Are feats the problem?

[Mirtek]

The trick is... you don't actually know that. You certainly think that.

I do know, because such feats, items, class features, whatever already fail for me right now.

I hate everything that doesn't quietly vanish into the numbers on my character sheet and I don't have to remember ever again.

Weapon Focus is fine, all my attacks go up by +1 damage and I don't have to think about it ever again. A feat that gives +5 damage vs. prone enemies is terrible for me, because now I have something I will simply forgot 90% of the time I am attacking a prone enemy.

My favorite items are Belt of Vim, Circlet of Indomitability and Boots of Quickness. I have made the "misstake" in LFR to take a Circlet of Mental Onslaught instead of my desired Circlet of Indomitability, because it's basically the same plus a neat power. I got the item 7 LFR adentures ago and I have never used the power even one. Not because it would not have helped, not because I did not have the action to spare, simply because I forgot I actually have it. The closest was remembering the power when it was not currently my turn and then having forgotten it by the time it was my turn again.

Would you look at the feat options and decide to try _really_ hard to milk out a +3 from some combination of 3 feats?

I would look for feats that make my character better at what he's supposed to do and doing so at the most "boring" way that requires the least tactic/remembering on my part.

A feat that only works when I charge would be something that I would not take because then I would have to find a tactic to charge often and to use different values when charging and when not charging.

I do not use frost cheese because it's cheese, but because I consider it too complicated for me to enjoy using it. Having to remember to change all my attack and damage values depending on whether or not I hit last round? No, thank you very much.

So I need simple feats that still improve my character in his job. There isn't much left except for simple increases in hp, defenses, attacks and damage

 

[DracoSuave]

That's a ridiculous argument followed by a plainly untrue statement.

There are many systems where 'optimisation' isn't a problem because you can't make choices that aren't optimal.

Name one system where players have choices and there's no way to optimize.

So long as there are choices, some will be more optimal than others.

Regardless, that's not the actual point of the post.

Once you realize the problem is the social contract of the group and not the system itself, things can become a lot more manageable.

So your point about non-optimizers in an group that is pro-optimization is also completely valid... because it has NOTHING to do with feats, and EVERYTHING to do with the social contract of the group.

DMs should strive to get players around the same power level, give or take. It doesn't matter if they're above or below the curve, so long as they're at the same point. The optimal/suboptimal parties can be handled by basic encounter design after that point.

 

[keterys]

I have made the "misstake" in LFR to take a Circlet of Mental Onslaught instead of my desired Circlet of Indomitability, because it's basically the same plus a neat power. I got the item 7 LFR adentures ago and I have never used the power even one. Not because it would not have helped, not because I did not have the action to spare, simply because I forgot I actually have it. The closest was remembering the power when it was not currently my turn and then having forgotten it by the time it was my turn again.

Do you do the same thing with powers, out of curiosity? That is to say, do you avoid AEDU classes? Or never use dailies, when you do?

I end up not using dailies much, myself, but I'm very good with encounter powers.

I would look for feats that make my character better at what he's supposed to do and doing so at the most "boring" way that requires the least tactic/remembering on my part.

So, which of the following bonuses (all passive, but not bonuses to attack, defense, damage) wouldn't work for you because they're not worth remembering?

Defender:
Your opportunity attacks Slow
Your mark penalty applies to attacks against allies even when you're included

Controller:
You can exclude one ally from an attack
Allies take half damage from your attacks

Striker:
You shift an extra square whenever you shift.
Your critical hits prone.

Leader:
You grant saves with your heals.
Allies can shift when they spend an action point.

Anyone:
Increased Speed
Increased # of Surges
Increased Surge Value
Bonus to a skill
Skill Training
Save against Slow, Immobilize, Restrain at the start of your turn
Deal full damage to Insubstantial

 

[Tony Vargas]

First off I love D&D and I really enjoy 4e but one thing which really hurts my enjoyment of D&D is characters which are optimised so heavily as to break the normal encounter rules.

