I wanted to create a separate thread to discuss this, because it keeps getting brought up as a tangent to other threads. Going to level 10.
Full disclaimer about my biases: I am not a fan of the feat mechanic in 3e because I am not a fan of char op. I understand lots of people like it, but not me. I am a fan of character customization, but prefer tailoring abilities to fit the archetype of who you want to play, not what creates the most DPS.
AD&D: let's look at one of the most popular classes, the Ranger. In AD&D, there were not feats, but there were class abilities (really the same thing, mechanically)
Level 1: + dmg against giants, surprise, tracking, can specialize (only class other than fighter who can)
Level 8: druid casting ability
Level 9: magic user ability
Level 10: employ additional magic items, attract body of followers
3.x: Ranger
Level 1: bonus feat, favored enemy, track, wild empathy
Level 2: Combat style
Level 3: bonus feat, endurance
Level 4: animal companion
level 5: additional favored enemy
Level 6: bonus feat, improved combat style
Level 7: woodland stride
Level 8: swift tracker
Level 9: bonus feat, evasion
Level 10: 3rd favored enemy
NEXT (ranger /w sharpshooter specialty)
Level 1: favored enemy, spellcasting, track, precise shot
Level 2 :favored enemy benefit
Level 3: weapon mastery
Level 4: wary
Level 5: camouflage, deadly strike
Level 6: sniper
Level 7: woodland stride
Level 8: favored enemy benefit
Level 9: called shot
Level 10: feral senses, deadly strike 3x
As you can see, the feats in Next aren't that much different than what you'd find as class abilities in AD&D. The BIG difference is that in 3e, each class gets bonus feats that they can choose with no limitation with the exception of meeting a pre-req. It is of my opinion that when we hear the word "feat", we immediately think of char op in 3.x. I know I do. That's why in my opinion, WoTC should stay away from that term. However, unlike 3e, Next packages them by specialty. When I choose Sharpshooter, I get precise shot at level 1, weapon mastery at level 3, sniper at level 6, and called shot at level 9. Those do not change. They are very much like AD&D's class abilities that you get when you level up.
That all being said, it is also mentioned that for those who want (char op fans), they can create their own specialties and essentially emulate 3e in that the character gets whatever feats the player wants at level 1, 3, 6, and 9. Also, players can ignore feats altogether and take a +1 to an attribute score instead.
What this does, is allow players to play like AD&D (as the core game is designed) or to play like 3e (by houseruling specialties away). Next has a lot of bugs still to work out, but I believe in giving credit where it's due because it allows AD&D players to play the way they (and me) want, and it also allows 3e players to play the way they want, at least in the context of feat/class abilities go. I know fully well that there are still areas where AD&D players won't get everything they want (like an attack matrix over an ascending AC system). But as far as feats go, it shouldn't be cause for a no-go. I totally understand why some players wouldn't want to play Next over another version (I don't like the HD healing mechanic myself), but this is one area that seems to cover just about all editions.
Excellent analysis. Very true.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;649192I wanted to create a separate thread to discuss this, because it keeps getting brought up as a tangent to other threads. Going to level 10.
Full disclaimer about my biases: I am not a fan of the feat mechanic in 3e because I am not a fan of char op. I understand lots of people like it, but not me. I am a fan of character customization, but prefer tailoring abilities to fit the archetype of who you want to play, not what creates the most DPS.
