D&D 5E How They Should Do Feats

[Mistwell]

I am liking how they chose to do it, just fine. I do think a few feats could use tightening up, but I like the system overall, and I do not want to go back to the 3e system as I think it did lead to power creep. I also want to discourage min/maxing where possible, and I think this system helps with that.

 

[KiloGex]

That's something that's new to this edition, and one of the few things about it I don't like.

It's something I do like. I prefer telling the story of how/why someone has become an adventurer, rather than writing a backstory explaining all of these adventures that they've had before this new life.

Feats are not what made characters overpowered at high level. A 2nd edition 20th level wizard is far more powerful than a 3e 20th level fighter, even with its 18 or so feats.

And a 20th level wizard in 3E is far more powerful than a 20th level wizard in 2E. And a 20th level fighter in 3E is more powerful than a 20th level fighter in 2E. And a 20th level wizard is more powerful than a 20th level fighter in nearly any edition. You can't compare apples and oranges here.

Crap feats are crap feats, and don't have to exist - period. Just because there were some bad feats in 3rd and 4th editions doesn't mean there would have to be any in Next.

Agreed, which is why they've gotten rid of all of the bad ones and just kept the good ones in Next. They don't have the meaningless feats that just give you a minuscule bonus or that get rid of an unnecessary penalty; it's all meat.

The problem I have with the "super feats" is that they make characters very same-y and cookie cutter. Everyone who wants to be an archer is going to take Archery Master, and that's that.

And every archer in 3.x takes Point-Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, and Manyshot. Just because you have more choices, doesn't mean that you aren't going to take every staple feat.

There isn't any way to gain one skill or language at a time, as you'd think people would, instead BAM! you suddenly get 3 langauges and skills instantly. That just doesn't sit right with me at all.

We also don't know if there are any ways to do this though. Since we haven't seen the final version, we aren't sure if you can obtain further skills or languages. Therefore, I'm reserving my final judgement for this with the official release.

 

[KiloGex]

I want them to flip that. I want class features to be big eventful choices, something where the choice of multi-classing means something. I want feats to be smaller and less important choice that add to your character (split up the triple feats) paired with a +1 stat pump.

So...You want 3.x and 4E? Then go ahead and play those; nobody is forcing you to move.

 

[Sadrik]

So...You want 3.x and 4E? Then go ahead and play those; nobody is forcing you to move.

Nope. I already have 3.x I am good with that.

I want a game that caters to the simple gamer. I want a game that caters to the more complex gamer. I think making class features come at less frequent levels but at a programmed interval for all classes would be better. For example, levels 1/3/6/9/12/15/18. Make those features significant to both the class and the subclass (not every level mini abilities). Then offer feats at all other levels. You could remove a feat for gaining access to a new spell level if you wanted too.

This provides enough variability for those who want it and enough simplicity for those who don't.

I realize you won't agree with my assessment and that is ok. If you give it some thought though I think you will agree that this is a superior method regardless of which edition it was initially developed in.

 

[bogmad]

I really do like how feats are being implemented in this edition, but I do wish that there could be a feat at level 1 perhaps.

I remember it mentioned before by Mearls that a possible way to address the dislike of human ability scores would be to maybe give humans a feat at level 1? I wouldn't mind, but then why is a human suddenly better able to be an arcane archer than an elf?

I like the idea of trading even the ability scores for feats. Why not let players trade character creation bonuses for feats as well? Perhaps certain races would only have certain feats available while humans could select everything? Giving them two feats and other races only one is obvious overkill, but not letting other races have one at all while humans do seems to limit character types.
Probably the argument would be that this complicates character creation too much?

As much as I like how feats let you define your character, it's a little frustrating you have to wait several levels to be able to do so.

 

[KiloGex]

Make those features significant to both the class and the subclass (not every level mini abilities). Then offer feats at all other levels.

You're correct; I don't agree with you. So you want to give less class features, yet then give 12 feats to every character? At this point, you're basically creating small variables between classes, with the majority of differential depending primarily on the feats that a character chooses. I am perfectly okay with having only a small handful of chances for feats - choosing out of a pool of maybe 25 to 30 - and have the vast majority of specialty come from the class and subclass itself.

I don't think that having the ability to select a dozen feats from a list of 100 "caters to the more complex gamer"; I think it just makes a game more complex, which isn't always a good thing. Anybody can create an enormous list of selections, give players hundreds of points and numbers to play with, and make a 400 page rulebook that you have to read over a few times just to get the gist of.

What WotC is doing with this edition is making the leveling easy for both the person who wants to simply get a template to level by and the person who likes crunching numbers. Where the complexity of the system is going to come in is how you use those numbers, abilities, and feats that you have in gameplay. You can't always judge a system by what the words are; sometimes you need to judge it by how it plays at the table.

 

[Sadrik]

So you want to give less class features, yet then give 12 feats to every character? At this point, you're basically creating small variables between classes, with the majority of differential depending primarily on the feats that a character chooses.

