Feat Points

[Sylrae]

Feat Points:

Instead of getting feats at set levels, the character gains feat points at each level, which may be spent any time. Thus, a player will get a larger number of weaker feats for the cost of a single powerful feat.

The idea, is that since some feats are much more worth while than others. So to compensate, all feats are given costs.

Feats such as Acrobatic, Alertness, etc, will have a low cost such as 2, maybe 3, whereas a much more powerful feat such as Leadership would cost the regular cost of a feat, which is six points. The reason for scaling regula feats up to 6, is that that wayyou get the same number of those feats as the phb says with a gain rate of 2 fp/level, and you gain the same amount as in pathfinder for 3 fp/level.

Thus, you go through, and rate all of the available feats, according to how powerful the feat is.

Individual weapon proficiencies will have a low cost (2-3)<-maybe 3 for exotic, 2 martial, 1 simple.
armor proficiencies would be worth 4-5.
toughness (phb version of +3 hp) is worth less than 1. its useless.
- the NWN version of toughness (+1 hp per level, retroactive) is worth 4

If someone really wanted to they could apply class abilities to this concept for more modular classes that dont come as pre-specialized as the do now. it would likely work great with the generic classes variant. kindof a build your own classs idea.

Then what remains is a total list of what feats are going to be available and their costs.

Costing the phb 3.5 feats out should be done now as a starting point. keep in mind the number of prereqs, and their required costs of the parent feat, when assigning new costs for the child feat. For example, great cleave is worth more than a 6, but because it requires cleave, which would be worth maybe 5 or 6, its really not worth all those extra above 6, because they essentially already paid for some of it.

Here is a list of the regular feats in the PHB.I assigned preliminary costs to some of them. suggestions are welcome.



Acrobatic 2
Agile 2
Alertness 2
Animal Affinity 2
Armor Prof (Light) 4/5
Armor Prof (Medium) 5/5
Armor Prof (Heavy) 6/5
Athletic 2
Augment Summoning
Blind Fight
Combat Casting
Combat Expertise
Improved Disarm
Improved Feint
Improved Feint
Improved Trip
Whirlwind Attack
Combat Reflexes
Deceitful 2
Deft Hands 2
Diligent 2
Dodge
Mobility
Spring Attack
Endurance
Die Hard
Eschew Materials
Extra Turning
Great Fortitude
Improved Counterspell
Improved Critical
Improved initiative
Improved Turning
Improved Unarmed Strike
Improved Grapple
Deflect Arrows
Snatch Arrows
Stunning Fist
Investigator 2
Iron Will
Leadership
Lightning Reflexes
Magical Aptitude 2
Mounted Combat
Mounted Archery
Ride-By-Attack
Spirited Charge
Trample
Natural Spell 6+ > if it or wild shape are included at all.
Negotiator 2
Nimble Fingers 2
Persuasive 2
Point Blank Shot
Far Shot
Precise Shot
Improved Precise Shot
Rapid Shot
Manyshot
Shot on the Run
Power Attack
Cleave
Great Cleave
Improved bull Rush
Improved Overrun
Improved Sunder
Quick Draw
Rapid Reload
Run
Self-Sufficient 3
Shield Proficiency
Improved Shield Bash
Tower Shield Proficiency
Skill Focus
Spell Focus
Greater Spell Focus
Spell Mastery
Spell Penetration
Greater spell Penetration
Stealthy
Toughness
Track
Two-Weapon Fighting
Two-Weapon Defense
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
Greater Two-Weapon fighting
Weapon Finesse
Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialization
Greater Weapon Focus
Greater Weapon Specialization
Weapon Proficiency, Exotic 3/3
Weapon Proficiency, Martial 3/2
Weapon Proficiency, Simple 2/1

Suggestions/Comments?

 

[Kerrick]

It's not a bad idea, just after thinking about it for a few minutes. You can buy a bunch of piddly little feats, or wait, store up points, and get a couple better ones - it's not dependent on levels.