AD&D: let's look at one of the most popular classes, the Ranger. In AD&D, there were not feats, but there were class abilities (really the same thing, mechanically)
Level 1: + dmg against giants, surprise, tracking, can specialize (only class other than fighter who can)
Level 8: druid casting ability
Level 9: magic user ability
Level 10: employ additional magic items, attract body of followers
3.x: Ranger
Level 1: bonus feat, favored enemy, track, wild empathy
Level 2: Combat style
Level 3: bonus feat, endurance
Level 4: animal companion
level 5: additional favored enemy
Level 6: bonus feat, improved combat style
Level 7: woodland stride
Level 8: swift tracker
Level 9: bonus feat, evasion
Level 10: 3rd favored enemy
NEXT (ranger /w sharpshooter specialty)
Level 1: favored enemy, spellcasting, track, precise shot
Level 2 :favored enemy benefit
Level 3: weapon mastery
Level 4: wary
Level 5: camouflage, deadly strike
Level 6: sniper
Level 7: woodland stride
Level 8: favored enemy benefit
Level 9: called shot
Level 10: feral senses, deadly strike 3x
As you can see, the feats in Next aren't that much different than what you'd find as class abilities in AD&D. The BIG difference is that in 3e, each class gets bonus feats that they can choose with no limitation with the exception of meeting a pre-req. It is of my opinion that when we hear the word "feat", we immediately think of char op in 3.x. I know I do. That's why in my opinion, WoTC should stay away from that term. However, unlike 3e, Next packages them by specialty. When I choose Sharpshooter, I get precise shot at level 1, weapon mastery at level 3, sniper at level 6, and called shot at level 9. Those do not change. They are very much like AD&D's class abilities that you get when you level up.
That all being said, it is also mentioned that for those who want (char op fans), they can create their own specialties and essentially emulate 3e in that the character gets whatever feats the player wants at level 1, 3, 6, and 9. Also, players can ignore feats altogether and take a +1 to an attribute score instead.
What this does, is allow players to play like AD&D (as the core game is designed) or to play like 3e (by houseruling specialties away). Next has a lot of bugs still to work out, but I believe in giving credit where it's due because it allows AD&D players to play the way they (and me) want, and it also allows 3e players to play the way they want, at least in the context of feat/class abilities go. I know fully well that there are still areas where AD&D players won't get everything they want (like an attack matrix over an ascending AC system). But as far as feats go, it shouldn't be cause for a no-go. I totally understand why some players wouldn't want to play Next over another version (I don't like the HD healing mechanic myself), but this is one area that seems to cover just about all editions.
Sac, I think a few of us saw this coming from eary on. It just seems like the most obvious way to allow feats but at the same time curtail the Char op.
It is most similar with the way priests from the Complete priest could add and remove class abilities to produce certain kinds of priests (druids, templars or scholars for example).
I can see that the additional specialities in Next might put some off but they are really no different from weapon specialisation except they are more paced and extend deeper (weapon master in BECMI perhaps - I am unfamiliar)
Solid analysis. I don't like the word feat either, but I suppose WotC has to throw a bone to traditionalists of all editions, not just TSR D&D.
I'm introducing a mixed group of AD&D and 3E players to Next right now, and the AD&D players didn't have any problem with the notion of picking a thematic background and specialty. I just read out the names of the backgrounds and specialties, and the guys chose which they wanted without cracking a book.
Quote from: jibbajibba;650627I can see that the additional specialities in Next might put some off but they are really no different from weapon specialisation except they are more paced and extend deeper (weapon master in BECMI perhaps - I am unfamiliar)
And really, the way a group could handle specialties they don't like is no different than in AD&D when you don't like classes: simply don't allow them.
Just make sure the group knows these things. As always, communication is the key.
Quote from: Haffrung;650665I'm introducing a mixed group of AD&D and 3E players to Next right now, and the AD&D players didn't have any problem with the notion of picking a thematic background and specialty. I just read out the names of the backgrounds and specialties, and the guys chose which they wanted without cracking a book.
I really think this is representative of most gamers as a whole. I.e., not as hostile towards any version of D&D as those of us on message boards ;)
Quote from: Sacrosanct;650669I really think this is representative of most gamers as a whole. I.e., not as hostile towards any version of D&D as those of us on message boards ;)
I tolerate all editions of D&D, as long as we agree 4e is not D&D.
;)
Quote from: Sacrosanct;650669I really think this is representative of most gamers as a whole. I.e., not as hostile towards any version of D&D as those of us on message boards ;)
I should have also noted that the 3E guys downloaded their own copies of the Next playtest rules and built their characters from scratch. So yeah, I'm not seeing the hate.
Interesting I have not been following the playtest at all but if this is the way Next is going with the question of feats I can deal with it. Kind of like a poor man's version Fantasy Craft feats almost.
@Rincewind, I agree wholeheartedly the 4E is not DnD.:)