D&D (2024) 75 Feats -- not nearly enough

[Horwath]

Eldritch Adept. Especially with the invocations getting a glow-up.

maybe,
but most invocations are not worth half a feat.
maybe if you limit the feat invocation to 1st level only invocations and that it cannot be retrainable, it would fall into half feat territory.

 

[Remathilis]

117 FEATS INCLUDING THIRD PARTY
108 WOTC FEATS
88 AL LEGAL
108 -75 = 33 feats which did not make the cut but will be coming out in 2026.

Maybe. Keep in mind certain feats are setting specific (such as Aberrant dragon mark or knight of the crown) and a few retired (snirfneblin magic).

 

[Maxperson]

not really a fan of tier3&4 exclusive feats.

Scaling feats feel better, Like extra HPs or Temp HP based on level or power based on prof bonus.

I disagree and here is why. I want there to be an amazing and strong feat for me to take, but be gated at 15th level or something. To me it diminishes that strong feat for there to be a putzy version that doesn't really make sense to have, just so that the feat can scale up.

The best thing would be to have both. Some feats scale. Some are gated by level/tier. Everyone gets something that they want. Except for the folks who don't like feats. Plththththththhthth!

 

[ezo]

some logic.

you were saying that fighters with feats are more generic than fighters withot feats.

Yes, perfectly logical.

As to the bolded section, I never said anything of the sort. The fact you seem to believe that I did shows how illogical your understanding is. What I said was:

"Seriously though, feats are too unbalanced, a few handful get taken more often than all the others put together IME." Nothing about fighters in that sentence at all.

these aren't less generic fighters though, they're barbs, monks, paladins, rangers and rogues.

they all fight, ergo they are fighters.

the current fighter already gets all of these things though, and they haven't made them interesting, you're pointing at things we already have as if we're oblivious morons who haven't realised they exist.

No, I'm pointing at things that allow you to differeniate your fighter from your neighbor's fighter. Neither is generic by any stretch of imagination unless you make it so--and believe it to be so.

how i play my character doesn't give them new mechanical features though, this is just the terrible 'roleplay has infinite potential' argument, well, the other classes have infinite roleplay potential AND cool mechanical features to use! give the fighter cool mechanical feature too, through feats or otherwise.

It isn't a terrible argument at all--it is a perfectly valid argument. Fighters have been in D&D since the beginning "the Fighting-Man" or whatever, and a character is "generic" only if you choose to view it that way. I've probably played over 100 fighters in AD&D, 2E, 3E, and 5E. None of them ever felt generic to any other.

Fighters have features just as other classes do. Personally, action surge is IMO one of the most powerful features in the game. Subclasses all have features as well. Each class pretty much gets one "good" feature for the core, with a couple exceptions (Rogue and Monk IMO).

 

[jasper]

Maybe. Keep in mind certain feats are setting specific (such as Aberrant dragon mark or knight of the crown) and a few retired (snirfneblin magic).

Do you want the List?

 

[jasper]

you know what is even more generic?

fighters without feats.

Let's see:
max out STR or DEX as primary
max out CON
max out WIS as most important save after.

wow, so much variety...

Do you know they advertise the game as simple. Adding in feats is not simple. Especially with the hint they may include Graze on a new weapon column. Where a miss is actually a hit.
How about don't max out anything? That would not be generic.

 

[jasper]

If you want more control over your game, AL is probably not the best place for you.

Yes But I accepted it, otherwise it is back to 7 players, 6 DMs and one module completed every year.

 

[jasper]

Well, I hope you'll find the new feats to be better. My IRL group barely uses feats, (not because we outlaw them, but because we usually go for ASIs.) but I've seen the issues you had. So far the playtest feats seem both more interesting and less unbalanced. We'll see.

Thanks,
I knew WOTC would include feats being not optional when they gave Skill, tough, and Magic Initiate as free feats in AL.
Prediction. FEATS WILL NOT BE OPTIONAL IN 2024 PHB.
If I am wrong I will post a picture of me drinking coffee.
YEA! I mostly caught up. And got to go again. See you.

 

[Horwath]

I disagree and here is why. I want there to be an amazing and strong feat for me to take, but be gated at 15th level or something. To me it diminishes that strong feat for there to be a putzy version that doesn't really make sense to have, just so that the feat can scale up.

The best thing would be to have both. Some feats scale. Some are gated by level/tier. Everyone gets something that they want. Except for the folks who don't like feats. Plththththththhthth!

problem is, 1% of people play 15+ level.

do I want ti spend resources balancing those feats?

No.

it's enough to have 8th and 9th level spell to balance.
and high level preselected class features.

would it be nice to have those feats? yes.
realistic? no.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Prediction. FEATS WILL NOT BE OPTIONAL IN 2024 PHB.

I'm sure they're going to still say they are to appease the old school crowd even if designing around it hinders the game in terms of design philosophy (eg, barely having one)