tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582522294352880775.post8528468310873259945..comments2014-04-27T16:38:08.906-05:00Comments on Wastex Games: Feats of FunAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03949583508679401659noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582522294352880775.post-49699488495775537382010-09-22T11:14:04.000-05:002010-09-22T11:14:04.000-05:00And an awesome set of feats they are...And an awesome set of feats they are...Adamhttp://www.leedsdnd.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582522294352880775.post-66534948651833743722010-09-24T06:05:20.000-05:002010-09-24T06:05:20.000-05:00Eh...to each their own. D&D is about fun, if ...Eh...to each their own. D&D is about fun, if they don't think these feats will increase their fun then they don't have to use them. Such is the game. <br><br>I'm a little disappointed (but not surprised) someone on the Wizards forum would reply with the amount of venom some of those comments seem to be dripping with it.Jeremy Southardhttp://www.wastexgames.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4582522294352880775.post-48930923554651107532010-09-24T11:21:02.000-05:002010-09-24T11:21:02.000-05:00(Cross-posted from the Wizards thread)The funny th...(Cross-posted from the Wizards thread)<br><br>The funny thing about fun is how closely it's tied to balance. A feat that does something flavourful is fun, but if you do it in a way that makes it over- or underpowered it becomes much less fun.<br><br>Imagine you have a player who's a shaman, and you want to give him a special unique feat that turns his spirit into a ghostly dragon thing. Sure, that'd be fun. But how to implement it?<br><br>How about once per encounter, he can add an energy keyword to Spirit's Fangs? That's pretty dragony. It's also massively underpowered. Your player might like the idea of a dragon spirit, but he's never going to take the feat because it's so useless. He never gets to experience the fun of having a dragon spirit. Or maybe he does take the feat... and finds himself lagging behind the rest of the party in combat. He gets the experience of having a dragon spirit, but that experience isn't a fun one.<br><br>How about all his spirit's melee attacks gain an energy keyword and can be used as a close blast 3? That's dragony, and way overpowered. He'll definitely take the feat, and then he'll proceed to wipe out every encounter on his own. And that's no fun: where's the challenge? Even if he does find that fun, the other players won't: the shaman's always hogging the spotlight.<br><br>Those examples are a little extreme, but hopefully they illustrate what I'm talking about. Cool ideas are all well and good, but they're only really fun when the mechanics support them in a balanced way. Your "Feats of Fun" don't really do that.<br><br>Also--<br><br>While your feats certainly are unbalanced, the thing that really gets my hackles up is how they're presented. Nearly everything is wildly unbalanced, makes no sense, duplicates existing feats, or is just really poorly phrased... it reads like you had a bunch of random ideas, wrote them down in point form, and then posted them. (With all the mentions of Twitter at the top, I'd wager that that's actually what you did.)<br><br>And that's not cool. Knowingly posting something that you could have done well but couldn't be bothered to proofread, well, that's kinda disrespectful to your audience. More than that, it's disrespectful to yourself. It's saying you don't really care about what you're doing, that you don't take pride in your work, and that you think so poorly of your readers that you expect them to love it anyway.<br><br>BLynn, I don't think you're that kind of person. I think you do want to make something cool and fun. And I think that's great. Keep at it.<br><br>But everything on this forum is PEACH: "Please Examine And Critique Honestly." And if you want an honest opinion, it's only common courtesy to put in an honest effort first.<br><br>Jeremy, Mplindustries gave his honest opinion on the article. He called it like he saw it, and y'know what? Pretty much everything he said was correct. He lost his temper near the end, quite reasonably; I probably would have too. It was an honest critique, and instead of getting snippy you'd do well to follow his example and make some suggestions of your own.Igfighttp://google.comnoreply@blogger.com