How do you feel about the only-general-feats direction of D&D?

[Wednesday Boy]

How do you feel about D&D's shift towards publishing no feats that are specific to a class, race, build, power source, or role? Do you like it or do you wish they still included class/race/build/power source/role specific feats?

Personally I wish they still had those specific feats. I enjoyed having options that could enhance or expand the class/race/etc. facets of my character and I'm disappointed that these feats are not planned for future products. I noticed this most prominently when reading Heroes of Shadow and had trouble coming up with potential feats to take that would make a vryloka vampire a little more vryloka vampirey.

Am I alone in this? Do most people prefer non-specific feats? Thanks for the feedback! (And please start a different thread if your response pertains to there being too many feats already and no new feats are necessary.)

 

[RangerWickett]

I'm sure you're not alone, but I don't really miss them. I mean, ugh. I have to be an eladrin wizard to be able to use a sword as a wand? Why not just have a feat that lets you use weapons as implements in general?

Why do some feats in Arcane Power only apply to, well, arcane powers, when they would not be unbalanced for other classes to take? What is gained by having three dozen different feats for the various healing/inspiring/majestic/ardent/shamanistic words out there?

There are too many fiddly bits. Game options should be narrative-based, not mechanics-based. Figure out what an interesting thing to do is, then make rules for it; don't make up some rules and then lacquer on some flavor.


I'm fine with "vampire" feats or "wizard feats" if they work off those class abilities. Likewise with "dwarf" and "elf" feats that work with their racial powers. But I really don't want to see "dwarf vampire" feats, or "halfling binder"-specific feats. It's too narrow, and clogs my brainspace.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Overall I liked them, though there was a necessity of a huge number of them for all the race and class combinations.

I do not like the boring anyone-can-take-this feats as they are too good for powegamers and encourage the same feats to be taken ad infinatum

But yes, feat bloat is a direct result of racial and class feats.

 

[Aegeri]

I would have liked to see a middle ground but the current direction demands throwing babies out with the bathwater, usually after covering the baby with oil and setting it on fire for good measure while they are at it. There are good reasons to have "general" feats that everyone can take and are generally useful. There are also good reasons to have some feats that make a race more interesting (or give it a boost in an area it needs it) or class feats (again for the same reason).

There are good reasons to use all three and the right mix would have been ideal. The vampire and shade for example could really use feats to give them needed boosts. On the other hand, I can see general feats that apply to all kinds of healing (or whatever) being desirable to having 3 billion different variations on a similar feat just for each specific healing power. Again it's about making feats relevant and interesting, while thinking before restricting it to a narrow class/race with "Is there a good flavor or mechanical reason this should be restricted?". If there isn't a good flavor or mechanical reason to restrict the feat: It should be able to be taken by anyone.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

chop

What he said.

(By the way, for the next week stick to only irrational posts so I can spread the XP around.)

 

[Dausuul]

I think there's a place for race/class-specific feats, but there should be a really good reason before they restrict a feat that way. If there's a feat that increases your Fey Step distance from 5 to 10 squares, it makes sense to have it be eladrin-only. If it's a random bonus to damage with longswords... not so much.

But then, I think the feat system in general needs a massive overhaul.

 

[vaultdweller]

On the whole, I do like class-specific and race-specific feats.

However, before assigning a pre-requisite to a feat, careful thought needs to be given to whether or not that feat is really something that needs to be unique to that race or class.

Also, I think taking things to the point of, "Only Bullywug Paladins with Dex 15 that worship Corellon" or some other such nonsense is too specific. Feats that have multiple pre-requisites should be rare exceptions.

 

[TwoSix]

I like general feats as long as they're part of the journey towards a feat-less 5e.

 

[the Jester]

I'm of a mixed mind. Feats were the thing that made your race matter past character creation; one of 4e's stated design goals (in Races & Classes) was to do this.

OTOH option bloat blech, so much so that in my homebrew version of D&D I have completely dropped feats in favor of other mechanisms.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm of a mixed mind. Feats were the thing that made your race matter past character creation; one of 4e's stated design goals (in Races & Classes) was to do this.

I agree with the goal, but not the means. Feats are too nitpicky. Racial powers would have been a better solution.