Latest D&D Survey Says "More Feats, Please!"; Plus New Survey About DMs Guild, Monster Hunter, Inqui

WotC's Mike Mearls has reported on the latest D&D survey results. "In our last survey, we asked you which areas of D&D you thought needed expansion, and solicited feedback for the latest revision of the mystic character class and new rules for psionics." Additionally, there's a new survey up asking about DMs Guld as well as the last Unearthed Arcana (which featured the Monster Hunter, Inquisitive, and Revenant).

Find the survey results here. The most requested extra content is more feats, followed by classes, spells and races, in that order.

 

[Ahglock]

Personally, I wouldn't mind feats that mimic class abilities to allow for a limited splash of another class without having to resort to multiclassing.

I would like to see 18 or so feats based around each skill.

Prerequisite: Skill X
+1 ability score with skill X
Gain double proficiency in skill (expertise)
2 or 3 exploration and interaction leaning abilities tied to skill

You might need to offer some alternate versions of Athletic and Observant to compete, but something like that seems like it would offer the right focus and wouldn't step on the Rogue's and Bard's toes too much.

That's kind of what I want as well. Having to dip into rogue on my barbarian so I can have expertise in athletics to be the world wide wrestling champion of the world is irritating. Or if you are playing a ranger and despite it not working with other class abilities you want a different weapon style or a weapon style on the barbarian. Yeah you can do a one level dip but maybe you don't like what else comes with that.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

So, as long as they don't say "Here's a 256pg book for you...", of which only 30 pages are going to be useful for me...go for it. I guess.

Inside of those books...toss in a couple pages of Feats specific to those 'things'. Add in a few pages of new spells, arch-types, equipment. That's fine...as long as the majority of the book is there to help the DM run cooler games.

I detect what Kant might have called a "non-universalizable maxim". You do realize that players buy books too, right?

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Then its a question of what you play D&D for: Mathematic optimisation or fun.

It would be nice if we didn't have to choose, because what was fun was also mechanically optimized. 5E is normally very good about this.

 

[SkidAce]

As for the rest...classes, races, etc? *shrug* I'd much rather have WotC make crunch books focused on helping a DM run a cool, believable and exciting campaign over giving Players more options that a DM has to deal with. Give me a Wilderness Survival Guide, a Dungeoneers Survival Guide, a Cityscape Survival Guide, a Castles & Fortifications Guide, a Seaborne Adventures Guide, a Guide to the Inner Planes, a Guide to the Lower Planes, a Guide to the Higher Planes, etc...etc...etc... Inside of those books...toss in a couple pages of Feats specific to those 'things'. Add in a few pages of new spells, arch-types, equipment. That's fine...as long as the majority of the book is there to help the DM run cooler games.

This my preferred way ahead.

 

[Curmudjinn]

These new feats should be powerful and important. Something that can fully swap out class abilities, etc, on that level. Allowing deep class customization.

 

[IgnatiusJ.Reilly]

Why ditch variant human. If anything he is more balanced now as 2 feats when everyone has one is less impressive than 1 fest when everyone has 0. The +1 to every stat option is just bad mechanically. I'd still play it as I prefer humans no matter how bad they are but variant human is closer to balanced with non humans than standard human is.

Yes, one way to make sure no one plays a human is to remove the Human Variant.

 

[Curmudjinn]

Double post.

 

[Gadget]

This is disappointing...WOTC has proven that feat design is perhaps the trickiest design space to get 'right' as demonstrated by the last two editions. For every one that wants a "linguist" feat, there seems to be 10 more, IME, that want the moar damage Power Attacking/blitzkrieg/whatever feat that adds little depth to the character, but rather demonstrates the system mastery of the player. Despite my misgivings, I realize that this is a play style many enjoy, so bully for them I guess.

I think one of the best things WOTC did was throw up their hands and dump the whole feat system in the 'optional' bin and be done with it. Perhaps there is a way to tie the lighter feats like linguist to backgrounds instead?

 

[Salamandyr]

I wouldn't mind more feats...only no more "gotta haves", and no more weapon spec feats where one kind of weapon grants a bonus to a situational effect you have no control over (like heavy blade mastery in 4e, granting a bonus to opportunity attacks, which basically never happen) and others that grant a bonus every round (like pole arm mastery and the silly butt stroke bonus attack).

I admit it; I just want swords to get something cool. Cooler than just getting to be swords I mean.

 

[Arkhan_The_Black]

Coming from a player that got into D&D with 4E and am currently having a perfectly fun time with 5E so far,I do think that more options for pretty much everything would be a plus, with feats being just one element of that. As a GM, you have the ability to just not allow whatever crunch expansion they put out if you don't like it, and feats are of course optional to begin with. I just think that it's been long enough into 5E's lifespan that some mechanical expansion would be appreciated, as no matter which way you crunch it, 5E has had a very low amount of options releases if you don't allow the UAs