Nod. 4e's not nearly as bad that way as prior eds, especially out of single digit levels. Still, it can happen. One issue is monster balance. MM1 monsters weren't quite there yet - the Elites & Solos had too-high defenses, many monsters did too low damage, etc. MM3 and MV monsters work a bit better.

You can also make encounters more challenging by adding more danger and interest to the environment. Difficult and hindering terrain, traps/hazards/obstacles, or secondary objectives beyond the combat - rescuing innocents, retrieving an item, stopping a ritual, etc.

Would limiting feats tone down the level of potential abuse?

Specific feats, yes. Expertise, for instance. Superior Implements. Others that can build up crazy combos. Then there are the specific crazy builds - charging builds, for instance, may abuse some feats and class features, but also make use of magic items. Often banning specific things isn't as effective as simply not passing out (or allowing purchase of) the 'wrong' items, or simply rejecting the character build as a whole. Someone brings you some chargtastic abomination, crit-fisher or whatever, you just say 'no,' and keep saying it until they bring you something reasonable - or stop asking (you won't miss that kind of player).

How about forcing a character to take at least as many non combat feats as combat feats (i.e. ones which effect defences, damage, damage type, accuracy, combat movement etc)?

Can anyone see this working?

What constitutes 'non-combat?' A feat might not /look/ that combat-oriented, but could still play a part in a broken combo of one sort or another.

If you want to be draconian, you can just narrow the feat field a /lot/. PH-only. Even PH1-only. Choose a cut-off date, or disallow Dragon/DDI material. You could cut a whole Source out of your game - it inevitably reduces bloat, and gives you campaign a more unique feel.

Ultimatley, though, you'll have as much trouble with PCs being overpowered as your players choose to give you. Good players make it easier on you. Bad players delight in making the task of DMing harder and less rewarding.

 

[Mirtek]

Do you do the same thing with powers, out of curiosity? That is to say, do you avoid AEDU classes? Or never use dailies, when you do?

I just take the most simple dailies. I'd choose a simple 3[W] over a 2[W] plus effect.

I often tend to forget simple effects (e.g. I have a level 7 avenger with a level 1 daily 3[W] and +2 damge until end of encounter, I used the daily every day but I think I can still count on one hand how often I remembered to apply the +2 damage after having used the daily.)

Your opportunity attacks Slow

I think eventually others would remind me, I still need to be reminded to mark with my level 13 swordmage.

Your mark penalty applies to attacks against allies even when you're included

Would solve issues whether monster attack like "attacks twice" incur the -2 or not, there's a lot of table variation in LFR with this

Controller:
You can exclude one ally from an attack
Allies take half damage from your attacks

I guess I could remember that, but I don't play controllers anyway

Striker:
You shift an extra square whenever you shift.
Your critical hits prone.

These are just things that wouldn't interest me much. The former wouldn't matter often, the latter doesn't really change anything since I tend to melee the first mobster that wants to melee someone. Thus even if I would prone it, it would just get up and attack me on it's turn, no difference from not having to get up and just attack me

Leader:
You grant saves with your heals.
Allies can shift when they spend an action point.

Anyone:
Increased Speed
Increased # of Surges
Increased Surge Value
Bonus to a skill
Skill Training

I actually take most of these feats already, these are nice things that just increase the number on my character sheet and are always on.

Save against Slow, Immobilize, Restrain at the start of your turn

I think I would remember these most of the time, although I don't like such specific feats thus wouldn't take them.

