Evolving Feats

[the Jester]

I was just thinking about Linguist, and how nobody will want to spend two feats on languages. Lamentably, I might add; language skills are extremely useful, and in a campaign where the number of languages is not cut down to single digits as is the default 4e assumption, they can even be life savers.

Skill Training is another feat like this. There are better options for learning a new skill (multiclass and class-specific feats), and I can't imagine anyone taking Skill Training more than once.

So what if you could "evolve" some of your feats?

Instead of spending a second feat to add 5 more languages, many of which might be wasted slots, what if you could spend your retraining option to change Linguist from "gain five languages" to "gain six languages"?

Skill training is a bit more problematic; gaining a skill every level at the cost of a retraining option is, IMHO, too powerful. But what if Skill Training could be evolved once at paragon and once at epic? At those levels, there are usually tons of cool retraining options- swap a heroic feat for a paragon one!- so it might be a fair trade.

I'm just mulling the basic idea right now, but I think I like it for Linguist, anyway. What do you think?

 

[Quickleaf]

Yeah great point, it seems like all the skill or noncombat feats don't scale with level. Spending your retraining option to boost the feat is the same thing as retraining a feat, so youre proposing a Linguist II effectively. What would be the limit on the number of times you can boost a given feat? Once per tier sounds about right.

As another example take Alertness which provides a static bonus and a benefit useful at all levels. It would make sense that the static benefit increase with a boost. But I wouldn't see the "no CA when surprised" changing for instance.

 

[Rune]

Why not just have the feat scale by tier? That is, one language learned at heroic, an additional language learned at paragon, and another at epic.

If that's not enough language for you, I'd create another feat that let you understand the gist of any unknown language, and be able to communicate very basic concepts within it. Call it Talented Linguist or somesuch.

 

[Saeviomagy]

My favourite solution would simply be to have an additional character resource "non combat feats" and obviously disallow anything which is combat oriented from being bought with it (which might go so far as to include stealth, athletics and intimidate boosters.... but probably just stealth). Problem solved, linguist is now only competing with skill focus and it's ilk. Hand out one non-combat feat per combat feat and you're golden.

That's how I'd go about it. If you feel uncomfortable with the above, then the concept of making such feats scale is a potential possibility. I wouldn't charge retrains: you're just falling into the trap of making people have to choose a non-combat benefit (retrains are valuable) over a combat benefit again. Just make the feat scale. And make it scale good.

Linguist: gain 3 new languages, plus another new language every 5 levels. Skill training/focus/etc.: combine them, and now applies to 1 skill +1 skill per 5 levels (each point can either be spent to gain training, or gain skill focus in the skill).

In effect, the value of the feat (though non-combat) eventually becomes great enough that choosing the feat becomes a character defining trait on it's own. Picking linguist makes you THE LANGUAGE GUY. Picking skill training makes you THE SKILL GUY.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

when I was working on my own homebrew 4e (will be posted someday) I went back to saga system and took talents.

I gave 1 talent at 1st level, and 1 every 3 levels (3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27,30) and gave each class a few talents and then a couple generic ones... in general all where non combat options. I folded lingustics and skill training, and focus into talents...

I also allow in said homebrew ar 11th allowing 1, and at 21st a 2nd swap of 1 talent=1 feat....

 

[Quickleaf]

I don't want to derail the thread since part of the question is whether retraining can be used in a different way...

But willing noncombat from combat feats always seems tricky to me. Skill training (arcana) helps learn the weaknesses of several types of monsters while Skill training (bluff) improves your odds of feinting to gain combat advantage.

Linguist is one of those rare feats that is almost indisputably noncombat focused.

A good example of siloing is the hunter which grants knacks at every few levels (like [MENTION=67338]GMforPowergamers[/MENTION] suggests). Some old noncombat ranger feats have been woven into these knacks.

 

[KahnyaGnorc]

For Linguist, how about making learning languages take time to learn, and Linguist halves that time? At Paragon, allow someone who takes Linguist to understand basic concepts after talking with a native-speaker for a time.

For Skill training, what about adding training to all the skill-based feats, instead of having training as a prereq?

 

[SparqMan]

Not to focus on Linguist too much, but players could also get benefits to Insight, History, Streetwise, Diplomacy and Bluff when making checks involving the people or places of the language they know.

Learning a language often means getting to know context and culture, not just a vocabulary.

If a PC is speaking to a Dwarf and also knows Dwarven via Linguist, there may be subtle hints about what region or clan that Dwarf is from that would benefit the PC even if they are conversing in Common.

 

[eriktheguy]

Re: the difficulty in combat vs noncombat feats

If you are worried that skill focus could overlap with combat, then simply don't allow the modifier to apply during combat.

Optimal builds are very feat intensive, and there are so few non-combat feats. It almost isn't worth letting players use feat slots on them. If a player seems interested, I will usually award such a feat for free (and thank my luck that they were interested in linguistics or history in the first place).

 

[Mengu]

I think maybe bonus feats, or two for one feats, or feats as story awards are the answer here.

Say a human runepriest is picking up toughness at second level, but he decides he wants to learn it from the dwarves that they helped clear the mines of some kobolds for, I might give free language dwarven as he picks up enough phrases to get by from the dwarves. For the price of one feat, he would basically gain 1 feat and 1 language.

I find that a bunch of feats are worth half a feat especially for a non-optimal class. If a Halfling Druid want to gain training with Acrobatics, I might give them free Combat Reflexes. If a Dragonborn Warlock wants to train Perception, I might give them free Dragonborn Senses. If an Elf Warpriest wants to train Stealth, I might give them free Dusk Elf Stealth.

Basically if you pick any feat that's only mildly useful that no one will pick because there are many better feats out there, and combine that feat with skill training of an appropriate nature, you probably have a good feat right there that can be desirable and not OP.