Concerning Feats

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Epic6th is a great idea. Unfortunately, I couldn't get my players to agree to limit their characters to only 6th level.

But, to the main question(s), as I see them, in the thread.

What I offer my players is this: A special prestige class that offers only feats. Taking a level in this prestige class grants the character 5 bonus feats. It confers no other benefit (either to BAB, saves, hit points, etc...).

For all intents and purposes, it works just like the character had taken a level in a prestige class.

For me, I really like it. Because, even though it seems like it gives the character a lot, they still gain XP as if they were a level higher than they were, but they didn't really get much tougher. Instead, they only increased their options through the extra bonus feats. So, it may serve to slow advancement, a bit, while still allowing the characters to grow in breadth (if not in height), so to speak.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Again though ... how many feats do you think a level should be worth? I'm putting it at between 2 and 3. What do you think?

Honestly? It depends on the level they're currently at. At level 1, there's only so many great feats out there they can take, and there's already flaws to do that. If you notice, a lot of good feats come in clusters at certain power levels. For example, many great feats, and most non-mage tactical feats require BAB +6, so level 6 for martial classes, level 8 for rogue-types. Wizard-types probably don't care about those feats. Druids will NEVER want to trade a level for feats below 5th level. After that, it becomes a far more worthwhile investment, because almost every single feat worth taking for a Druid requires Wildshape, or is more useful if you have Wildshape.

 

[Jhaelen]

Let's say the players come to you, the DM. They have just obtained enough experience points to level (say, from 1st to 2nd level.) They offer to trade in that level and the experience earned, for feats.

Sounds like a bad deal to me. I wouldn't grant them any feats. If you do, you'll most likely regret it bitterly a few levels from now.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

Epic6th is a great idea. Unfortunately, I couldn't get my players to agree to limit their characters to only 6th level.

But, to the main question(s), as I see them, in the thread.

What I offer my players is this: A special prestige class that offers only feats. Taking a level in this prestige class grants the character 5 bonus feats. It confers no other benefit (either to BAB, saves, hit points, etc...).

For all intents and purposes, it works just like the character had taken a level in a prestige class.

For me, I really like it. Because, even though it seems like it gives the character a lot, they still gain XP as if they were a level higher than they were, but they didn't really get much tougher. Instead, they only increased their options through the extra bonus feats. So, it may serve to slow advancement, a bit, while still allowing the characters to grow in breadth (if not in height), so to speak.

Does taking a level in this PrC cause the Character Level to increase, in your system?
For example, if a 1st level character levels, and instead of becoming 2nd level she takes 1 level in the PrC and gains 5 feats, does she now count as a 2nd level Character? (thus, requiring more experience points to level the next time.)

If yes, can this PrC be taken multiple times? Say the character above reaches 5th level in her class (and is a 6th level Character overall), could she take the PrC again and gain 5 feats, remain 5th level in her class, but now be counted as a 7th level Character?

Is that how it works?

EDIT: It seems to work like this. I'm just checking to be sure.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

Epic6 looks like a great idea, and a good alternate set of rules.

Players, of course, may well insist on the ability to eventually reach high level (as you saw, Hrothgar) and thus the group can't go with Epic6.
I really have no answer to that one.

I was trying to create a system where the players could advance, but more slowly, while gaining feats.
Since it becomes progressively harder to level as you rise in character level (you must defeat more powerful opponents to gain enough experience) it thus becomes more difficult to gain the extra feats (since they are level based.)
A group taking twice as long to level, is going to spend a long time in that 6th to 10th level range, which seems to be favored by players and DMs alike as a fun place to play in.
For those groups who favor 10th through 15th level, they are going to spend an awfully long time in that range.

But I didn't think it fair to allow the characters to race up to 5th level, then start sacrificing levels for feats. I thought they should start at 1st level.
Why?
5th level is, as mentioned, a cushy point where the threat of death is diminished, and you have more powers to throw around anyways. I feel that should be earned, not granted.
In short, I don't think it should be a matter of: 'let's get you up to 5th level so you are out of the extreme danger posed for low level characters, then you can delay advancing to take all those feats at your leisure.'
I'm more like: 'You want a lot of feats? That is fine. But extra reward comes at the cost of extra danger. When - if - you get to 5th level, you'll better appreciate what 5th level means (and have all those nifty feats to use in addition to the comforts of 5th level.) You'll have your cake and eat it too, but first you must survive getting there.'

