Discussing 4e Subsystems: Feats

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm not completely convinced that the 4E designers got the intersection of feats, multi-classing, and paragon paths in the optimal spot, but I can't seem to pin down exactly where I think they missed it.

I do disagree with the idea of packaging a lot of smaller bonuses into a single feat was a design boon in 3.*. Yeah, it made a lot more combinations possible, which is great for people wanting to write a lot of pages on essentially the same feat concept, but not so hot for the players of the game. It's much easier to pick out feats without having to look through all that chaff. Now, maybe they could have made the shorter list more interesting by including variations within a feat, so that each feat was more applicable to a wider range of characters.

 

[RefinedBean]

Well, I love 4E, but feats are the one thing I have issue with.

1. As Stalker0 says, there aren't enough of them to really feel like you have a plethora of options. While he/she goes on to say that splat books and online supplements can fix that, I'm not so sure. Will the feats in Martial Power apply to PHB classes as well as the Martial Power variants? If so, phew! If not, we run into the problem that certain race/class combos have, for the most part, only a select number of feats that show in-game mechanical (and even flavorful) benefit.

2. Feats don't seem like...well, FEATS to me. I don't have a problem with what they do; I think they work very well in 4E. But for the most part, it doesn't seem like they give you anything crazy-fun or game-changing to do. This is probably due to the three-action-system of 4E...but would it be hard to have something like Spring Attack in there?

3. Multiclass feats as "super feats": Agreed, and see no problem with it. If you're going to have your character multiclass, you should get some benefit from it other than power-swapping, and these feats handle it in spades. In my opinion.

 

[Shroomy]

While I agree that currently there are not enough feats, especially at the paragon and epic tiers, I think the drought will rapidly come to an end (Dragon has actually added quite a few feats to the mix). I'm also not worried about feats becoming too trivial, situational (of course, some feats, especially those integrated with a new subsystem or campaign variant, will be very situational), weak, or stale, because the "small bonus" can be applied to so many things and in so many different ways. I think that the recent Gladiator article in Dragon is a good signpost in this regard, as it presents what we would think of as traditional feats, feats that directly modify existing class powers (power by power), and new uses for the multi-class feat system. How about feats that add new weapon property keywords to existing weapons? Feats that add new powers (such as the channel divinity feats)? A plethora of new racial feats (see the genasi, drow, gnoll, and warforged articles)?

 

[mattdm]

I disagree - it is clumsy design. Anyone attempting to use the standard array is pretty hosed if they are a wizard (except for burning blizzard which requires Int + something).

I think the main problem is that the standard array isn't that great compared to several other point buy options.

It is a fine design to require Cha for spell focus and other ability scores for certain specific things - but a generic power damage bonus? Either treat weapons the same way as powers, or powers the same way as weapons. It is the only way that makes sense.

It does seem like weapon focus doesn't need to be there. It's a very dull feat with a lot of power.

 

[The Little Raven]

Will the feats in Martial Power apply to PHB classes as well as the Martial Power variants?

Well, as Martial Power is billed as a book expanding options for the Martial classes found in the PHB, the answer is obviously yes.

But for the most part, it doesn't seem like they give you anything crazy-fun or game-changing to do.

Because that's not what they're supposed to do. Powers fill that spot. Feats just give you small improvements to what you can do.

 

[Cadfan]

Taken in conjunction with the fact that every class has a 'secondary ability' which affects various powers except for the wizard, I can't shake the feeling that wizards were developed by someone else who wasn't quite on the same page as everyone else on the development team

I do agree with this, sort of.

It would be an entirely valid, and indeed quite cool, system if the wizard were set up so that, depending on what you choose for your secondary and tertiary ability scores, you opened up different chains or collections of feats that would let you customize your character in different ways.

So... its something that could be very cool, and might lend some flavor and structure to what is otherwise, in my opinion, the crappiest designed class in 4e.

Unfortunately, at the moment, we don't have that structure. But maybe someday we will? That's about the only good thing I can say for it. My personal suspicion is that we DID have that structure, and then it got murdered by people on the internet.

As for your comment that the wizard doesn't work well with the standard array, that was just silly. Sorry. It works just fine on a standard array. 16 in Int, 14 in your secondary, 13 in whatever else you might care about for feat reasons, 12 in anything else you might care about for feat reasons, particularly if it only has to be a 13 at the paragon tier.

 

[Gothmog]

Well, I love 4E, but feats are the one thing I have issue with.

1. As Stalker0 says, there aren't enough of them to really feel like you have a plethora of options. While he/she goes on to say that splat books and online supplements can fix that, I'm not so sure. Will the feats in Martial Power apply to PHB classes as well as the Martial Power variants? If so, phew! If not, we run into the problem that certain race/class combos have, for the most part, only a select number of feats that show in-game mechanical (and even flavorful) benefit.

2. Feats don't seem like...well, FEATS to me. I don't have a problem with what they do; I think they work very well in 4E. But for the most part, it doesn't seem like they give you anything crazy-fun or game-changing to do. This is probably due to the three-action-system of 4E...but would it be hard to have something like Spring Attack in there?

3. Multiclass feats as "super feats": Agreed, and see no problem with it. If you're going to have your character multiclass, you should get some benefit from it other than power-swapping, and these feats handle it in spades. In my opinion.

I'm going to respond to your post, not because I disagree with it, but because I have thought similar things.

#1 Agreed- more feats are needed, especially in regards to racial and class-specific feats. Some more weapon-style and fighting feats would be great too, like we saw in the recent Dragon gladiator article. Right now paragon and epic feats are in short supply as well, but more feats in general are needed. I'd LOVE to see more racial and class specific paragon and epic feats as well.

#2 Don't think of 4e feats as the same type of thing as 3e feats. The game-changing exception-based abilities are powers now, and every class gets them. Feats are things that now change the way the character works slightly, usually by providing a passive bonus that doesn't have to be activated (the exceptions being Power Attack and Divine Channeling feats). Once I realized this, I liked 4e feats MUCH more than 3e feats. Your example of Spring Attack would be better modeled on a power, probably available to Rangers and Rogues.

#3 Agreed here too- multiclassing feats are awesome, and the best way I've seen to handle multiclassing in any edition of D&D. WotC got multiclassing right finally.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

My first reaction to 4e feats was that they were unnecessary now that we had powers. To some extent, I still think they might be a vestige of 3e that is no longer needed.

But there are some uses for them. The racial feats are effective, as others have said. And the idea of a multiclass super feat is decent. I think there should be a more thorough, meatier multiclass option too, but this is decent for what it is.

In some ways, 4e feats are more like 3e skills than 3e feats. They're not going to be the huge exception-based advantages in combat that 3e feats were (those are powers now), but they serve to customize characters and provide other, small bonuses. I see several problems with them - there's not enough, and to some extent there's not enough game content, including feats, for non-combat encounters - but overall I suppose they still have their place. Another problem though is that they do make teaching the game that much longer.