is bunches and bunches of feats. It you get bunches and bunches of feats anyway then you are taking something away from what makes the class unique.
The point of the fighter is also weapon and armour training and fighter feats, things that cannot be replicated by any feats currently.
I was wondering, if with the advent of new products, perhaps Paizo could make feats available every level instead of every 2 levels, There are so many feats to choose from (not to mention some of them even become mandatory), it would give players a bit more leeway in which feats to choose, heck, they could even take those feats usually no body takes, but that can add a bit of flavor to your character (such as deceitful). It would also ease with some feats chains (cough** whirlwind attack, cough**).
Rogues, Rangers and Monks to a certain extent already get this.
I can certainly see the appeal, although it would involve an extensive review of the feats.
Edit: It would also require a review of everything classes get from leveling. Things are spread out with a purpose as they are. Although I wouldn't be opposed to a well thought out progression of "get stuff every level." This might actually be a decent way to reduce the "christmas tree" effect--get rid of the stat boosting items, and make them part of the character by giving them a stat point or enhancement bonus or something every level.
Right, that is why it takes away from the fighter, why would you take fighter when you get the feats anyway? The whole point of fighter is bunches and bunches of feats. It you get bunches and bunches of feats anyway then you are taking something away from what makes the class unique.
It's the only thing that makes fighters unique. It's the only thing that makes fighters anything at all. If this happened, the fighter class would literally disappear, being completely replaced by the barbarian.
I for one wouldn't miss it. It's the blandest class in the core.
Hello Paizonians.
I was wondering, if with the advent of new products, perhaps Paizo could make feats available every level instead of every 2 levels, There are so many feats to choose from (not to mention some of them even become mandatory), it would give players a bit more leeway in which feats to choose, heck, they could even take those feats usually no body takes, but that can add a bit of flavor to your character (such as deceitful). It would also ease with some feats chains (cough** whirlwind attack, cough**).
Fewer feat chains, more scalar feats, as said below.
Edit: It would also require a review of everything classes get from leveling. Things are spread out with a purpose as they are. Although I wouldn't be opposed to a well thought out progression of "get stuff every level." This might actually be a decent way to reduce the "christmas tree" effect--get rid of the stat boosting items, and make them part of the character by giving them a stat point or enhancement bonus or something every level.
Conan the Barbarian (yet another 3.5 spinoff) discouraged magic in every way and compensated with +1 all attributes at 6/10/14/18. You were never assumed to get magic items in that game and frequent mention is made of never saving money, as money was for High Living (read: whores and booze), not gearing up. Made for interesting play.
Great idea. And with all those extra spells out, spellcasters need more spells/day and spells known. Rogues need more rogue talents, barbarians more rage powers. Everyone should get everything.
What are you, five? Didn't you learn that you can't have everything? :P
Great idea. And with all those extra spells out, spellcasters need more spells/day and spells known. Rogues need more rogue talents, barbarians more rage powers. Everyone should get everything.
What are you, five? Didn't you learn that you can't have everything? :P
You are right and wrong IMHO. PCs could be more complicated to run, and maybe more powerful, but IMHO a consilidation and/or a scaling with levels could be an awesome idea as an alternate rule.
You are right and wrong IMHO. PCs could be more complicated to run, and maybe more powerful, but IMHO a consilidation and/or a scaling with levels could be an awesome idea as an alternate rule.Great idea. And with all those extra spells out, spellcasters need more spells/day and spells known. Rogues need more rogue talents, barbarians more rage powers. Everyone should get everything.
What are you, five? Didn't you learn that you can't have everything? :P
I should have quoted the OP. I'm saying that you don't double the number of feats you get just because there are more of them available.
I wouldn't be against turning some feat chains into one feat. Not all of them, but in the right cases. Vital Strike, and Two-Weapon Fighting are prime examples for things that need to be a single feat (or, at least in the case of Vital Strike, part of general combat rules.)
I should have quoted the OP. I'm saying that you don't double the number of feats you get just because there are more of them available.
I wouldn't be against turning some feat chains into one feat. Not all of them, but in the right cases. Vital Strike, and Two-Weapon Fighting are prime examples for things that need to be a single feat (or, at least in the case of Vital Strike, part of general combat rules.)
