Feat Points

[Kerrick]

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.

Yeah... ALL martial weapons for one feat is too much. All simple weapons is fine - they're not very good, overall.

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.

I was balancing power and desireability, not just one or the other. By those criteria, Weapon Finesse rates about a 5. Powerwise, it's around 4; desireability-wise, it's very close to 6. Like I said, it's not useful for all classes, or even all PCs, so its power is necessarily limited. Something like Combat Prowess (epic feat - +1 to all attacks), though... that's powerful AND desireable to all classes.

 

[Knight-of-Roses]

While I can see the purpose or rate feat and the point based purchase mechanic , I am not sure I am sold on the additional complexity.

I would rather just give out more feats and more bonus feats and keep it at that.

 

[Sylrae]

That really doesn't solve the problem though. Your "just give them more feats" will in fact make the issue bigger.

The problem is there is such a huge gap in the usefulness of feats, that there are a number of feats which would make your character much more interesting, but the problem is, you'd have to be an idiot (or in a 100% non-combat game) to pick it over a feat with much greater utility, which you're getting for The Same Price.

There are some other solutions, but point-buying them seems like the easiest way to do it.

If you want to drop the added complexity for the players you have 4 options really.

1. Improve all the crappier feats until they are on par with the good feats (Huge amount of work)

2. Just remove all the feats from the list that nobody ever takes because they are so inferior.

3. Just give them more feats, which makes a bigger gap between people choosing useful feats vs people choosing flavorful feats

4. Give everyone All the Feats (lmao).

The option I'm not counting is

put the feats into categories of usefulness and give out feats from each list at different rates. This one is in fact a viable alternative, but its almost the same as the point buy system, the difference being that everyone will have the same number of utility feats vs. flavor feats.

 

[Nedz]

How do you rate the difference between Skill Focus being applied to a cross class skill againt applying it to a class skill ?

 

[Sylrae]

Nedz, it wouldn't be much of a difference, but class skills and cross class skills are kindof a stupid system to begin with. I would suggest if you want to have class skills and cross class skills, instead of having cross-class cost double and have max ranks of half, give less skill points, and apply an inherent +2 bonus to class skills. If you look at both pathfinder (The Beta rules are out online and the official book comes out in august) and Kerrick's Project Phoenix (just go find any of his posts, there's a link in his signature), you'll see some of the revisions that make D&D alot better.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

You may want to consider going with the system and costs that Sean Reynolds put up back in 2003:
Feat Point System

 

[Sylrae]

Nice catch, that is exactly what I was talking about. I hadn't seen that before, and didnt realize that anyone had statted out the levels.

 

[Bladesinger_Boy]

Feats points do seem like one option.

However, what things could happen to crappier feats to make them workable, viable, valid?
1) Improve their power and make them worthwhile
2) make them skill tricks, not feats
3) smush them together into other feats, probably other crappy feats
4) reduce the reqs; maybe the feat is crappy because the reqs are too high?

Pathfinder did a good job with skill feats. Whether its skill focus or those +2/+2 skill feats, the bonus doubles once you have 10 ranks in that skill (so 10th level). Method #1.

There are a lot of Rogue-ish, Monk-ish, Fighter-ish combat and mobility feats that I'd prefer to see get fixed by Method #2. That "make a turn when you run" feat is fine- as a skill trick.

Using Method #3 feels like making tactical feats. That being said, some good flavor could come out of this. Imagine a bundle of a few Monk feats all together in one Monk-ish tactical feat, or some Rogue tactical feat, or whatever. I do like the feel of tactical feats so I'd promote this option the most as it provides the most flavor. Method #1 or #2 are simpler, but really a mechanical solution to a mechanical problem. #3 seems more fun, stylized.

 

[Hereticus]

Feats add uniqueness to characters, and I like to keep things simple. All characters gain one feat per level, with no stat increase every four (replaced by more feats).

Feats include stat increase +1, specific save +2, skill increase +4, and everything in the books plus more.

 

[Bladesinger_Boy]

What if feats were "tiered" into 10 level chunks like 4E. A Heroic tier feat is just that; one heroic tier feat.

However, a paragon tier feat can be one paragon tier feat or two heroic tier feats. An epic tier feat can be one epic tier feat or two paragon tier feats or three heroic tier feats.

This means the points are implicit, no actual number crunching involved. If you just keep taking feats at your appropriate tier, you get the same amount.

This DOES NOT fix already low-power and not worthwhile feats. Maybe feats would need to be redone with lower feat reqs but placed into higher tiers where appropriate. Example: Whirlwind Attack, Manyshot, Imp Critical.