I'm not saying every person chooses no feats for the same reason. I'm just saying that commonly the reasons given are superfluous or are made to repel certain play styles or people. This can be said for more than just feats of course could also be UA etc.
I use passive initiative with a size rule. Small creatures get +2 medium 0 and large -2 and every size after minus 1 progressively. Works out better and gives smaller creatures a chance.
So the consensus is feats aren't really the issue its certain play styles. And by removing feats it makes it harder but not impossible to optimizethough its mostly done to repel certain players?
I've never been 20, hell I've never been a double digit. Seems like most games I've been in, they end it at 8-9 and make us re-roll new characters. Is this normal for most games?
I think DND rules in general induce a build type mentality. The moment you say "roll a character". You have to think about what role you want to play, and build towards it. Like I said in a previous post, remove feats and people will still optimize stats and classes/items.
I feel like...
Again, That's just a sleazy player. Maybe I'm lost here, are people who optimize builds, with DM discretion and respect towards the game that everyone agreed to play power gamers, or are people who want perfect munchkins regardless of how the DM and fellow players think and feel power gamers? I...
I feel like you are generalizing the term powergamer to much. Power Gaming/ers to me, are people who like to optimize their build in anyway. Maybe they power game towards social encounters, or out of combat abilities. And of course there are some who do combat focused builds. Just because they...
First post here! Just a question really, why do people care so much about feats leading to powergaming?
I just feel like good DM's know the have plenty of tools at their disposal to even the playing fields. Are they more worried that powergamers might outshine the roleplayer types with flavor...