More feats, and stackable feats

[Kerrick]

I talked to a guy this weekend who's looking for a group (like me); we hooked up through the FLGS. Anyway, he was telling me about his PC, a paladin, and he mentioned that characters didn't get enough feats - he had to "wait a long time between levels". It's a fairly common complaint, though I'm not sure if I've ever noted it myself. I've been against the idea simply because monsters follow the same rules as PCs, and they get enough feats as it is. Well, that and if everyone gets a feat every 2 levels, what will the fighter do?

But then I started to think: Why? Why not leave monsters at 1/3, and give PCs 1/2? The only "problem" I could see is that you'd run out of feats to take after awhile (assuming you don't have a hoard of books to choose from).

There's another idea I came up with today at work: why not let some feats, i.e., Dodge, Great Fort, Lightning Ref, Iron Will, Spell Focus, and Spell Penetration, stack? I already do this with Dodge and the +2 save feats; letting SF and SP stack would eliminate the greater and epic versions (which have no prereqs besides the base feat). The way I figure it, if a mage wants to blow 5 feats to get a +5 to his spell DCs, he should be allowed to, eh? The only thing I'm worried about is that using 10 + 1/2 caster level + spell level for spell DCs (which scales nicely with saves) with this rule might make spellcasters a little too strong (even if it is only one school) - with all those extra feat slots, a mage would be stupid NOT to dump a few feats into Spell Focus.

 

[Knight-of-Roses]

I like the idea of more feats. If the stackable become a problem on Spell DCs you can always scale it back or apply the law of diminishing returns or require that the bonus is not more than 2 higher than the next two highest School Spell DC bonuses the character has or whatever. Give it a try I say.

 

[Kerrick]

Or put a cap on it - say, you can take it 5 times. Cool.

 

[ashockney]

I like the concept of more feats. One of the most interesting treatments of this that I enjoyed was the e6 solution that can be found on ENWorld. The concept is that the game breaks down after about 6th level, so just stop the characters at 6th and carry it up the rest of the way where xp translate into new feats.

In 3.5 one other issue is the significant disparity between feats. I like 4e's treatment of heroic, paragon, and epic tier feats. This helps to keep the power levels more comparable and is an elegant solution to support maintaining balance between the classes.

The other solution that I would recommend is that additional feats could be used to "unlock" abilities as opposed to presenting new statistical benefits, particularly in combat. These powers or abilities would work well as "teamwork" benefits, patented character tricks to be used in combat, or things that would augment a character's ability to successfully function and benefit from the environment in a battle (ie, condition).

In general, I think feats that work REALLY well for characters and monsters are the ones that provide defense against environmental conditions (ie, blind fighting, dodge, mobility, spring attack, combat reflexes, etc.).

I would finally suggest that there is a wide-open gaping hole where "paragon" roleplaying abilities should kick in for this game (above 10th). I think characters can and would invest in such Roleplaying feats with no combat, and only rp'ing influence. The skill challenge system from 4e is a far more interesting way to address and resolve non-combat conflicts that can drive the story in an rpg. The skill system for 3e would work well for this with just a few tweaks.

 

[Kerrick]

In 3.5 one other issue is the significant disparity between feats. I like 4e's treatment of heroic, paragon, and epic tier feats. This helps to keep the power levels more comparable and is an elegant solution to support maintaining balance between the classes.

It's more that there's a significant lack of high-level feats, which is part of the reason why fighters start to fall behind in viability.

The other solution that I would recommend is that additional feats could be used to "unlock" abilities as opposed to presenting new statistical benefits, particularly in combat. These powers or abilities would work well as "teamwork" benefits, patented character tricks to be used in combat, or things that would augment a character's ability to successfully function and benefit from the environment in a battle (ie, condition).

PHBII has some tactical and teamwork feats, but I don't have that book.

I would finally suggest that there is a wide-open gaping hole where "paragon" roleplaying abilities should kick in for this game (above 10th). I think characters can and would invest in such Roleplaying feats with no combat, and only rp'ing influence.

It really depends on the campaign - one that's heavy into politics and RP, sure; but one that relies more on combat? No - they'll go for combat-related feats.

The skill challenge system from 4e is a far more interesting way to address and resolve non-combat conflicts that can drive the story in an rpg. The skill system for 3e would work well for this with just a few tweaks.

It could, yeah.

 

[Hawken]

The problem isn't that feats don't stack, its that their benefits are fixed, while the characters are not. A +1 or +2 bonus to something is significant at levels 1-5, but at 15+, it doesn't really matter and they are easily forgotten. But what if the benefits of the feat scaled with the person?

Dodge: Instead of providing a static +1 bonus to AC (is there anyone who really makes their player choose a single target?), provides a bonus equal to +1 OR the Poor Save value for a character of that level, whichever is greater.

The "Saving Throw feats" (Great Fortitude, etc.) could similarly scale. Instead of a static +2, they provide either a +2 to the save OR the Poor Save value for a character of their level, whichever is greater.

Spell Focus and Spell Pentration could return to their original 3.0 values (+2) instead of +1 and could scale up an additional +1 at 10th, 15th and 20th levels. As per Dragon 309, the only reason these feats were "ratcheted down" was because the producers were worried about "overlapping modifiers from prestige classes and feats that were out there". First off, if they overlap, only one bonus is provided, not two and for all these bonuses they mention from prestige classes and feats (none come to mind immediately) to cause such a problem, that means the player would have to plot their wizards on that particular course--which players are usually too independent to do. So, give them back the +2 bonus and add a little "oomph" to make it worth their time at the higher levels.