Yes I think right now there is not enough character variability.

I understand your position. You want a programmed progression of small cookie cut abilities each level for all classes and add in a couple of big choices every now and then from feats. Literally I want the opposite of that. I want big programmed class features that really matter and smaller feats. This offers greater character customization, which only apparently was a feature. Now it is a bug?

Remember the smaller feats are paired against a +1 stat boost. So if characters got 8 class features and 12 feats over 20 levels a novice player would only have to deal with 8 class features and 12 stat pumps. I think that is a lot easier than 13-15 mini class features and 5-7 stat pumps. It is in my mind the worst scenario for both groups, people who want the simplicity don't have as much and people who want the complexity don't have as much either.

What WotC is doing with this edition is making the leveling easy for both the person who wants to simply get a template to level by and the person who likes crunching numbers.

There are a lot of interesting things in character customization with background and sub-class choices. But feats, to me, are looking like a blunder. A real missed opportunity.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

There are a lot of interesting things in character customization with background and sub-class choices. But feats, to me, are looking like a blunder. A real missed opportunity.

The key here is that at its simplest form, the game needs to be like 2e: Choose a race and class, never pick anything again.

Plus, I'm fairly certain they are trying to get rid of remembering "fiddly bits" and creating "builds". Small feats tend to encourage people to mix and match feats to create extremely niche characters with powerful mixes of abilities. For new players especially this can be daunting. Heck, I'm a rules lawyer who spends his time reading D&D message boards and the idea of picking feats in both 4e and 3.5e gives me nightmares. So many feats...so many combinations....have to read them all to make sure I'm not missing one that would fit my build better. I really like the major themed feats from 5e because it allows me to look at the feats and say "Do I want to be offensive or defensive? I'll take the offensive feat. That makes me good at two handed weapons and at doing damage." Which is much easier to remember and deal with than "Alright, I have this feat that gives me +5 damage against prone targets. This feat that knocks people prone when I do 15+ damage in a single hit and this feat that gives me +5 to save against fire spells."

 

[Sadras]

There are a lot of interesting things in character customization with background and sub-class choices. But feats, to me, are looking like a blunder. A real missed opportunity.

It is much easier to introduce though the playtest a simple game with a "fat feats" mechanic and then once the rule book comes out reflect a modular system which can be adopted, with a possible feat module which allows for the fragmentation of the "fat feats" to mini-feats, allowing the players who prefer detailed custom-made characters to design them through the feat module.

 

[Sadrik]

The key here is that at its simplest form, the game needs to be like 2e: Choose a race and class, never pick anything again.

2e also had weapon proficiencies, non-weapon proficiencies, and kits. 5e encompasses these under background and sub-class. 5e also has feats and/or stat boosts. Like I said before, players looking for the simple game would look no further than stat boosts. 8 class features and 12 stat boosts over all 20 levels, that is a lot simpler than they have right now.

Plus, I'm fairly certain they are trying to get rid of remembering "fiddly bits" and creating "builds". Small feats tend to encourage people to mix and match feats to create extremely niche characters with powerful mixes of abilities. For new players especially this can be daunting. Heck, I'm a rules lawyer who spends his time reading D&D message boards and the idea of picking feats in both 4e and 3.5e gives me nightmares. So many feats...so many combinations....have to read them all to make sure I'm not missing one that would fit my build better. I really like the major themed feats from 5e because it allows me to look at the feats and say "Do I want to be offensive or defensive? I'll take the offensive feat. That makes me good at two handed weapons and at doing damage." Which is much easier to remember and deal with than "Alright, I have this feat that gives me +5 damage against prone targets. This feat that knocks people prone when I do 15+ damage in a single hit and this feat that gives me +5 to save against fire spells."

I think creating builds is now a major piece of D&D, whether old timers like me like it or not. If the rug was pulled out, I think many would not see the game as something they would want to play and continue on with PF, 3.x or 4e even. Character customization should not be eschewed as a bug.

It is much easier to introduce though the playtest a simple game with a "fat feats" mechanic and then once the rule book comes out reflect a modular system which can be adopted, with a possible feat module which allows for the fragmentation of the "fat feats" to mini-feats, allowing the players who prefer detailed custom-made characters to design them through the feat module.

That only fixes 1/2 the problem. You still wind up with a bunch of class features that are fiddly for players not interested in that.


One other aspect to class features and feats is multi-classing. Right now if you think there is a neat fiddly ability that is only attainable as a Class X at Level X you have to multi-class to get it, even though that ability may have only been placed there to fill in an empty level for the character class and could be a neat ability for more than just that one class. To me class features should be more than just a neat ability that gets arbitrarily assigned to a class, it has to really be tied to the concept of that class. Spell casting, spell book, divine channeling, sneak attack/backstab, rage, etc. everything else is fluff.