Talk:Child of War (5e Feat)

Oh, I didn't see this move and rework. I actually like that a lot. Needs a few tweaks, but I like that it's working with existing mechanics to make you feel extra strong or nimble. --Carcabob (talk) 09:22, 20 December 2017 (MST)

Glad you liked it. I went with what I thought the Primary Contributor was going for and I feel it worked out well. Feel free to tell me what other little tweaks you think it needs. --Dark Dragon (talk) 09:31, 20 December 2017 (MST)

Child of Ares Talk Page

I had clicked the Talk Page to move, but got an error during loading/saving :/

Perhaps a DM doesn't want to raise the cap on all abilities. A feat allowing one ability to be higher cap should be fine. I'd reduce the ability increase to 1 otherwise this is a straight up better option than increasing an ability score by 1. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:03, 13 December 2017 (MST) --Carcabob (talk) 15:11, 14 December 2017 (MST)

Then the DM can increase the cap only for the abilities they want. It just doesn't make sense to have a feat do the same thing as an Ability Score Increase. That's just a modified Ability Score Increase. I don't think that sort of thing needs to be part of feats in the Homebrew Wiki.

As for reducing the increase to 1, that would mean the feat would be useless until you take the feat again. This violates the general principles of feats being immediately useful and avoiding feat chains. --Carcabob (talk) 13:37, 13 December 2017 (MST)

Aye, I hear ya. I feel that's sort of a scapegoat reason though to not include a feat/race/subclass on the site (then the DM can increase...)

From my goal, I merely wish to balance things. If more is added to this then it is too strong but my suggestion makes it useless. I couldn't see any other compromise than to delete the feat (which is your desire if I'm not mistake) or rework it into a different blessing. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 13:52, 13 December 2017 (MST)

That's about right. I just don't think any of it's iterations have really suited being a balanced, interesting feat. The name doesn't follow the usual naming conventions either. The abilities would be fine to have in a game, but feats are not the mechanic to introduce them. Either an Epic Boon or just a Variant Rule

"I am a" child of ares. Seems good to me :p but I added the delete stub. I am not in the business of creating feats :) which is basically where this is at, create or delete. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 10:05, 14 December 2017 (MST)

Fair point. I think I just felt it was oddly specific, named after the Greek god. Feats are supposed to be more general and encompassing. Anyway, thanks for your help! --Carcabob (talk) 15:11, 14 December 2017 (MST)

Perhaps the name could be changed to "Child or War"? As for the the argument of the DM just raising the stat cap, most aren't going to do that. The feat seems fine to me as is. It's not overpowered at all and in my opinion it appears to follow the theme of feats being immediately gratifying for the player. Perhaps a little bit of flavor text could be added as well?

Child of War is a good idea to keep things neutral. Per discussion above though, adding extra benefits on top of getting +2 to an ability makes this the clear choice over an ASI. The increase needs to be +1. At which point, increase the max to 22 might be moot. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 08:14, 20 December 2017 (MST)

Ok, how bout a compromise? Make the increase a +1, but just loose the to a max. The flavor of the feat is that you train beyond normal limits, so how about just have it grant a static increase similar to the ability manuals in the DMG? If that still feels unbalanced then I can ad a level prereq so that this can't be take at level 1 or 4 and be super game breaking.

Someone moved the page to "Child of War" and gave it a rework (Though didn't move this talk page with it). I actually like the rework a lot. It works within existing mechanics while still making you feel really strong or nimble.--Carcabob (talk) 09:25, 20 December 2017 (MST)

I rewrote it again. I'm not fond of things that say "you get skill proficiency X and if you already have it you double your proficiency". Just go ahead and give them the proficiency and the expertise. You've also got to qualify that the double proficiency is instead of normal proficiency, to prevent stacking doubles. Finally, I simplified the third benefit and made it apply to a single check so that it all balances out. Marasmusine (talk) 07:16, 27 May 2019 (MDT)