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="Vanuslux" data-source="post: 3301848" data-attributes="member: 937">Errrr...the AEG book was less than 160 pages.  144 according to AEG's website.  The Mongoose book was 256 pages but includes feats from nearly a hundred sources if I remember correctly, including the SRD (which if Spell compendium is any indication WotC wouldn't include) and the Netbook of Feats (which is over a hundred pages by itself) and  was famous for basically just throwing everything that they could find in without regard to quality or redundancy.  I owned it and saw that for myself.  As an aside, I recently sold it and don't miss it at all. The Spell Compendium did not have every spell from every supplement, not even from every supplement it drew from.  I see no reason that a feat compilation would necessarily have to include every feat from every book.  A vast many of the published feats are specific to non-core things like the Shifter, Warforged, and Dragonmarked feats from Eberron and would naturally be left out.  I highly doubt that they would use anything from fairly current sources like Complete Mage or Scoundrel.  Spell compendium didn't reprint anything from the PHB so I don't see why they would include the epic feats from the DMG.  I don't think they'd use anything from XPH since that's the core psionics book and anyone using psionics (and have any use for the feats) is apt to have that.  Spell Compendium proves that completeness is not necessarily a goal for the Compendiums.  Not that I think that the Rules Compendium is a Feat Compendium.  I'm just saying that I think people are overestimating how big a Feat Compendium would have to be.</blockquote>

Verification