The main problem I can see is that you could really use some kind of guidelines for rating feats - that way all the feats would be more or less uniformly rated, and feats from outside sources could be added with little or no trouble. I'd suggest checking out the Netbook of Feats for some information on rating feats; they've got all the ones from the SRD, plus a few hundred custom feats, all rated by several judges on five different criteria (explained waaay down at the bottom).

As far as assigning ratings: Any feat that has prereqs has one or more of the following: stats, skills, feats, BAB, miscellaneous (character level, class ability, alignment, spellcasting ability, etc.).

All you do is assign points based on the "level" of each prereq: a stat score of 11-15, for example, would be +0.5; 17-21 = +0.75, etc. You'd really have to work from both ends - i.e., figuring values for each prereq, and judging a general value for the feat itself, then tweaking the values to fit.

So basically what you do is figure the feat's value sans prereqs, then reduce its overall value based on how many and what type of prereqs it has, assigning values to said prereqs (I know, you already kind of said that). Once you get some basic guidelines set, you can move to other feats and try the same thing with your values, adjusting as necessary.

What you really need first, though, is a "base feat" - something against which you can gauge other feats' power - or at least a "base effect" - something that you can point to and say "This is equal to x points". I'd use 3 points as the base value, not 6, because not all feats are equal - some are more valuable, and some are less, and this would give you some room to maneuver. Any feat that's worth more than 3 is not necessarily overpowered, just more powerful; anything that exceeds 6, however, is definitely overpowered and can be scaled back.

For a base feat... the +2 save feats are good, the +2/+2 skill feats, or Skill Focus (I'd say that any feat that adds a +2.5 to +3 total bonus to one or more skills is balanced, or worth 3 points).

Sorry for the long rambling post... I think this is a really interesting idea. I just spent the last several days adding 100+ feats to my site, so I've got feats on the brain. I like fiddlybits, too - this reminds me of UK's CR system. I got into a stream-of-consciousness type thing and couldn't stop.

 

[Hawken]

You could assign feats a value of 2, 4, or 6--for the sake of simplicity. Give "feat points" at each level, maybe 1 at 1st and every odd level, 2 at 2nd and every even level. This would give 30 feat points by 20 levels, and thus any combination of up to 15 weak (2 pt), 7.5 moderate (4 pt), or 5 strong (6 pt) feats. Classes could provide bonus feat points (such as Fighter, Wizard, etc.).

My reason for the progression I suggested is that the rate is still close to the same progression, taking 3 levels to get a moderate (4pt) feat, while a weaker feat could be purchased sooner and a more powerful one would have to be saved up for. If you give 2-3 per level for each level, then you are increasing the number of feats to 1/level or 1/2 levels instead of the norm, 1/3 levels.

For armor feats, I suggest making each feat 2 points. Honestly, they just aren't that important to be valued any higher. Spending 6 feat points would be more than enough just for proficiency with any armor or shields.

For weapons, I would suggest nearly the same as armor, except I would group the weapons together. Simple Weapon proficiency would cover ALL simple weapons and cost 2 pts. Martial would cover ALL martial weapons but cost 4 points. Exotic would cover ALL exotic weapons but cost 6 points. If your class gave you partial proficiency in a group (like Wizard or Rogue), you could pay half the normal cost to get complete proficiency in the group.

Some feats I would allow to be purchased without having to "buy" the prerequisites. Such as, Diehard. Endurance is such a pussy feat that the only way it gets bought is if it is a prereq for a prestige class or if someone just has to have the Diehard feat. I dislike having to "waste" feats just to get others. Just make Diehard a 4 pt feat and be done with it. Its not worth less because it can mean the difference between life and death, but its not so powerful to be worth 6 pts since its use is only under extremely limited circumstances (when you're dying or about to die).

I would make the Metamagic and Item Creation feats all 2 pt feats since you essentially have to be a spellcaster to get them. "Gateway feats", those that are prereqs for many other feats, like Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc., could be 4 pt feats while all of the feats in their chain are 2 pt feats.

