For people that have the book and can't deal with Paizo's shitty message boards...

What's up with the new Feat per level chart. Are they really giving all classes a feat every other level, and Fighters more feats on top of it?

It's kinda gay if I'm reading it right.

A feat every other level (and fighters get feats on even levels).
You are reading it right.

It works well in practice. Particularly with characters like the fighter, actually. People keep bitching that Wizards are powerful, but when you know what you're doing with a fighter, you can really kick ass. After, it's a matter of what, as a player, you like to do around the table.

Quote from: Cranewings;320925For people that have the book and can't deal with Paizo's shitty message boards...

What's up with the new Feat per level chart. Are they really giving all classes a feat every other level, and Fighters more feats on top of it?

It's kinda gay if I'm reading it right.

That's right, it is very joyful. Players like feats. I did the same thing near the end of my last 3.5 game, so that fighters got a feat every level. Since fighters were more dependent on feats for additional effectiveness, I think they benefited the most.

I don't know. It rubs me wrong. More feats were never what the fighter needed, unless they are planning on publishing better feat trees for warriors.

The most annoying thing is being a 6th level fighter with a maxed out archery tree, and starting over at 7th by taking something stupid like dodge so you can start towards mobility. So you get +1 AC, probably bringing it from like 22 to 23, and everyone else gets better spells, more powerful animals, new abilities...

I don't have the problem of feat trees personally. I have so many sources of feat trees, including the WotC PHB2, the Book of Experimental Might, Iron Heroes and other such documents for elongated feat chains, that I can just pick and choose whenever, if ever, that becomes a problem.

Besides, the players I've had at my game table usually aren't the type maxing out everything just for the sake of it. Being efficient at something is one thing. Optimizing every trait, score, ability and squeezing every single +1 mod one can get is another, completely.

It might be a playstyle thing.

True20 does the Feats / Power balance better than any D20 game I have seen and I hoped Pathfinder would have emulated that more.  

Based on what I read in the beta, the Fighter / Wizard imbalance seems to have been dealt with slightly in Pathfinder, but the "Wiz as Uberpower" is a sacred cow of Old School.  

As a student of point-buy games, there is no doubt that in Gurps / Hero / BESM / most others that spending points on powers beats points on skills just as spells and special abilities always outshine attack bonus and feats.

I suspect people who like 3.5 will be generally happy with Pathfinder much in the same way that gamers who like AD&D are generally happy with C&C.  For some, the changes aren't enough and for others, the changes will be too much.

And for some us, we don't play wizards anyway. Too damn brainy. Now SORCERERS! There's a magic class.

Quote from: Cranewings;320925It's kinda gay if I'm reading it right.

Your mom's kinda gay.

Feats rawk.

Quote from: Spinachcat;321042As a student of point-buy games, there is no doubt that in Gurps / Hero / BESM / most others that spending points on powers beats points on skills just as spells and special abilities always outshine attack bonus and feats.

Why is this?

Quote from: GnomeWorks;321140Why is this?

In GURPS, it was explicit in 1st edition's designers notes that a point represented 250 hours of learning time, NOT a balance factor. Magic was therefore based upon learning times, not power level; a limited form of functional balance was established by the prerequisites, but fundamentally, a 75pt wizard was  combat-equivalent to a 100pt warrior with a Longbow and longsword. (And a 250pt wizard was superior to a 250 to 350 point superhero, as well...)

In Champions, most characters spent only 20-40 points on skills; the same range as talented normals... but combat capability was a 3rd subsystem from both powers and skills. A 100 point "elite normal" in Champions can be a frightfully effective brick, but a guy with 10 points of flight, a 2d6 RKA (30ap; buy it with a OAF, and cut it to 10 pts), and 20 rPD and 60 PD can soak up AK47 fire all day long. Champions is fairly well balanced, tho', and since normal weapons are able to be assessed point costs as powers, it can be VERY balanced. (An AK47, 2d6 RKA, autofire, Real Weapon, OAF, about 10 points.)