163
edits
Changes
m
→Feats: remove term 'synergy feat' from list.
:: Just note that you can't go just on that--you also need to see how much a class gets before saying it's balance range, not just when it gets what. For example, barbarian rage and fighter's feats and rogue sneak attack are all fighter-ish level (I'd say the last could potentially be rogue if done right), but if you combine enough of those together they start to encroach on rogue territory, etc. Same goes for other balance points, of course. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] 07:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
:::How much a 'class' gets? How do we do that, especially if we're back to rating the Balance Range of a specific Feat in a vacuum? I mean, any veteran DM knows to look for that pattern when judging the supremacy of a class build. Seeing 8d6 of Sneak Attack Feats on a character sheet always raises an eyebrow. But we can't give a single Sneak Attack Feat a balance rating based on how often it is spammed in a class build. Especially off into Epic Levels. But then again, Single Use feats are always going to be easier to quantify than Stackable Feats, or Synergy Feats, or even Tree Feats. I think we should overlook the 'spam-ability' of a singular feat if we are going to rate it. ...Synergy is almost impossible to judge given the unlimited number of combinations. Stackable feats are easier because of the set increments. Tree Feats are even easier than that, because Synergy can be quantified and prerequisites are already present to judge level gained. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 09:03, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
