Do the points used to add an ATA to characters count towards the 10% feat rule, I'm not sure

Nope, because they are no longer Feats.

that's what I thought but I wasn't sure, thanks again

How many times has this question or a variation of it been asked this weekend? It seems that is gets asked 3-4 times a day.

Why do you ask this question?
You don't have to answer if you don't want to.
If it is something you don't want to read, just back out of the thread and move along.

Competing forces:

Some people want to help, so they pop into every thread.

Some people are lazy and post a new thread rather than bothering to use the search function.

That said, the search function on this site is pretty weak and ATA is too short a keyword to search for. My tag search of ATA revealed only this thread and another thread on the topic, but searching by tag is a relatively new concept.

BULLSEYE! "Lazy" hasn't a thing to do with it.

For you? Perhaps not.



But I've been told flat out before that someone was feeling too lazy to look something up (either on the forum or in the documents). To imply that your time is somehow more valuable than others and they should look things up for you is not a great way to ingratiate yourself.

QFT
Rep to you.

I'm not so sure about this, can you look up some proof to this for me?

Searched rules forum for "ata feat cap". An ATA Question was among the first few hits. Easy find.

I have no issue with the OP. I have no issue with those who post rather than search. I do agree that the search engine w have here is "less than" a search engine like google. That said, I guess I just have extraordinary luck when it comes to searching with it.

Posters do do that and it should be discouraged. In this case, though, SkrullThemeTeamer didn't say that and seemed to be asking a genuine question. Part of the problem with SkrullThemeTeamer searching for the answer first is that this site really does have a terrible search engine.

Showing again how bad the search engine is...that search included a thread about the Vampirism feat that had nothing to do with what we are searching for. It also included an unrelated thread about Warbound. And these were just the first two threads. My point of course being that this site has a bad search engine. It would be nice if it could be made more effective.

Honestly, it's becoming an 'epidemic' around here, I pop in and try to help out as much as possible with rules questions. Though I am not always right, I do my best.

But yes, I agree, it's sheer laziness. When I see a question asked, and there is the exact same question in another thread on the very first page of the Rules Of Combat Forums, I know that the person never bothered to do a search. I'll usually just direct the person to the other thread.

The search function here works just fine, but again, laziness. Try punching in different search phrases. I am willing to bet that most people (not all) that use the search function, punch in one (very specific) word or phrase, and when they don't find exactly what they are looking for, they give up For instance, I simply punched in 'alternate'. Not ATA, or feat, just 'alternate'. It returned the following threads, all on the first page of the search:

Alternate Team Abilities and 10% cap

New ATA Question

Alternate Team Ability Question

I'm sure I could (easily) find more if I simply changed my search parameters.

I also think that displaying results as posts.


On the other side of things, using an actual title instead of "Couple Questions" would help, too. (Not to mention that one thread with 5 questions on 3 different subjects doesn't do much to help other users' searches.)


But seriously, the lack of up-front searching does get irritating. I once saw a guy post a question which was already asked AND was the second non-sticky thread AND had a descriptive title.