More on the glimpse into feats

Originally started this as a comment to Crwth's "Odiferous Feats" post. But it got so long that it became a separate blog...


I chalked up the "Heroic" vs "Paragon" tiers as nothing more than terminology, but now that you mention it, I think it probably will be tied to character level. Which sucks!

I think the roles of "sniper", "controller" etc... are just loose descriptors and not an actual game mechanic. The only place I'd expect to see them is in the MMs.

I caught that Action Points will be core. No big surprise but I did forget to mention it in my blog (despite my mental note to do so).

At first glance I like the new version of Toughness. The current 3.5 version is blah, but this one gives a continuous benefit, which I like. I'll probably take it on most of my human casters.

I can't believe I missed the "squares" thing under the Golden Wyvern. Goddamn! I hate that! How about "omit a number of 5' gaps...". WotC can push their fucking "squares" on us all they want, I ain't buying their fucking minis. In fact I'm boycotting them just out of spite.

As for prerequisites, I can't see the Golden Wyvern feat having none. It must be part of a specific tree or path. In fact I'm sure I've seen that "Golden Wyvern" phrase somewhere else. Tome of Battle maybe? Another dev blog?

Anyways, it's looking more and more like everything is tied to level & class. In fact, I can see why character creation has been touted as much simpler in 4e. All you do is pick a race and a class then plug in the Lego blocks as you go. No decisions. No resource management. No strategy or tactics. No creativity. With the talent trees and feat design it's just plug'n'play.

You must be this class to take this ride.

After reading the latest Dev&Des article I am both encouraged and discouraged. Disencouraged? I dunno. Whatever.

The article gives some sweet insight into the role of feats in 4e. First of all, applause for keeping feats in the new edition. I love feats. I'm a whore for feats. I like to map them out. I like to use them. I think they add tons of versatility and uniqueness to a character. As far as game mechanics go, the feat system in 3.5 is probably my favorite.

So, while I'm glad to see that feats will be a part of 4e, I'm not so thrilled by the implementation. As per Andy Collins, a guy who probably knows, the majority of feats are being rolled into each class.

My reaction to this can be summed up in one cute little acronym. WTF?

This is exactly what I feared losing in 4e. The versatility and freedom to make any character I can imagine. No longer will I be able to mix up archetypes and concepts through choice of class, feats, skills, and spells.

Instead, if I want Spring Attack, I'll have to play a ranger or rogue. If I want Power Attack, well, that's under the Fighter and Barbarian class only. Think a sorcerer with a spiked chain and Improved Trip would be fun? Sorry. You'd need the Exotic Weapon feat and Combat Expertise, both of which are buried in the fighter type classes.

Maybe multi-classing will save the day. I'm certainly not above dipping into second or third classes for an extra feat or some proficiencies. However, I'm not willing to hamstring my character at later levels for a feat I should have been able to take at 3rd, 6th, or 9th level regardless of chosen class.

So I'm miffed.

Then there's this thing called "Tiers". As in...
"Toughness
Tier: Heroic
Benefit: When you take this feat, you gain additional hit points equal to your level + 3. You also gain 1 additional hit point every time you gain a level."

In the article Collins lists two kinds of tier. Heroic and Paragon. Interesting in that it's somewhat concrete proof of the whole talent tree concept. Cool, I guess. I'm just too pissed off about the feat thing to care.

Tiers of Joy

I'm beginning to sense a theme in the development and design of 4e. Bear with me. I'm a little slow.

That theme, ladies and gentlemen, is tiers.

Everywhere from developer blogs to playtests to dev&des articles the idea of tiers is everywhere. There's the tiers in spellcasting that will replace the "Vancian" fire-and-forget method of previous editions. The whole "at will vs per encounter vs per day" thing. There's the set-up of the DMG with the first part of the book being at low, medium, and high "altitude" (to borrow the term used by David Noonan here). Finally, David Noonan (in the same blog thread) announces that he's working on what he says are ""skill challenges," "extended challenges," and "complex challenges.""

While I'm of mixed opinion on what I've seen/read/heard about 4e, but I have to say that I like this viewpoint. I like that they are coming at the design of 4e from different heights/tiers/altitudes. Break the game down and organize it into the various levels. Group the things that we as players or DM will use all the time in one neat and tidy section. If nothing else speeds up play and minimizes page flipping, this will.

Although I do love flipping past those sexy pictures of Mialee...