EDIT:

The Epic6 sounds a bit like my proposed Very Slow Advancement, where you need triple the experience points to level but obtain 4 to 6 feats through each level (2 to 3 for the two times you refused to level when you could have.)
Yes, the characters can still advance beyond 6th level. But at 1/3rd the normal rate of advancement, how far are they going to go? If it takes 2 to 3 adventures for the party to level once, now it takes 6 to 9 adventures for them to level! (That's a lot of play time ...)
The characters are going to spend an enormous amount of time in the sweet spot range of 6th to 10th level.
If they get to 11th level, it's going to take one heck of a lot of adventuring to keep leveling (yeah, you defeated the CR 11 challenge. Killed half the party, but you did it. Now, if you can only do that 8 more times, you'll reach 12th level.)

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

Sounds like a bad deal to me. I wouldn't grant them any feats. If you do, you'll most likely regret it bitterly a few levels from now.

I can see players wanting to 'trade in' that quick 1,000 experience points for 2 to 3 feats, yeah.
Then, not repeating the process, but zooming up in level ... with the extra feats to help them along the way.
My system wouldn't allow that. Begin with Slow Advancement, stuck with Slow Advancement.

However, you say I will regret this. Can you elaborate?

If it is because someone took a feat chain (hey, my 4th fighter now has Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, and Whirlwind Attack!) I would think adding to the challenge (those aren't CR 4 orcs, those are CR 4 orcs with bows and poisoned arrows and they're firing them at the party right now!) would even things out ...

 

[Jhaelen]

However, you say I will regret this. Can you elaborate?

If it is because someone took a feat chain (hey, my 4th fighter now has Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, and Whirlwind Attack!) I would think adding to the challenge (those aren't CR 4 orcs, those are CR 4 orcs with bows and poisoned arrows and they're firing them at the party right now!) would even things out ...

This is exactly why I think, you'll regret it before long. Standard encounters will no longer be challenging, so you'll always have to modify them in some way. This means more work for you as the DM. You may not notice the extra-effort much for a few level, but once you're in the mid-level region it'll become noticeable.

Even without house-rules a party including one or two powergamers can be very difficult to challenge. In my campaign effective party level is now 12 and it's incredible what they can kill in one or two rounds.

Ultimately it's for you to decide. If you don't feel it will make much of a difference, give it a try.

P.S.: I am using Weapons of Legacy in my campaign. I modified the mechanics, so performing a ritual will only cost xp and gold but not cause any permanent penalties. I introduced them, because magic items are hard to come by in my campaign.
But in a way that's a similar approach to give the players some 'extras'.

Giving your players magic items that allow them to use certain feats might be a more balanced way since they can be lost/destroyed (especially after it turns out they're causing balance problems...).

 

[taliesin15]

Edena writes:

I always felt, personally, that characters needed about 3 times as many feats, minimum, as the rules allowed them. Just my opinion, of course.

Interesting perspective. Never heard that one expressed. One problem with this though is then ALL the NPCs and Monsters would have to have/get 3 times the Feats. Just think of all the extra work that is for the DM. Not that Players always do...

Got a question for you.
Let's say the players come to you, the DM. They have just obtained enough experience points to level (say, from 1st to 2nd level.) They offer to trade in that level and the experience earned, for feats.

Wow. First, I think 2 Feats for a LVL seems about right. You should make this a poll.

Second, most players, I would think, would be missing the other things that comes with levelling up--such as extra spells, attack bonusses, skill points, saving throw adjustments, not to mention not getting one higher slot in terms of getting extra feats and ability score adjustments. Because if a PC is not levelling up, they certainly wouldn't get those, right?

Third, the DM would have to come up with some kind of alternative to the old "training with mentors" to level up paradigm, assuming one's campaign uses that mechanism. Mine still does, sure, a holdover from 1st edition, but whatever. So now I guess the Ranger would have to look for something other than the Ranger School in the woods to the North, and they'd be wondering does this mean we're not going to get our tuition. Perhaps not as big a deal as the dealing with the very greedy local Master of the Thieve's Guild. FWIW.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

The idea of a character coming from a school, and having been through a training program to reach 1st level, was in my thoughts here. Along with further training for leveling. Those concepts made perfect sense to me back in 2E, and I thought they made even more sense in 3E.