An exception to this would be Two Weapon Fighting, which I would make a 6 pt feat because it is supposed to be so damned hard to do but just about every group has 1-3 twf types. Like the other 'gateway feats', I'd make their chained feats (Improved TWF, Two Weapon Defense, etc.) worth 4 pts each.

Toughness (PHB or Improved) should only be a 2pt feat. +3hp is the king of pussy feats and I'd give it away for free if someone had the courage to take it or ask me for it! The +1hp/lvl version is next to useless and is nothing that couldn't be made up for with a good die roll. +20hp at 20th you say? So what? At 20th, you're going to live or die regardless of 20 more or fewer hp--a spell is going to kill you right away or incapacitate you or a fighter's full attack will slaughter you whether you have 100hp or 120hp!

Dodge, Mobility and Spring Attack, I would make 2pts each. Same with the Shot on the Run and Mounted feats.

Weapon Focus, 2pts. Weapon Specialization 4 pts. Greater versions, add 2 more pts each over the originals.

 

[Kerrick]

You could assign feats a value of 2, 4, or 6--for the sake of simplicity. Give "feat points" at each level, maybe 1 at 1st and every odd level, 2 at 2nd and every even level. This would give 30 feat points by 20 levels, and thus any combination of up to 15 weak (2 pt), 7.5 moderate (4 pt), or 5 strong (6 pt) feats. Classes could provide bonus feat points (such as Fighter, Wizard, etc.).

I was going to suggest simply assigning values like 1, 2, or 4 (or 2/4/6) to each, then I got caught up in my ramble.

For armor feats, I suggest making each feat 2 points. Honestly, they just aren't that important to be valued any higher. Spending 6 feat points would be more than enough just for proficiency with any armor or shields.

I agree.

For weapons, I would suggest nearly the same as armor, except I would group the weapons together. Simple Weapon proficiency would cover ALL simple weapons and cost 2 pts. Martial would cover ALL martial weapons but cost 4 points. Exotic would cover ALL exotic weapons but cost 6 points. If your class gave you partial proficiency in a group (like Wizard or Rogue), you could pay half the normal cost to get complete proficiency in the group.

Interesting idea. Have you noticed that fighters get Martial Weapon Proficiency with ALL martial weapons, but the MWP feat adds only ONE?

Some feats I would allow to be purchased without having to "buy" the prerequisites. Such as, Diehard. Endurance is such a pussy feat that the only way it gets bought is if it is a prereq for a prestige class or if someone just has to have the Diehard feat. I dislike having to "waste" feats just to get others. Just make Diehard a 4 pt feat and be done with it. Its not worth less because it can mean the difference between life and death, but its not so powerful to be worth 6 pts since its use is only under extremely limited circumstances (when you're dying or about to die).

Diehard isn't all that valuable itself; I'd say value them both at 1-2, so you can buy them at the same time.

I would make the Metamagic and Item Creation feats all 2 pt feats since you essentially have to be a spellcaster to get them.

Same with fighter feats - anything that requires a specific class ability, or a level in a specific class, should be lower cost (see below).

"Gateway feats", those that are prereqs for many other feats, like Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc., could be 4 pt feats while all of the feats in their chain are 2 pt feats.

An exception to this would be Two Weapon Fighting, which I would make a 6 pt feat because it is supposed to be so damned hard to do but just about every group has 1-3 twf types. Like the other 'gateway feats', I'd make their chained feats (Improved TWF, Two Weapon Defense, etc.) worth 4 pts each.

Simple fix to that is add a BAB requirement. The upper-level ones have one; just boost TWF to BAB +6, ITWF to +11, GTWF to +16, and ditch Perfect TWF - that way it's harder to get the feats, AND you're limited to 3 attacks with the off hand. Hmm... I think I'll do that myself.

