Difference between revisions of "Talk:Crusader of the Desert (3.5e Feat)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
m (modernizing) |
m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{Rating|rater=Jota | {{Rating|rater=Jota | ||
|rating=like | |rating=like | ||
| − | |reason= | + | |reason=What I really like about this is how thematic it is. It is hardly something for every character, but in its given niche it can be of great value, which is how feats should be (my opinion as a designer), rather than "if you are X you take Y on creation, Z at third, et cetera. I can see instances where a paladin might not want to take advantage of the divine grace switch (still need some Charisma for spells, smiting, turning - well, maybe not the last one, but pretty much every other class feature keys off Charisma. If you're just in for the two level dip it's fantastic, because Charisma isn't a combat stat, but I am not sure Constitution to all saves justifies a two level dip and adherence to the code of conduct unless you have a strictly Constitution-based class (which are generally, and perhaps rightfully, eschewed). Minor concerns over dip potential aside, I really like this.}} |
Latest revision as of 14:25, 11 February 2015
Ratings[edit]
|
Jota likes this article and rated it 3 of 4. |
|---|---|
| What I really like about this is how thematic it is. It is hardly something for every character, but in its given niche it can be of great value, which is how feats should be (my opinion as a designer), rather than "if you are X you take Y on creation, Z at third, et cetera. I can see instances where a paladin might not want to take advantage of the divine grace switch (still need some Charisma for spells, smiting, turning - well, maybe not the last one, but pretty much every other class feature keys off Charisma. If you're just in for the two level dip it's fantastic, because Charisma isn't a combat stat, but I am not sure Constitution to all saves justifies a two level dip and adherence to the code of conduct unless you have a strictly Constitution-based class (which are generally, and perhaps rightfully, eschewed). Minor concerns over dip potential aside, I really like this. |
