I'd just like to say FC is awesome

[The_Grand_User]

I certainlyknew FC was looking like a great game when I got it, and I and my players have certainly had fun while we've played it. But just today I happened to get The Genius Guide to Horrifically Overpowered Feats for Pathfinder, thinking it'd be way over the top, but perhaps having something interesting anyway.

But when I actually started looking through it I thought "Hmm, FC has that, oh, and that, does that better, don't even need a feat for those two." Horrifically broken stuff... in Pathfinder. But in FC? Could fit right in and work well, and that's its beauty!

Some of the feats are equivelent to anything from FC feats, 1st level class features to class gamebreaks, back down to simple tricks or just assumed rules.

((ok, the Gestalt feat would be truely horrifcally overpowered regardless))

Great job, Crafty Guys

[Crafty_Pat]

Great job, Crafty Guys

 

[Sletchman]

I just looked at the preview and it's pretty funny.  They have several examples of 4 feat long chains to cover what FC does with 1 and it's "Horrifically Overpowered".  A couple of the legitimately good feats (Denied: Ignore any one thing, once per day) can be pulled off with just a prize or two (Cagey + Shield Block = Denied).

I've actually had conversations with D&D / Pathfinder converts about some feats and character options that they say are too overpowered (Sword and Knife chain are popular).  Half the time it ends with me just saying "yes, but every character option is overpowered, so it all shakes out balanced".

And yeah, I'll echo your sentiments Grand User - FC is great work and the Crafty guys should be proud of it.

[Theodoran]

I certainlyknew FC was looking like a great game when I got it, and I and my players have certainly had fun while we've played it. But just today I happened to get The Genius Guide to Horrifically Overpowered Feats for Pathfinder, thinking it'd be way over the top, but perhaps having something interesting anyway.

But when I actually started looking through it I thought "Hmm, FC has that, oh, and that, does that better, don't even need a feat for those two." Horrifically broken stuff... in Pathfinder. But in FC? Could fit right in and work well, and that's its beauty!

Some of the feats are equivelent to anything from FC feats, 1st level class features to class gamebreaks, back down to simple tricks or just assumed rules.

((ok, the Gestalt feat would be truely horrifcally overpowered regardless))

Great job, Crafty Guys

I completely agree... FC is a very good game. Thank you very much! 

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

According to one review on RPGnow a lot of the feats in there aren't really overpowered, and of those they are there are only a few that are horrifically overpowered.

I don't know whether it says something about Pathfinder vs FantasyCraft when something considered overpowered in Pathfinder actually isn't.

[Morgenstern]

In L5R they called it "The Matsu Effect" when a really quite manageable mechanic at first glance looks crazy-above-the-bar.

It helps substantially to have a game that assumes a multi-dimensional set of obstacles to success, so when something out-of-scale lets a player cry, "I am the god-king of all possible combat!" experienced GMs just raise a hand to their face to hide the evil smile taking root... and maybe snicker a little bit at the world of non-combat sausage about to come raining down.

[Harlequin]

I certainlyknew FC was looking like a great game when I got it, and I and my players have certainly had fun while we've played it. But just today I happened to get The Genius Guide to Horrifically Overpowered Feats for Pathfinder, thinking it'd be way over the top, but perhaps having something interesting anyway.

But when I actually started looking through it I thought "Hmm, FC has that, oh, and that, does that better, don't even need a feat for those two." Horrifically broken stuff... in Pathfinder. But in FC? Could fit right in and work well, and that's its beauty!

Some of the feats are equivelent to anything from FC feats, 1st level class features to class gamebreaks, back down to simple tricks or just assumed rules.

((ok, the Gestalt feat would be truely horrifcally overpowered regardless))

Great job, Crafty Guys

Yeah, FC is good like that.

[Dragoon-Darkfire]

One legit problem I had with 3.5 (and by extension Pathfinder even though I haven't played it) was that the feats actually never really seemed to IMPACT your character in any significant way and only really worked when they were there to enforce a class or racial ability. You couldn't, say, take a feat for knife-fighting and instantly be damn good at knife fighting. You'd just get a +2 with it or something.

FC had no such problem and what really did win me over was that character customization WORKED because feats actually did impact your character's strength a lot more. A courtier with greatsword basics feat was GOOD AT USING A GREATSWORD. Maybe not as good as, say, a soldier but he wouldn't feel gimped taking it.

Just my two cents.

[Bhurano]

As we started with FC a buddy fell immediately in love with the Captain. Strong leader, has a loyal retainer, buffs his buddies in combat and he had plans to go Paladin. In other RPG's mostly a devout follower of Stupid Lawful in FC the paladin gets a badass makeover.