Toughness (PHB or Improved) should only be a 2pt feat. +3hp is the king of pussy feats and I'd give it away for free if someone had the courage to take it or ask me for it! The +1hp/lvl version is next to useless and is nothing that couldn't be made up for with a good die roll. +20hp at 20th you say? So what? At 20th, you're going to live or die regardless of 20 more or fewer hp--a spell is going to kill you right away or incapacitate you or a fighter's full attack will slaughter you whether you have 100hp or 120hp!

+1/level is still more useful than a flat +3, though I probably wouldn't value it much higher - the +3 version rates about a 1, IMO.

 

[Sylrae]

I picked 6 for a reason, 6 should be the most powerful feat you can pick for a level normally with the non point based. like, the PHB feats should be ranked 1-6. unfortunately some are worthless. the +1/level version of toughness is worth a 1, maybe a 2. the +3 is complete garbage.

The reason for the 6 is it works for a feat every 2 levels or every three, easily. give 2 pts per level you get 3.5 progression, give 3 pts per level you get pathfinder progression.

Weapon proficiencies shouldnt all be clumped together, I dont think a fighter should get all martial even, he should get to pick a bunch but he shouldnt get all of them. Learning to use a sword shouldnt teach you to use an axe. all martial IMO would be worth more than six. I'd say they should be worth 1 each, or maybe 2-3 if you break it down into smaller categories and scrap the existing ones. (Two Handed Swords, Crossbows, Bows, Reach Weapons, etc). I'm thinking maybe fighters should just get like 10 martial weapons theyre trained in or something like that.

classes with bonus feat lists would need to have multiple feat pools or it would be kindof unfair as they would get a muh larger selection of feats for their bonus feats than they used to.

I dont get metamagic feats. you pay for them twice. They higher spell slot is paying for it, then they want you towaste your feats on it too? They definitely need to be low cost. unless you ditch the spell level changes and just limit their usage. 1-2 points for most of them.

Item creation feats too, but the whole Item creation system for d20 is so crappy everyone avoids it IME. If theyre gonna dump xp, resources, and need spells to make magic items, they shouldnt have to take a feat to do it at all, thats what the exp costs are for. Item Creation feats should just make item creation easier, cheaper, or more effective. This whole system is crap as is, but if you want to keep it, make it CHEAP for the feats. lol.

you know?

but you guys agree that feats shouldnt all cost the same? Thats good.

Additionally, the more feats we have priced the easier assigning prices becomes, because we have lots of reference points.

we need a way to know how to price them though. cause I doubt we'll get a consensus on the point values.
we need to all be using the same scale, thats for sure though, lol.

and I dont want to go 2 4 6, we should have as many options as necessary, thats the purpose of point-assigning them. otherwise we need to improve feats to match their point values or we still have them not being worth what you pay for them, you know?

so to start...


what is the weakest non-useless feat (1)

what's the strongest (6)

and whats one in the middle? (3)

I'm inclined to put individual weapons at 1, armor at 3, and twf at 6. depending on prereqs assigned to things you could adjust the prices, as you guys mentioned. what do you think?

 

[Kerrick]

Weapon proficiencies shouldnt all be clumped together, I dont think a fighter should get all martial even, he should get to pick a bunch but he shouldnt get all of them. Learning to use a sword shouldnt teach you to use an axe.

all martial IMO would be worth more than six. I'd say they should be worth 1 each, or maybe 2-3 if you break it down into smaller categories and scrap the existing ones. (Two Handed Swords, Crossbows, Bows, Reach Weapons, etc). I'm thinking maybe fighters should just get like 10 martial weapons theyre trained in or something like that.

Do it like UA - weapon groups. A fighter gets proficiency in, say, 3 weapon groups, and you can take a feat to gain proficiency in 1-2 each - that effectively models what they have. With that system, though, you could probably ditch the EWP feat entirely - most groups don't have more than 1 exotic weapon in them (well, okay, I'm looking at the ones *I* did - UA's are slightly different, IIRC).

classes with bonus feat lists would need to have multiple feat pools or it would be kindof unfair as they would get a muh larger selection of feats for their bonus feats than they used to.

