At first, I was thinking that maybe Feats should be gained on the same schedule as Weapon Proficiencies; so for the four main classes for the first 10 levels:
Fighter level 1: 4; level 4 +1, level 7 +1; level 10 +1 (7 total)
Cleric/Thief: level 1 2, level 5 +1, level 9 +1 (4 total)
Mage: level 1 1, level 7 +1 (2 total)
This would require much fewer adjustment to the henchmen deck. It would just mean adding 1 feat to each character.
So, maybe it would be better to smooth things out. Each class only gets 1 feat at first level:
Fighters: 1 feat every level (10 total for levels 1-10)
Clerics/Thieves: level 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 (5 total)
Mages: level 1,6 (2 total)
or maybe have only Fighters getting them at first:
Fighters: 1 feat for every level (10 total for levels 1-10)
Clerics/Thieves: 2,4,6,8,10 (5 total)
Mages: 2, 7 (2 total)
The question would be what to do with Monks and SubClasses. Clearly Illusionists, Summoners, and Canons would be treated as Mages. I'd treat Assasins and Bards as Thieves (although maybe they'd get one more, I don't know). I imagine it'd be best to treat Druids and Warlocks as Clerics for simplicity's sake, even though there is some minor argument for making druids a little worse and warlocks a little better.
The question of Berserkers, Rangers and Paladins is a little trickier. They have their own set of abilities which fighters lack. It might be better to give them slightly fewer feats, but should it be as few as Clerics, or somewhere between Fighters and Clerics.
Monks are also tricky. Maybe they should get the same as fighters, even though they have tons of special abilities already. On the other, they seriously suck at low level, so any little bit helps.
I very strongly believe that straight class fighters should get the most/best selection of these abilities. Rangers get a level based damage bonus and spells, paladins get several powers and spell abilities, and berserkers get to be berserk. So I'd say paladins and rangers, at clerics, or slightly better, since they really don't focus completely on combat (in their upbringing or whatever, they learn how to read forest signs or commune with a higher power or whatever). Berserkers, somewhere between fighters and clerics, if not at fighter rates, the only thing holding them back is pretty much the fact that their fighting is partly divinely inspired, and partly the fact that they can't focus on much of anything because of their class.
ReplyDeleteMonks. Monks in 1st edition suck so much, I'd say give them the same rate as fighters. At higher levels, this will make them badass, but at low levels they'll still suck no matter if you give them a gun that shoots holy handgrenades. I think we have little to worry about ever actually seeing a monk in our group, no matter what.
I like the last schedule for feats the best. Fighters have picked up a few tricks because of their background, and everybody else can pick up a trick or two after they've been out in the world for a little while.
Maybe make the Berserker's berserking ability into a feat, and require that they take it as their first level feat, and then allow them to progress as fighters (because they're crappy-armored fighters with berserk power anyway, not having a huge bag of tricks like Paladins and Rangers)
ReplyDeleteWouldn't the berserker/ranger/paladin's slower XP advancement offset any feat imbalance? They weren't balanced to begin with. Why start now?
ReplyDeleteBerserkers have the same XP advancement as fighters (at least as far as I compared up the list), but they have slight weapon limitations, serious armor limits (this is a biggy, leather or less), and extremely limiting behavior restrictions (seriously, I think theirs is even worse than paladins when it comes down to it...no running from fights, ever) placed on them by the higher power that gave them their abilities.
ReplyDeleteRangers and paladins, as I've always reckoned it, had lots of special abilities that were intended to be balanced between their slower XP advancement, along with their multitude of behavior taboos, possession restrictions, and hireling/henchman limitations. I will agree that they weren't balanced to start with, but giving paladins/rangers the same number of feats as fighters/berserkers just makes that gap between fighters and paladins/rangers even wider than it was before.
As a side note, I think we all agree that we give monks the same access to feats as fighters, because monks would still suck.
ReplyDelete