Talk:3.5e Scaling Feats

Breadcrumb
Was it changed? I don't see the disclaimer about these being more powerful than other feats anymore. --Ghostwheel 01:47, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It was removed, as was the note on the article balance page and the note on the scaling feat page. After discussion the consensus was that a different balance guideline wasn't something people wanted to do. They wanted them separated still, for a reason that's not entirely clear to me, but they're subject to the same balance guidelines as every other feat. In short, I lost the round, and it's back to business as usual (mostly). - Tarkisflux Talk 02:57, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If this is the case, then they should be evaluated as a package rather than as a singular scaling feat, for the same argument I made in IRC, though I'll repeat it here if anyone else is interested (casual, dumb, lowest derivative user, etc). If we don't have a disclaimer, it needs to be evaluated just like any other feat rather than on its own balance scale. --Ghostwheel 05:44, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, that was the consensus view - evaluate as a package just like every other feat. I'm pretty sure that's what not having a different balance guideline means. Feel free to start balance arguments over whichever ones you want on their talk pages, change yours to what you think they are so we can argue about them on their talk pages, whatever. - Tarkisflux Talk 06:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't want to go through every one of them and start two-dozen debates... how opposed would you be to bumping up the effective balance level of all of them (with a cap of VH of course) for a start? I think that would give us a rough estimate, and we can go on from there on specifics. --Ghostwheel 07:03, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If you want to have a general discussion that it would be appropriate to boost all of them, this would be an appropriate place to start lining up evidence I suppose. But without that evidence and some sort of consensus that it supports the position, I'm extremely opposed to the idea. Most of them were balanced to the "like any other feat" standard in the beginning, since you did most of the initial tagging, and I don't see what has changed since then. Spot fixes seems more appropriate as a result I think. There are a couple that I argued about dropping recently, and those could go up probably. Leziad's thing is certainly substantially better than H in the current context, for example, but there will likely be discussion on any of your fluff feat if they went up. The 1 that I linked earlier Surgo agreed was M, as were Aarnott's similar scaling ones. - Tarkisflux Talk 07:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Lists
Why don't my feats here appear in my wikicode lists? --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:20, 14 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure. Do you mean the lists on your user page? Far as I can tell, all of your feats that are listed here are also on your user page. Do you have a particular feat as an example of one that's not showing up? - Tarkisflux Talk 23:45, 14 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Edit - nevermind. Since these are in a different category, that category needed to be added to the search terms. Havvy added them already (thanks Hav). - Tarkisflux Talk 23:47, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Scaling feat preload?
I'm pretty sure one exists. Where is it? --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)