This means that with spell focus and greater spell focus, a 20th wizard could have a +7 bonus to the save DCs of a school of magic. So what? It took them 20 levels to get that bonus and it means that the opponents their facing should be paying attention to the save instead of just casually dismissing it.

This also serves to make the feats worth it. Over the course of their career, a wizard gets 7 feats, 8 if they're human (not counting metamagic or item creation bonus feats). These feats should count for them. They should make a difference because, for a wizard with so few feats (no class should be forced to multi-class or take a prestige class to get feats just because they feel they don't get enough), each feat has to count. Upon selecting each feat, the player should feel confident and comfortable that he selected the right one for his character, never that the feat has been "wasted".

 

[Kerrick]

Dodge: Instead of providing a static +1 bonus to AC (is there anyone who really makes their player choose a single target?), provides a bonus equal to +1 OR the Poor Save value for a character of that level, whichever is greater.

Well see, that's why I was going to let it stack. What if you take it at, say, L5 or L10? Do you suddenly get a +2 or +3 dodge bonus? I assume the bonus increases as you level...

The "Saving Throw feats" (Great Fortitude, etc.) could similarly scale. Instead of a static +2, they provide either a +2 to the save OR the Poor Save value for a character of their level, whichever is greater.

Wow... that would effectively turn a low save into a high save, or boost a high save into a really high save. A player would be stupid not to take a feat like that.

Spell Focus and Spell Pentration could return to their original 3.0 values (+2) instead of +1 and could scale up an additional +1 at 10th, 15th and 20th levels. As per Dragon 309, the only reason these feats were "ratcheted down" was because the producers were worried about "overlapping modifiers from prestige classes and feats that were out there".

That's all? Pfft. I thought it was because they simply thought the feats were too powerful on their own. +2 each would work, since spell DCs are very hard to increase after you get L9 spells.

 

[Hawken]

What if you take it at, say, L5 or L10? Do you suddenly get a +2 or +3 dodge bonus? I assume the bonus increases as you level...

The Poor Save value at level 5 is still +1, so from levels 1-5, you would be looking at a +1 bonus. If you took it at level 10 (who gets a feat at level 10?), the Poor Save value is +3, so you would get a +3 Dodge bonus.

Yes, the bonus increases, not with each level, as you seem to imply, but at the rate of a Poor Saving throw (+1 through 5th, +2 at 6th, +3 at 9th, etc.).

Wow... that would effectively turn a low save into a high save, or boost a high save into a really high save. A player would be stupid not to take a feat like that.

If that is too high, then how about +2 bonus. At 12th, it increases to +3 and at 18th it increases to +4. That would effectively put a Poor Save halfway between Poor and Good as far as the numbers go and applying it to a Good save would provide a scalable bonus that isn't (to me) overpowered.

+2 each would work, since spell DCs are very hard to increase after you get L9 spells.

True, but they should scale. Saving throw bonuses still continue to increase every 2 or 3 levels, so its not unreasonable for a select group of save DCs to increase with a feat and then every 5 levels or so.

 

[Kerrick]

The Poor Save value at level 5 is still +1, so from levels 1-5, you would be looking at a +1 bonus. If you took it at level 10 (who gets a feat at level 10?), the Poor Save value is +3, so you would get a +3 Dodge bonus.

Right, I was looking at that. Low saves aren't all that high... but I don't know.

Yes, the bonus increases, not with each level, as you seem to imply, but at the rate of a Poor Saving throw (+1 through 5th, +2 at 6th, +3 at 9th, etc.).

That's what I meant - if you take it at L5, you're not going to get screwed because it doesn't scale.

If that is too high, then how about +2 bonus. At 12th, it increases to +3 and at 18th it increases to +4. That would effectively put a Poor Save halfway between Poor and Good as far as the numbers go and applying it to a Good save would provide a scalable bonus that isn't (to me) overpowered.

Now that could work. I did something similar with Toughness - you get +2 hit points, +1/level (retroactive). I boosted the low save to top out at +8 at L20, so I'd have to drop this bonus, but I think it would work well if you use the standard poor saves.

True, but they should scale. Saving throw bonuses still continue to increase every 2 or 3 levels, so its not unreasonable for a select group of save DCs to increase with a feat and then every 5 levels or so.

In this case, you should probably go with DC 10 + 1/2 caster level + spell level or stat mod (both variations are popular, but I've found spell level scales with saves better).

If you use this with +1 feat/3 levels, a +1 stacking bonus would probably work. +2 would probably be too much.

If you use this with +1 feat/2 levels, I think both would be too powerful - a wizard would have 14 feats (11 from levels, 4 bonus); we can assume he'll dump 5-6 of those into SF, which gives him a +5 or +10 bonus at L20. His L9 spells would be DC 10 + 10 + 9 + 5 = 34; a CR 20 creature's average saves are only around +20.

I was thinking about this last night, and I think that you can either a) give the characters more feats (1/2 levels) or b) you can give them more class abilities, but you shouldn't do both. This is why the Pathfinder characters are so overpowered - they get loads of cool abilities AND more feats. I could be wrong, of course, but I think I'll stick with the normal feat progression for the time being, but let things like Spell Focus stack (at +1).

 

[Hawken]

Just to clarify, I meant my feat suggestions for feats that do NOT stack. If they could be taken repeatedly, they would be WAY overpowered.

Also, if a wizard was going to spend 5-6 feats boosting DC, having a 14+ to make the save is not at all unreasonable or overpowered. In the same instance, the same creature is likely going to have something else to boost his saves even further than +20 (saves do increase faster than DCs), so it would probably really work out to close to a 50/50 thing more often.