D&D 5E Does Your DM Let Everyone Start With A Feat?

[CleverNickName]

It's a simple question, with a simple poll: Does your DM let every character in the campaign (regardless of their race, class, or background) start with a free feat at 1st level? Can it be any feat the player wants, or do they have to choose from a list of DM-approved feats? Do you not use feats at all? Vote for the option that best fits your experience.

I'm kicking around the idea of allowing this little house-rule to my upcoming campaign. I just like the extra layer of customization that a 1st level feat brings to the character, especially if the players find a way to work it into their character backstory. But what sounds good in my head might not play well on the tabletop, so I thought I'd solicit input from my fellow gamers. Anybody have any horror stories to tell? Are there any pitfalls I should watch out for?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

This needs an entry for "Thinking about it". I am not currently running a campaign and the one I am playing in started before this became a consideration. (It really started nearly 40 year ago, with a long slow period because we did not live close enough for a regular game. Online is sure useful)
My nephew is thinking about a new campaign and in considering allowing a free feat.
I would if I was starting a new campaign but from as curated list.

 

[Burnside]

I have found that the “extra level of customization” of the “starter feat” actually leads to an extra level of sameness as I see the same 5 or 6 clearly superior feats selected over and over in any campaign that does this.

 

[Hussar]

I did this in my current campaign. The only limitations I placed were that the feats were to be non-combat. So, no Sharpshooter or Warcaster, stuff like that. A few of the players kinda, sorta danced around the edges - one player took a feat (the name of which I forget) that allows Mage Hand to push 5 feet in combat as a bonus action, for example. But, not a huge deal. I'm running the Candlekeep Mysteries and I didn't mind the players having a bit of extra out of combat goodies from the outset.

IMO, it worked pretty well and it certainly made the players happy. Got a few Ritual Casters in there, but, considering all 5 PC's are casters, that's not a big deal either. Overall I'd say it was a pretty solid success.

 

[pukunui]

I do not give out free feats at 1st level, nor do any of the other 5e DMs I play with.

I am not opposed to the idea, however. In fact, back when 5e was new, I had a house rule allowing players to trade in their racial +2 ASI for a free feat at chargen, but I don't think people anyone ever made that trade. Maybe once? I stopped offering it some years ago as I was keen to reduce the number of house rules I play with.

That said, I like the idea they're introducing with DragonLance where you get feats via your background. I expect that will become the default for all backgrounds as part of the 50th anniversary revision.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm about to use a bonus free feat in my campaign. In the past nothing I saw nothing that would indicate it have caused a problem - but my players are far from optimizers, and in the games I've been a player many times I wished I had that first-level bonus feat to further flesh out my character.

 

[CleverNickName]

I have found that the “extra level of customization” of the “starter feat” actually leads to an extra level of sameness as I see the same 5 or 6 clearly superior feats selected over and over in any campaign that does this.

See, this is what I'm worried about.

I might avoid this by forcing the players to choose this first-level "bonus feat" from a short list of options. Feats that I have carefully selected for build options and storytelling potential. I'm thinking stuff like Light Armor Master, Ritual Magic, Skilled...the feats that are nobody's first choice, and probably aren't worth a +2 ASI, but would still pretty good to have for certain builds, or to fill in gaps. It's free, after all, so there'd be nothing to complain about.

If I let them pick any feat at 1st level, it would be the only feat they would ever get...and I don't think that would be very popular with my players.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I did it once, but like Burnside said, it didn't wind up as all that interesting. I think if I try it again, I'll make a list of feats that I never see in play, and only allow those ones. "Hey, they're free!"

 

[pukunui]

I'd actually like to try running a 5e game without feats just to see how it goes.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Yes, as our primary DM (and when others in our group DM), we have always allowed PCs to begin with a feat and variant humans can begin with two OR get a further ASI +2 (in addition to the two ASI +1s).

I'd actually like to try running a 5e game without feats just to see how it goes.

I've considered that myself... but feats are just "too cool" so I doubt the players would want to do it long term.