Talk:Darksider (3.5e Feat)

Ratings

	Aeturo likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	Didn't see the original the others are talking about, besides in the differences page between this and the last edit I checked out, but this version is actually very interesting. I like the flavor and most of the effects, such as taking my barbarian's glaring weakness of being possessed and being used against the party.

	Eiji-kun likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	I found this interesting. The benefits balanced by literally having the threat of death or serious harm, just the kind of psychotic rage break power I like.

Original feat was called Inner Demon.

Do you have permission to post that feat here? Surgo 11:53, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

No, which is (partially) why I didn't; the feats are similar, but the only identical points are the basic premise (you have a demon, it makes you rage). Name, write-up, and details of how the feat works are all unique elements, I just thought it would be in bad taste not to credit the guy who came up with the idea. - Viatos 17:52, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

I see a few way to fix this. Maybe I could adopt it if the author would be willing? --Leziad 06:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I left a message on the author's talk when I tagged this with WC. If they don't respond and you want to make an official request, we can set you up with the 2 week comment period and see what happens Leziad. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 20:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Tarkisflux - the Aberrant and Devil-Touched feat types are functionally similar to Draconic or Abyssal Heritor feats, found in Lords of Madness and Fiendish Codex (I or II, whichever does devils and Hellbred). That said, yes, this is bad design; I've come a bit farther now and it's a little painful to look at it, frankly. If Leziad still wants it, it's his for the remaking. - Viatos 16:24, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Adoption

After all the time that happened between my request and eventual adoption I kind of lost my original idea. In any case, it would be fun if this feat was re-rated. --Leziad 10:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Updated Rating

Blocked Rating

MisterSinister is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.

This rating refers to a substantially different version of the article, or concerns mentioned in it have already been addressed.While this isn't the eyeball-rending atrocity it used to be, it's still fiddly, annoying and kinda underwhelming for what should be an awesome concept. Bonus turd points for using vague duration terminology also. I mean... I can't say I dislike this, but liking it is certainly not happening in a hurry.

Blocked Rating	Aarnott dislikes this article and rated it 1 of 4.
	This rating refers to a substantially different version of the article, or concerns mentioned in it have already been addressed.The circumstantial nature of both parts of the feat just don't seem useful enough to me. I see this feat as a little bit better than Iron Will.