Feats Not Created Equal

[Impeesa]

Y'know, I only took one probability course, so I'm a bit hazy on the technicalities - maybe hong could fill us in here, I don't know. But if I recall correctly, if you've got a bunch of things weighted towards a central value (in this case, feats with an average power value), you're pretty much guaranteed of a few things. Some will be below average, some will be above average, most will be around the median. The more sample points you have (more feats from more supplements), the more likely it is that some will be more significantly above or below the central point. Every now and then, someone points this out, and it's not a brilliant insight - it's simple statistics. Given that only extraordinarily rigorous mathematical analysis of feat power levels could tighten the distribution (which isn't likely to happen), and having more options is, in general, a good thing, I find it pretty hard to complain about the current situation with the number of feats available and the power levels they encompass.

Lemma one: Subdividing feats will not help at all. Feat power levels presumeably do not form a discrete spectrum, so no matter how you divide them up you'll still have feats which are particularly strong (or particularly weak) for a Minor feat, and the same for the Major feats. You end up with more arbitrary categories, and the same problem you started with. Again, without some extraordinarily rigorous mathematical analysis, there will always be a 'best' and a 'worst' choice within any given pool of options (though those may be context sensitive, based on character race/class, campaign type, etc). Aside from being intuitively obvious (which, sadly, is not a valid method of proof), this is a fairly basic part of game theory.

Man, I don't even study this stuff and I still spout off. :\ Consider yourselves lucky I was too lazy to draw up diagrams and examples, because I seriously considered it.

--Impeesa--

 

[philreed]

One way feats like Toughness can be more valuable is if feat trees are built using the "worthless" feats as a base.

 

[megamania]

What gets scary is stuff like FR where there are regional feats that can create some craaaaazy results.

Feats were created to define a character. If players are using the same ones every time they may not be mixing it up correctly (IMO).

Earlier it mentioned no one uses Skill Focus. I do often to define a personality trait. Paranoid? use Alertness and Skill Focus: Spot or Listen.

Otherwise...is it against the rules to use the same set of Feats each time?

 

[Thanee]

What gets scary is stuff like FR where there are regional feats that can create some craaaaazy results.

Regional feats have higher effect, but also higher costs (opportunity costs mostly). Basically a fair concept.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darkness]

Ya, feats aren't equal, classes aren't equal, spells aren't equal, skills aren't equal......

I think I'm going to build a dwarf Cleric/Radiant Servant of Pelor with Nymph's Kiss, Power Attack and a two-hand weapon...

 

[ares71]

One way feats like Toughness can be more valuable is if feat trees are built using the "worthless" feats as a base.

My concern with that would be the limited number of feats characters get. Restricting them into more feat trees is going to further limit their choices, as they would only be able to progress down one or two feat trees.

Also, many of the more powerful feats are already available at 1st level (ie Improved Initiative). I'd hate to put a prerequisite for that one.


I'd rather see an upgrade in the weaker feat's power as the charcter progresses in level. Say toughness, automatically becomes improved toughness when character gets 3 hit dice or more. Feats like Power Attack improve with your base attack bonus already.

 

[ares71]

I have zero problems with dinky feats whose nearly-exclusive use is as a prerequisite to Prestige Classes. I wished more Prestige Classes required this.

I dislike feats like Skill Focus as a prerequisite for a Prestige Class. Frankly, if you have enough ranks in that skill, you shouldn't have to spend a feat to qualify for it also. Example, the Justicar from Complete Warrior. Has a prerequisite of Gather Information of 5 ranks, and Feat Skill Focus Gather Information (amongst other prerequsites). I think that's a silly waste of a feat. Why not just require Gather Information 8 ranks, it's the same difference.

 

[Vrecknidj]

Skill Focus has been put to good use by some of my players. Using it with Hide, Move Silently, or especially Tumble has proven very useful.

I am all in favor of breaking skills into two types: higher power and lower power. Like skills, with class and cross-class costing different amounts, the higher power feats could cost triple what a lower power feat costs. Then, also like skills, you could either take a lower power feat each level, or take one-third of a higher power feat, and then once you've taken the third third, you have the higher power feat.

There are all kinds of problems with this, like what to do with fighter feats and wizard feats, especially those that can also be taken by others. But, someone could sit down and work it all out.

Optionally, something like the d20 Modern talent trees would work nicely. I think that this is the perfect way to rebuild the rogue class so that there are effectively two rogues, one being Dex-based and one being Cha-based. In effect, the 3.5 ranger already does this.

Dave

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Why not just require Gather Information 8 ranks, it's the same difference.

Are you serious? It's not the same. Class skill vs. cross class skill, ranks cost differently.

Skill ranks functions as a minimum level restriction as much as BAB does. The Justicar is a perfect example of appropriate use of Skill Focus making a prestige classes a little more difficult to get into, and still fit the skill focus of a prestige class. Raise the Gather Information up to 8 ranks required and you put it further from a straight class Ranger, moving it from 7th-level minimum up to 13th-level minimum. Unless you are fine with giving out even more incentives to multi-class... somether of which I think the game can do to reduce.

IMO.

 

[ares71]

Are you serious? It's not the same. Class skill vs. cross class skill, ranks cost differently

I should have phrased it as Gather Information +8. I actually meant the net bonus of +8, when I said "ranks". Obviously, with cross-class skills, ranks aren't the same as the net bonus.

If you already have a high Gather Information, I thought spending a feat on Skill Focus Gather Information was wasteful.