So you're against getting more feats, but in favor of making existing feats more powerful?
So you're against getting more feats, but in favor of making existing feats more powerful?I should have quoted the OP. I'm saying that you don't double the number of feats you get just because there are more of them available.
I wouldn't be against turning some feat chains into one feat. Not all of them, but in the right cases. Vital Strike, and Two-Weapon Fighting are prime examples for things that need to be a single feat (or, at least in the case of Vital Strike, part of general combat rules.)
I think what he's saying is that there are some feats that you have to re-purchase just to keep the "same" level of benefit from them, and that he's opposed to having to do that.
TWF and Vital strike are good example of this. At first level, TWF double your number of attacks, but at 6th level you need to take Improved TWF to keep that up. (And so on at 11th and 16th level.)
So you're against getting more feats, but in favor of making existing feats more powerful?I should have quoted the OP. I'm saying that you don't double the number of feats you get just because there are more of them available.
I wouldn't be against turning some feat chains into one feat. Not all of them, but in the right cases. Vital Strike, and Two-Weapon Fighting are prime examples for things that need to be a single feat (or, at least in the case of Vital Strike, part of general combat rules.)
I think what he's saying is that there are some feats that you have to re-purchase just to keep the "same" level of benefit from them, and that he's opposed to having to do that.
TWF and Vital strike are good example of this. At first level, TWF double your number of attacks, but at 6th level you need to take Improved TWF to keep that up. (And so on at 11th and 16th level.)
Right. I assume those are deliberate feat taxes though. I was merely trying to point out that the argument is the same, but from a different direction.
I can see the benefits either way. In general I'm a fan of reduction and scaling, but I also like getting "stuff" at every level.
Great idea. And with all those extra spells out, spellcasters need more spells/day and spells known. Rogues need more rogue talents, barbarians more rage powers. Everyone should get everything.
What are you, five? Didn't you learn that you can't have everything? :P
Spells are a different thing, besides, back in 3.X characters got feats every 3! levels, did you know how many splatbooks were available at that time? Yes I have no freaking clue how many, but there were A LOT! People complained the same exact thing I'm complaining now, there are more feats now that you can take, there will always will be, since Paizo was so generous to lower it to 2 per level, will not just make it 1 per level?
back in 3.X characters got feats every 3! levels, did you know how many splatbooks were available at that time? Yes I have no freaking clue how many, but there were A LOT!
If you include stuff that was not from wotc, I think there were more books with nothing in it but feats than Paizo has made books in the PFRPG line so far.
since Paizo was so generous to lower it to 2 per level, will not just make it 1 per level?
Because the number of extant feats is not functionally linked to the number of feats a character gets.
Plus, how is that supposed to work? Will this be a general change in the rules? That means that characters will become less varied as there are now fewer possible combinations of feats.
Or will the feat bonus only apply if you buy the extra books? That's power creep.
So you're against getting more feats, but in favor of making existing feats more powerful?
Yes, but not across the board. I'm saying that some feats could (or should) be combined into one, but not that all feat chains should be turned into scaling feats, and that it's not because I'm losing any sleep over how with so many feats I just can't have them all in one character, but because the feats can't quite pull their own weight as a chain
The TWF and VS chains are examples that totally should have been combined into single, scalable feats because as chains they're too weak.
Two-Weapon Fighting should just double your attacks - for each iterative attack you get from BAB, you get a corresponding off-hand attack. Extra feats like Double Slice or Two-Weapon Defence are okay, but the basics should be one feat.
Vital Strike should give you one extra weapon die (or dice) for each iterative attack you give up.
Feats are fun, but after a while keeping track of all those feats becomes annoying bookwork, what you're proposing would give a human fighter 32 feats by 20th level, and for every other class doubling the amount of feats. It can also end up slowing down combat when a player looks up what they are capable of.
At the same time, I too would like to see some feat consolidation where it automatically advances as the character levels. Making certain feats more worthwhile.
If you feel there should be more feats, either houserule it for your game (if you're the gm) or try to convince your gm to allow it. Expecting Paizo to make such a ruling is unrealistic.