Yeah.

I dont get metamagic feats. you pay for them twice. They higher spell slot is paying for it, then they want you towaste your feats on it too? They definitely need to be low cost. unless you ditch the spell level changes and just limit their usage. 1-2 points for most of them.

You know, I never tweaked onto that. You're really getting triple screwed, because you either a) have to prep the spell that way in advance, or b) spend a full-round casting it on the fly. The "prep the spell in advance" thing is the reason I never use metamagic - I just can't plan out what spells I might need like that. This is a subject for another thread, though, I think.

Item creation feats too, but the whole Item creation system for d20 is so crappy everyone avoids it IME. If theyre gonna dump xp, resources, and need spells to make magic items, they shouldnt have to take a feat to do it at all, thats what the exp costs are for. Item Creation feats should just make item creation easier, cheaper, or more effective. This whole system is crap as is, but if you want to keep it, make it CHEAP for the feats. lol.

Item creation feats. I say just ditch them entirely and go with a skill-based system. Otherwise, yeah - have them reduce costs.

Additionally, the more feats we have priced the easier assigning prices becomes, because we have lots of reference points.

Definitely.

what is the weakest non-useless feat (1)

Dodge.

what's the strongest (6)

In terms of "must-have" feats, I'd go with Weapon Finesse and Power Attack. PA is probably more powerful because it doesn't have a cap; WF probably rates around a 5.

and whats one in the middle? (3)

Skills: Skill Focus; Attacks: Weapon Focus (this one's really about 2.5, so it could go either way); Damage: Weapon Spec. (this is about 3.5).

I'm inclined to put individual weapons at 1, armor at 3, and twf at 6. depending on prereqs assigned to things you could adjust the prices, as you guys mentioned. what do you think?[/QUOTE]

 

[Sylrae]

I tend to agree with most of that, except for Power Attack. Power attack is actually a really weak feat, that just *looks* powerful. The issue with power attack, is that after 1, or maybe 2 points, youre actually losing damage, because youre hitting that much less frequently. There was a big topic on that in the houserules forum about a year ago.

As for weapons, yeah, I'm inclined to drop the existing ones and group them much differently, grouping by similarity. Other than that I'd say drop them completely and have people buy individual weapons for 1 point each. If theyre grouped I'd go with 2-3 points each.

 

[Hawken]

I've got to disagree with you on the weapons. Beyond maybe level 2 or 3, weapon proficiency is such a non-issue that its non-issue-ness should extend to feats. Honestly, its not going to make a bit of difference if a wizard gets proficiency with ALL simple weapons in exchange for 1 of his 7 feats. Beyond 3rd level anyway, PCs are getting whatever weapons they want and selecting a different weapon is only a matter of flavor and style at that point.

Also, making the feats grant proficiency with just 1 weapon at a time is petty and forces both the PC and the DM to keep track of who is proficient with what--especially when it may never come into play.

As for Fighters, how is it wrong or unfair/unbalanced for them to be proficient with ALL simple and martial weapons? While barbarians are learning to rage, derics are learning an UNLIMITED amount of spells, wizards are studying countless spells, and rogues are beefing up on a dozen or so skills, the fighter is busy training with every type of weapon and armor available. How is that wrong? They can't use every weapon/armor just like clerics can't use every spell; they just get to use 1 at a time.

I say leave the MM/IC feats out of the pricing category. Make them available only to casters so you don't need to worry about pricing and points at all.

If Weapon Finesse is too "good" of a feat, break it down. Weapon Finesse (Simple), Weapon Finesse (Martial), and let finesse come for "free" with an exotic weapon proficiency.

Power Attack is limited in its usefulness, but the reason for a higher cost is that it is a "gateway" to about a dozen other feats. If PA is a 4, make the others a 2 or a 1. That way, to get Cleave, you'd be spending 6 points at those prices, and maybe another 2 or so to get Great Cleave.

