Pretty self explanatory question. In 5e, does your group(s) allow feats, whether you choose to use them or not yourself?
Feats are always hit or miss; depending on the campaign length, most characters pick up 1 or 2. Primary casters tend to avoid them until their spellcasting ability is at 20, since the desire to maximize save DC outweighs the benefits of most feats. Fighters (obviously) generally take the most, since they get more opportunities. Variant human is very popular in our games, since it allows a character concept to emerge at level 1, but since we usually start at level 3, non-human options only have to wait a little bit.
What's sad is that they're so many bad feats out there, that I actually combined several of them into singular feats... and still no one wanted them. The problem is that a good feat has to compare to +2 in your primary ability, and only the "broken" ones normally do that. Many don't even compare to +2 to your secondary ability.
I felt this a lost opportunity for 5E. During the playtest, they kept talking about how level 1-2 was the apprentice tier. This gave the impression that most characters will start at level 3, unless the DM wanted to run the apprentice tier. If this would have been the case, they could have fixed much of multi-classing by spreading the abilities (such as proficiencies) across all 3 assumed starting levels, so that the 1 level dip wasn't as amazing as it is now.For some classes, level 1 and 2 feel very VERY generic.
The only feats I alter at my table are GWM/Sharpshooter. Everything runs as-is and hasn't had any issues for our game play. My only change to those two is a pretty common switch from -5/+10 to -Prof. Bonus/+2x Prof. Bonus just to get a little of the "boom" and swinginess of it out of it at earlier levels.I would chosen "restricted or modified" if it was an option. It's extremely rare for feats to be dissallowed but common enough that some feats are banned or changed to warrant that answer.
That is awsome.