I thought that, in addition to a school enabling a character to obtain '1st level' perhaps the school enabled a character to obtain a 'package' of feats, to start the game with. About 5 or 6 feats, in addition to those that could be chosen.

What kind of feats would have been in this 'package'?
Well, let me state what would not be in the package first: 'You get Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, and Whirlwind Attack, and you do not need a BAB +4 to have Whirlwind attack.'
No, that would not happen.

What would you get?
A character from a school that stressed endurance and perseverence, might obtain: Endurance, Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Run, and Toughness.
A character from the cavalier school might gain: Alertness, Endurance, Mounted Combat, Leadership, and one other feat related to being a cavalier.
A character from a rogue school might gain: Alertness, Ambidexterity, Dodge, Lightning Reflexes, and Run.
A character from an academy of magic might gain: Alertness, Combat Casting, Lightning Reflexes, maybe Ambidexterity, and one other feat related to wizardry.

Note that I never included such feats as Mobility (the 2nd feat in a chain), nor Improved Initiative (a powerful feat), Power Attack (a strong fighter feat), or metamagic feats (strong wizard feats.)
Those feats are for the characters to take.
The feats I choose were feats I seriously doubt anyone takes if they can help it, but which add to the roleplaying and depth aspects of the character.

I mean, if I were playing a rogue, and I had 2 starting feats, I would take Improved Initiative and Point Blank Shot.
Although Alertness, Lightning Reflexes, Quick Draw, Run, and others make sense for a rogue, I don't have feats to waste. So I don't take those feats.
At 3rd level, I take Precise Shot. I want to shoot down my opponents with a Sneak Attack. Again, I don't take those other feats (Alertness, etc.) because I don't have feats to waste.

Just my take here. If a training school can make someone 1st level, I could see that school training the character in certain feats. Great Cleave or Spring Attack or Quicken Spell? No. Alertness or Dodge or Iron Will? Yes.

-

As for the monsters, yes they would have extra feats. More work for me, the DM, yes. But I do want to give my players the most enjoyable experience I can, and if they are all clamoring for feats I would go through the extra work.
That would even out the CR challenge right there, so I wouldn't have to have extra monsters or have them use more dastardly tactics in order to even things out. So that's extra work I wouldn't have to do, in this case.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

Edena writes:

(snip)

Second, most players, I would think, would be missing the other things that comes with levelling up--such as extra spells, attack bonusses, skill points, saving throw adjustments, not to mention not getting one higher slot in terms of getting extra feats and ability score adjustments. Because if a PC is not levelling up, they certainly wouldn't get those, right?

Correct. With Slow Advancement, the characters would gain the extra 2 or 3 feats for missing out on leveling, and it would take twice as many experience points to level.
No quick jump to 2nd level, raking in those 1,000 experience points in a hurry to avoid the Dreaded 1st Level Experience. No quick jump to 3rd level and obtaining the nifty powers and viable hit points of that level.

But I would think a determined, clever party could tough out the 2,000 experience points needed to obtain 2nd level, the 4,000 needed to obtain 3rd level, the 6,000 for 3rd, the 8,000 for 4th, and the 10,000 for 5th.
The payoff would be all those extra feats, so in the Sweet Spot of 6th through 10th level (which they'd stay in twice as long), they'd have a lot of customization of their characters. More opportunities for individualism, more opportunities for roleplaying, more satisfaction at having earned the higher levels.
Yes, there'd be those who Power Gamed. But even the extra feats aren't enough for any character to take all the feats (after all, there are thousands of feats, and hundreds of Power Feats!) So what you get is a One or Two Trick Pony. In a situation where he can't use his feat chains, he's all but helpless.

He can do 100 hit points of damage in melee combat? At 5th level?
Fine. That's pretty useless against the archers shooting at him.

He can fire gads of arrows at opponents and down powerful monsters in a second round at a distance? At 5th level?
That's great. He downs one monster. The other monsters close, and he's history.

Frankly, I don't see how any character can survive for very long in 3E, unless that character is played intelligently. Feats, even loads of feats, are no substitute for good playing.