D&D 5E [5e] Feats, what gives?

[Jake Hamilton]

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 builds? I feel like if you know you're playing for flavor, you shouldn't expect to be good in certain situations. I don't know, am I being to lackadaisical?

 

[iserith]

I include feats in some campaigns and adventures and not others for the same reason I use 8-hour short rests or variant encumbrance rules in some games and not others - because the inclusion (or not) of some options supports the play experience I'm trying to create in that particular game.

My choice has nothing to do with fears of "powergaming" because, as you more or less say, I have infinite dragons at my disposal and my expectation in any edition of D&D is that I have to adjust difficulty to fit the game and the players' skill level.

A player hogging the spotlight is somewhat of a concern, but again, that's something the DM also controls by ensuring that the content being presented has equality of opportunity for each player to step up and shine.

 

[Jake Hamilton]

Can you give an example of:

I include feats in some campaigns and adventures and not others for the same reason I use 8-hour short rests or variant encumbrance rules in some games and not others - because the inclusion (or not) of some options supports the play experience I'm trying to create in that particular game.

Just wondering how it helps with setting/scenarios?

 

[Barolo]

It depends on gaming styles. In some tables, feats such as actor or keen mind might have more impact than GWM or CE, as they can be cleverly used to avoid or overcome situations that could have been deadly if approached by the combat route. In some other tables, a lot of improvised actions might be in play, which could benefit from straightforward pluses provided by ABIs, which in turn become highly valued, and feats fall as secondary.

The thing is, as inclusive as 5e tries to be, it is not really possible to cater for all possible gaming styles without some rules tweaking, as some of those styles actually pursuit opposed goals regarding some aspects of the game. So, generally speaking, non-essential rules can be considered optional, and several rules variants are presented in the DMG, hopefully enabling whatever gaming preference your table has.

Can you give an example of:

I include feats in some campaigns and adventures and not others for the same reason I use 8-hour short rests or variant encumbrance rules in some games and not others - because the inclusion (or not) of some options supports the play experience I'm trying to create in that particular game.

Just wondering how it helps with setting/scenarios?

Regarding rests, if a game is a dungeon crawl, with short time between encounters, and the need to clean up a whole section within one day, 8 hour long rests and 1 hour short rests might prove adequate to balance out resources between classes. But if the game will be mostly an outdoors exploration trip, with very long periods between encounters, maybe using 8 hours short rests and long rests available depending on accommodations (like an cozy inn to comfortably and properly rest) might prove a more adequate fit.

 

[jasper]

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 builds? I feel like if you know you're playing for flavor, you shouldn't expect to be good in certain situations. I don't know, am I being to lackadaisical?

It totally depends on the dm and group. If the group is a majority PGs or have no problems with PGs, and the DM is okay with PGs; then the DM can up scale combat encounters.
In a mixed group or DM with has problems with PGs, then up scaling the combat encounters will hurt the roleplayer flavor builds.
The big fight comes to the following.
Some power gamers think if you don't power game then you having badwrongfun. Some power gamers demand all dms must allow PGs at their table.
Some DMs hate power gamers but will allow pgs to sit at their table. Then do things to tick off pgs.
Some DMS dislike power gamers and will ban pgs from their table. This ticks off PGS who think the DMs are their slaves.
I dislike power gamers and will not allow them in my homebrew. I just tired of the drama they bring to my table. However I will allow power gamers to play at my AL table because, in which every column they are pging in, they will be weak elsewhere.

 

[iserith]

Can you give an example of:

Just wondering how it helps with setting/scenarios?

Sure. When I want the theme of the game to be a bit more high concept (like "PCs as medieval superheroes") or more tactical (e.g. a game with a backdrop of endless war), I include feats so the players can take those options to make their characters more precisely fit those concepts.

In my upcoming campaign, feats will be gated behind joining organizations because I want to play up organizations and factions in that game. You might therefore see something like a Guild of the Arrow where the benefits of joining include access to the Sharpshooter feat. There will therefore be an incentive to join that guild.

 

[Jake Hamilton]

It totally depends on the dm and group. If the group is a majority PGs or have no problems with PGs, and the DM is okay with PGs; then the DM can up scale combat encounters.
In a mixed group or DM with has problems with PGs, then up scaling the combat encounters will hurt the roleplayer flavor builds.
The big fight comes to the following.
Some power gamers think if you don't power game then you having badwrongfun. Some power gamers demand all dms must allow PGs at their table.
Some DMs hate power gamers but will allow pgs to sit at their table. Then do things to tick off pgs.
Some DMS dislike power gamers and will ban pgs from their table. This ticks off PGS who think the DMs are their slaves.
I dislike power gamers and will not allow them in my homebrew. I just tired of the drama they bring to my table. However I will allow power gamers to play at my AL table because, in which every column they are pging in, they will be weak elsewhere.

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 optimize, does not mean they think the DM is their slave, or that the game has to be a certain way. As a DM your job above all else to have fun, and make sure your players do as well without catering to one type of player. If anyone intentionally gets in the way of that, it should be discussed and they should either act appropriately or be politely removed. Being a powergamer does not auto-justify removal I think. If you have a session 0 and the players discuss what they want and you find a compromise and there is still problems, it's not a power gamer's fault or role player's fault, it's a PERSON's fault. It seems like you've just encountered people. I don't think anyone should be ostracized for their play style.

 

[Blue]

First post here! Just a question really, why do people care so much about feats leading to powergaming?

Because if some players powergame and others don't it makes it a lot harder to make all characters get abotu the same amount of spotlight time during encounters.

I can calibrate the difficulty of encounters to any group. But that doesn't mean that I can make all characters feel equally useful every encounter if some are much more optimized.

 

[Tony Vargas]

First post here! Just a question really, why do people care so much about feats leading to powergaming?

We remember 3.x, for one thing.

But, another is that it's easy to blame problems on including an optional rule or deviating from a guideline.

 

[ccs]

I don't mind powergamers. After all, I'm the DM. You can't win an arms race against me.

Nor do I mind mixed groups of PG & non-PG.

1) I can just dial up the difficulty of encounters piecemeal. Our PGing, cheating paladin has discovered this.... Many encounters are designed to be 2/3 difficult for most of the party & 1/3 extra hard for him. Funny how that works out. It's like the gods have noticed he's the statical anomaly. (seriously, the player almost never, whatever his lv or stats, reports a # that doesn't work out to 17+mods. So what he fights has been "adjusted" accordingly. I can do that you know, seeing as I'm the DM. He has fun, the rest of the group has fun {and is in on the adjustment plan}, & we don't have to have a discussion of cheating.)

2) you'll run into a variety of encounters in my games. You can't PG all of them (unless your my cheater I mentioned above).
Nor can you hog all of the spotlight - because I'm the one who decides where to shine it & for how long.