Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IronWolf" data-source="post: 5912873" data-attributes="member: 21076">I think there are too many feats in the game as well. One of the things I recall early on with Pathfinder was the breath of fresh air it felt like with only feats from the Core Rulebook in the early days. I think the APG as a whole was a really strong book as well, not sure all the feats are really great as I think there are a few that stick out as better than some of the others. But I would probably keep the feats from there as well.  The rest could all go away in my opinion.I know, as a player I can ignore the other feats - and for the most part I do. As a GM I can rule out feats from other books, which I have not done yet. I try to avoid the "you cannot choose" that type house rule these days unless it is really game breaking (and obviously so at the time of choosing it).Even giving characters more feat slots doesn't help greatly. It does let you pick up a few more feats, but not sure how much dabbling in some of the so-so feats it will do. Probably a couple of so-so feats will start getting picked up.I think I can see where one might see a competition aspect. I don't think anyone likes to be the lowest performing party member time and time again. When your buddy at the table is throwing down 30 to 40 points of damage and you are just lucky to break 10, then often times you start to feel less effective. Even if the other players don't comment on that (and I rarely see that), many players are bound to feel a little odd about the disparity.</blockquote>

Verification