Celebrim, you asserted that Insight Archery was broken because it encouraged Dex-dumping.
No, I asserted that things that encourage multiple stat dependency are less broken than things that encourage single stat dependency. I asserted that on that principle, I probably wouldn't allow 'Insight Archery' into my game written as it is.
MY thesis is that the points you made about AC and Initiative are precisely what balances the feat.
My statement, "Dumping dex is particularly hard because its already a God Stat influencing to hit, AC, reflex saves, initiative, and many skills.", was an admission that of all the stats, Dexterity probably had the most pervasive effect, and so if any ability swapping was to occur it would probably be best from dexterity to something else (as opposed to the other way around). For example, you would more easily get away with 'missile attacks depend on intelligence rather than dexterity' than you would 'skill points depend on dexterity rather than intelligence'.
It is not a refutation of my point to bring up evidence that could be used against it. It just shows that I've considered the implications of what I'm saying.
Even though the swap from Dexterity to Intelligence is one of the more inoffensive in core because Dexterity is so heavily loaded and Intelligence relatively impoverished, and even though the particular swap of 'missile weapon 'to hit'' is one of the more inoffensive in core because in core no melee class depends strongly on intelligence, I still don't prefer this version.
I think the worry I have here ought to be obvious in context. I'm not worried about how the feat works in the context of some limited set of things I happened to have in mind or on hand, but in terms of what else might be in existance that I haven't thought of or which is yet to be created. That is, I'm worried about as yet unspecified interactions.
This mindset comes to me by way of WotC's other big game - Magic the Gathering (CCG). You learn to look out for mechanics that are inherently broken - cost reducers, action buyers, potential recursion, etc. - which, while they might not be breakable with the set of cards currently in existance, might become breakable in the context of some future hypothetical card interaction. Ability swappers that create single stat dependency are one of things I look out for in D&D as low hanging fruit. Partly this is a desire not to break the game. Partly this is also a desire to encourage multistat dependency because I feel mechanically one dimensional characters tend to be one dimensional in other ways as well, although that is admittedly an aesthetic bias on my part.
I'm hardly an expert in 3.5 charop, since 3.5 charop is one of the things I hate about 3.5, but my suspicion is that this is more likely to end up in the tool bag of a class like Factotum or Exemplar than anything in core. My concern here would be that there is a class out there with an ability like, "Add your Int bonus to the attack roll", that then stacks the Insightful Archery feat on top of that to gain twice it's Int bonus to ranged attack rolls, and then finds something like the Easy Peezy Archery bonus on top of that to gain three times its Int bonus to the attack rolls and suddenly you have something that at 5th level has like a +29 bonus to hit to bows despite having a Dex 8. And then heaven help you if someone out there decided to create a 'Power Attack' type feat for arrows, or there turns out to be prestige class out there that lets you add Int to you ranged attack bonus a third or fourth time. And suddenly you have a character build out there that has made Intelligence into even more of god stat than Dex already is, because two or three different authors all separately came to the conclusion that swapping intelligence for something dexterity did was ok because dexterity already had so much going for it.
UPDATE: Ok, I'm not an expert on 3.5 charop, but it's usually pretty easy to find someone that is. Here is the product of a little googling:
The Factotum Handbook. Notice how many of the ideas in the thread consist of "Use factotum's abiltiy to add Int to some roll, together with this feat that lets you add your Int bonus to some roll, together with this PrC that let's you add your Int bonus to some roll, together with this magic item that let's you add your Int bonus to some roll..." These are the dangers of ability swapping and mechanical variation for its own sake. I'm sure there is a Factotum + Many Shot build out there somewhere that breaks even harder with this feat in play.
And your point is well-argued, even if (I think) the nonstackability of same-source bonuses protects you from the situations you envision. Well done!
