Early Access to Paragon and Epic Tier feats == disaster?

[Mad Hamish]

It's probably not going to be too bad but I think you will want to discuss the feat selections with each player so that you can rule out ones that seem too powerful -> and there will be some.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I would not give a quick no, especially as essentials took away a lot of restrictions (basically dividing feats into two 'tiers' instead of three. If I had time , I would look at each feat in my books and delete racial, class, ability score or class restrictions on a lot of them.

But as others have said, watch some of them. Personally the ones that double healing are probably a bit much for low levels, as they are very efficient for healing. Also critting twice as much is probably not a great idea. Ones that give new abilities are probably better than ones that give simple mechanical benefits.

 

[erf_beto]

I've been tempted to try something like this myself. I love the Heroic tier, and often consider only-heroic-campaigns, but would like to see the higher level feats in action.

But instead of choosing them on first level, I think I'd let characters pick paragon feats at level 5+, and epic at 10+, just so they wouldn't skip all the heroic ones, and also give a sense of getting awesomer as they go.

 

[Cyronax]

Is a TPK really that big of a constant threat? Is your DM following the XP guidelines, or are the PCs just so powerful that he has to overcompensate? Our group played to level 18 and Paragon started becoming fairly easy due to the sheer number of non-At Will powers used each encounter combined with the increased synergies of the PCs to work together.

And wouldn't giving more powerful feats to the PCs just result in the DM making more encounters even more powerful, hence, increasing the challenge level and a set of good DM die rolls and poor player die rolls resulting in a TPK being more likely?

It would seem that allowing the feats would result in the players being able to play with the shiny toys (i.e. feats) for a while, but also result in the DM reacting to the power increase and end up TPKing the PCs and taking the shiny new toys away anyway.

Could you give an idea of where Epic feats are more flavorful and not just more powerful or with more utility?

I'm the DM for the campaign she is referring to. In the last two sessions, I tried to vaguely warn the party about the possibilities of TPK's if they just assumed that they were always going to win. I do follow the XP guidelines to a point, but they have received some magic items (including 2-3 artifact level items) that have made them perform like more powerful characters then they otherwise possible. For instance they went against a Level 22 level encounter and easily spammed through it two sessions ago, while this last session were extremely challenged by a 12-13th level encounter. Some combats feel extremely swingy, and many times it has to do with how the PC's coordinated on the battlefield as well as the fact that the party doesn't have a dedicated leader.

As for the original OP, I don't think there's anything wrong per se with early access to Paragon and Epic feats. I just would ask the PC to provide a reason, since I probably wouldn't hand down carte blanche access. But I could see several reasons in-game to give the PCs a higher tier feat as a reward: 1) divine boon, 2) secret acquired knowledge, 3) eating an apple from the Tree of Life, 4) a pact with a dark power, or 5) training at a prestigious academy.

C.I.D.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If you keep a close eye on what's being picked up, it probably won't be a big problem. But I can immediately see some issues with an Avenger starting out with Painful Oath and Hand of Divine Guidance, two striker features that you're supposed to get with tiers, available at first level. In a similar vein, you may see a swordmage starting with Double Aegis and Rapid Aegis Reaction, to become twice the defender.

However you may also get cases where a monk may decide to grab Starblade Flurry and Centered Master, which would not be quite so bad from a striking perspective. Or a fighter grabbing Phalanx Warrior and Mobile Warrior would just feel like a different flavor of fighter.

With heavy handed DM monitoring or player imposed restraint, it could be quite interesting. Without either, you may be creating unintended gaps between characters.

Agreed. The example that came to mind from me was a human Knight with Polearm Momentum, Polearm Gamble and Spear Push at level 1 using the Hammer Hands stance. And there are some really effective Healer feats to multiply the effectiveness of whatever your Word is.

 

[Aulirophile]

Agreed. The example that came to mind from me was a human Knight with Polearm Momentum, Polearm Gamble and Spear Push at level 1 using the Hammer Hands stance. And there are some really effective Healer feats to multiply the effectiveness of whatever your Word is.

Those wouldn't interact with each other. PM requires an attack with a spear that pushes/slides. The push/slide in this case is coming from Hammer Hands, not an attack, and it is specifically a separate action ("As a free action"). There is some debate if that is RAI (and there is an errata thread asking for the wording to be changed if so) but RAW Hammer Hands+PM won't work.

 

[erleni]

I think that if you keep an eye on the extra feats they take you shouldn't have too many problems.

Another "combo" that could be pretty powerful is that of a revenant with Fierce Vitality and Ghostly Vitality that can be really resilient.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

Re: TPK being the motivation -- all I meant was that in many campaigns, you never reach Epic tier. If you never reach Epic tier, all those neat Epic tier feats remain forever out of reach. The OP was all about the risks of granting early access, whatever reason there might be for doing it.

 

[Kerranin]

Biggest concern I would have is about the potential gap between those who habitually find good combinations of powers/feats, and the rest of the group.
Having said that, if you manage the process, any gap should be limited and as long as your players 'play nice', the whole thing should be ok.

 

[Solvarn]

I think that if you keep an eye on the extra feats they take you shouldn't have too many problems.

Another "combo" that could be pretty powerful is that of a revenant with Fierce Vitality and Ghostly Vitality that can be really resilient.

I have a revenant hybrid swordmage/warlock that uses a Belt of Solonor Righteousness. We are just getting into epic, and I picked up Ghostly Vitality. So now when I drop below 0, I am insubstantial resist 20 all. We don't worry about healing me so much during battle.