Deal full damage to Insubstantial

This I am also planing to take for my avenger, makes life easier if it's always the same values


I am also not an optimizer, I don't even get to the levels that CharOp considers averages (e.g. I once leveld my avenger to 30 how I would build him and missed the the 60 DPR mark by about 10%)

My swordmage at level 13 is currently dealing an incredible 9.1 DPR (and he's not doing any fancy controlling stuff to make up for it, although he's very hard to hit on every defense). He would end up dealing 2d8+23 damage at level 30 and that's with implement focus and shard of the mage. Without these items&feats I might just as well declare "full defense" every round, because the time I take to roll attack&damage is greater than the time I shorten the combat with the damage I would deal

 

[Ryujin]

I really don't mind 'fiddly bits', all that much. It just depends on how 'fiddly' they are. A little better with a specific weapon? Better at hitting with specific groups of spells, like Charm or Necrotic? Bonus damage against prone opponents? No problem.

Where I get annoyed, is when it comes to the extremely esoteric stuff. If I have to track whether it's the second Woden's Day of the month, to know if I'm getting an extra 5 damage, then that's too bloody much. It's almost gotten to that point, for some things. Or stacking a bunch of disparate condition bonuses; too much.

 

[keterys]

I actually take most of these feats already, these are nice things that just increase the number on my character sheet and are always on.

Okay - it does sound like a change that drops attack/damage/defense bonuses, but kept a healthy number of other bonuses would still be _usable_ to you, even if not necessarily preferable.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I'm kind of in your boat, Mirtek. I really prefer things to disappear into the calculation so I can get on with play and not remember "dammit, I coulda done that two rounds ago!" This applies more to item daily powers, but I tend to choose bake-in feats over much more fiddly ones.

I just take the most simple dailies. I'd choose a simple 3[W] over a 2[W] plus effect.

I often tend to forget simple effects (e.g. I have a level 7 avenger with a level 1 daily 3[W] and +2 damge until end of encounter, I used the daily every day but I think I can still count on one hand how often I remembered to apply the +2 damage after having used the daily.)

One thing I do with those is instead of turning the card over, I keep it on the character sheet to remind me it's in effect.

I also make my own power cards on index cards. It takes longer, but I never really liked the CB power cards and this way, I can be more fiddly.

Like, for my rogue, I'd write out the attack/damage per weapon, like:

+1 Dagger: +10 v (defense), d4+8 CA: +2/+2d6+3 Crit: 12/27 + 1d6

This lets me use more fiddliness by pre-baking it in. Like, I can put in +Charge stuff, +Bloodied stuff, and that way it's there on each card and I can add it in as needed. Yes, there's in-turn math, but given that I almost needed a slide rule* to do power attack calculations back in 3.5, it's much more usable.

* - I really should have used one, that'd've been neat.

Brad

 

[Mirtek]

Okay - it does sound like a change that drops attack/damage/defense bonuses, but kept a healthy number of other bonuses would still be _usable_ to you, even if not necessarily preferable.

The thing is that I also like to improve through feats. If I play a striker, I want feats to make me a better striker, aka increasing attack or damage.

Sure, I could take skill-focus 10x in a game where no feats exist to improve my "strikerness", but in such a game I would never be excited to get new feats as I level up. They could just as well be taken out completely.

 

[Gaming Tonic]

The thing is that I also like to improve through feats. If I play a striker, I want feats to make me a better striker, aka increasing attack or damage.

Sure, I could take skill-focus 10x in a game where no feats exist to improve my "strikerness", but in such a game I would never be excited to get new feats as I level up. They could just as well be taken out completely.

4E has defined roles for characters to make it easy to put together a well rounded party that can effectively be challenged by a variety of
encounters. Your strikers first job is to do damage so you should make sure that you are fulfilling that role. The leader should make sure he can heal. That being said if your striker is always knocked out or your leader always stunned then they will not be able to fulfill those roles, so some feats spent to keep characters on their feet and in control of their actions are feats well spent.
A party of five characters who each take a utility to re-roll a skill once an encounter with five different skills will decimate skill challenges but will lose out on other utilities such as escape and healing. They will be good at one thing at the cost of some other areas. If a party is optimized by the way it is the character that didn't optimize that causes the problem.