 

[Kerrick]

I've got to disagree with you on the weapons. Beyond maybe level 2 or 3, weapon proficiency is such a non-issue that its non-issue-ness should extend to feats. Honestly, its not going to make a bit of difference if a wizard gets proficiency with ALL simple weapons in exchange for 1 of his 7 feats. Beyond 3rd level anyway, PCs are getting whatever weapons they want and selecting a different weapon is only a matter of flavor and style at that point.

All simple weapons isn't really that big a deal - almost everyone gets them anyway.

Also, making the feats grant proficiency with just 1 weapon at a time is petty and forces both the PC and the DM to keep track of who is proficient with what--especially when it may never come into play.

Agreed - 1 point per weapon is just too much bookkeeping, and not very fun at all.

As for Fighters, how is it wrong or unfair/unbalanced for them to be proficient with ALL simple and martial weapons? While barbarians are learning to rage, derics are learning an UNLIMITED amount of spells, wizards are studying countless spells, and rogues are beefing up on a dozen or so skills, the fighter is busy training with every type of weapon and armor available. How is that wrong? They can't use every weapon/armor just like clerics can't use every spell; they just get to use 1 at a time.

It's not really unbalanced, per se, just... odd. I mean, your average fighter might know how to use a dozen or so weapons, and is pretty fair with maybe 1/3 to 1/2 of those - this pretty well models the weapon groups thing. BUT, if you're going to use weapon groups, it should be across the board, not just fighters. I don't think I'd use it as anything but an optional rule, personally.

I say leave the MM/IC feats out of the pricing category. Make them available only to casters so you don't need to worry about pricing and points at all.

They are anyway. But yeah, there's no real point in pricing them - the IC feats are all the same, and the MM feats are all pretty much the same too.

If Weapon Finesse is too "good" of a feat, break it down. Weapon Finesse (Simple), Weapon Finesse (Martial), and let finesse come for "free" with an exotic weapon proficiency.

Hmm... the problem is that the class using it the most (rogues) only get two martial melee weapons - the rapier and the short sword. Monks take it often, but they apply it to unarmed strike. It's a no-brainer feat for rogues, monks, and Dex fighters, but I can't really see how to tone it down - I mean, it requires BAB +1, only applies to light weapons, and a shield applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls.

No light weapon deals more than 1d6 damage except the spiked chain, so the big deal here is that they can hit more often (which is very useful for mid-BAB classes), and rogues can get more sneaks in. Effectively, it makes them more viable in combat, which is why it's so valuable.

Power Attack is limited in its usefulness, but the reason for a higher cost is that it is a "gateway" to about a dozen other feats. If PA is a 4, make the others a 2 or a 1. That way, to get Cleave, you'd be spending 6 points at those prices, and maybe another 2 or so to get Great Cleave.

Yeah, Power Attack is better at higher levels when the fighter can pretty well auto-hit with 2-3 attacks - it was intended for them to trade off those extra AB points to deal extra damage, since things have mucho hit points.

I'd agree - make PA 4 and the others (slightly) less - those Improved xxx feats are very useful. Which means we'd have to pick a new 6-point feat. I can't really see anything else that I'd rate above 5, except maybe TWF.

 

[Sylrae]

For Weapon Proficiencies, I can see your point in buying them individually being too tedious, but I wouldnt give the WHOLE category for one feat, its worth considerably more than that. if the categories were smaller and there were more of them then I could see categories for a feat. I'd recommend it even.
Maybe everyone should get simple weapon prof regardless of class too.

But anyways back on topic.

The reason I asked what feats were the most powerful, is that we need to figure out how to price them.

I think you guys might be pricing things a bit too low though. A 6 point feat shouldnt be so good its amazing, it should be a feat thats good enough to be the only feat you get on that level.

In other words you shouldnt get alot more of the beter feats, but you shouldnt be penalized by picking the less powerful ones by being crappy.