So in his first round he decided to go captain with angelic legacy... and his henchmen was also a angelic being. Cue the moment that the burglar is in trouble and severely outnumbered... and the damn airborne support came to save the day. Just pure awesome.

The human Courtier who wouldn't fight, but had his Orc Bodyguard do the bloody things, while he cowed anyone through Intimidate or pulled other nasty social tricks. He had an airship to boot - of course it had style.

Also the Beastmaster in one of our rounds... the player decided to bring in two wargs... while he would stand behind and pelt attackers with arrows.

In our current round the bulky bear priest... who goes full nature's vengeance with his paths.

Especially the priest is, now that I've seen it in play, very carefully thought out and makes it easy peasy to show the magic system of FC for newcomers.

Goblins... just the goblins... two standing in roughly the same place and giving double trouble. All I need now is scaly lizard deathballs... called Kobolds.

The interlocking feats, that characters act in narrative as the do from a game mechanic point and the nearly impossibly to break system are what swayed me at last.

FC is just pure awesome.

EDIT: The best design decision was to dump Magic Items are needed to suceed. All the trouble it brought upon me. And it leads to the fact that Magic Items are something special which is just more cool to the awesome that FC is.

[Gilbetron]

One legit problem I had with 3.5 (and by extension Pathfinder even though I haven't played it) was that the feats actually never really seemed to IMPACT your character in any significant way and only really worked when they were there to enforce a class or racial ability. You couldn't, say, take a feat for knife-fighting and instantly be damn good at knife fighting. You'd just get a +2 with it or something.

FC had no such problem and what really did win me over was that character customization WORKED because feats actually did impact your character's strength a lot more. A courtier with greatsword basics feat was GOOD AT USING A GREATSWORD. Maybe not as good as, say, a soldier but he wouldn't feel gimped taking it.

Just one of the many great things about FC.  I've been running or playing it for the past 2 years and I still think it rocks ... actually, I may like it even better than ever.

Currently I'm playing a Knife-wielding Sage/Priest that worships a goddess of fate and fortune.  He starts with 7d4 action dice, which explode on 3 or 4, and get a +2 to boot.  And he can use them on other's rules - holy hell is he effective   But back to the knives - it is the first character I've *ever* played that felt like a knife fighter.  I've had several throughout the years, but the most that games systems ever really supported was "+ to hit and damage, more attacks per round".  It just never felt right - but "every knife in your possession is considered armed at all times" is *so* cool.

My wife is playing a spear-and-shield warrior ... *spear* and *shield*, and she's effective, but distinct.  That's so cool!

[Uncle Muppet]

Currently I'm playing a Knife-wielding Sage/Priest that worships a goddess of fate and fortune.  He starts with 7d4 action dice, which explode on 3 or 4, and get a +2 to boot.  And he can use them on other's rules - holy hell is he effective

As Gilbetron's GM, I can say yes, those action dice are effective.  And damn annoying. 

[Morgenstern]

Part of what makes the feat tree's work in Mastercraft is Alex's (as I recall) cunning proposal that tricks be limited to 1 per action. Thats a substantial change from their appearance in Spycraft 2.0 that really opened up the creative spaces so that feats could offer tricks that were individually powerful and cool - because as a designer you know that even if a character had 6 amazing tricks, he could only ever use them one at a time. More tricks is more options which IS more power, but its not the same kind of power as stacking bonuses. Similarly stances are fairly powerful... but they arent' cumulative. A character that has a stance F for one situation and stance G for another isn't secretly scheming to amass some super bonus from the fusion stance F-G.

Its also why straight bonuses are so rare. The stance from Sword Basics is amazingly good because it's a rare hard math bonus. Even a measly +1... that applies in every circumstance and stacking with every other character option you have... is dangerous territory A) because it may combine unpredictably and B) because it's naked mechanics and therefore laregly boring. The few that there are... Base Attack bonus gained from level and the +1 from specialization immediately comming to mind... are heavily couched in the terminology to evoke that you don't get a +1 because its mathematically good, you get a +1 because its the accumulated effect of in-game weeks and months of practice and expertise. There is a fairly blunt "story reason" for it beyond the obvious numerical utility.

[Catodon]

Also the variety of stance/feat/trick/etc. combinations means you can put some mechanical crunch behind that cool character idea but when you do so you miss out on other opportunities.

Currently, I am enjoying a bow using Lancer character. I had a fun back-story of a mounted elfin hunter I wanted to try. With a fast mount, high initiative, deadshot stance and practiced shot this guy is VERY good at hitting things with the bow. The mechanics  really support the character's backstory BUT if this guy gets cornered in a melee or a battle of witty repartee he's toast.