Exchanging Feats

[Water Bob]

I've started using that optional rule where a PC can exchange out one Feat when he goes up a level and is elligible for a new Feat (thus, an old Feat gets changed and a new Feat is gained).

This seems to be working out pretty well.

Are there any problems in the way of unintended consequences that I'm not seeing?

Opinions about this opitional rule, pro or con?

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

I've used various methods to allow a player to retrain a character mid-game. I haven't run into problems so far.

Obviously loosing a feat that's a prereq for another feat breaks the feat chain and makes the higher feat unusable.

 

[Celebrim]

I don't allow it on the simple grounds that it encourages too much optimization and too much view of the character in a mere mechanical light.

But, in gamist terms, it isn't particularly unbalancing or likely to have much consequence - particularly if your players aren't themselves pure power gamers. So, I think you'll be fine.

The one area of consequence I can see is that many PrC's have entry prerequisites that include taking a variaty of suboptimal feats. If you allow the player to retrain out of these feats but still retain the powers and benefits of the PrC, I'm sure a cunning power gamer can get a significant advantage out of it. This doesn't effect me much, because I don't allow PrC's in my gaem, but if you do, it's something to think about.

 

[Water Bob]

Yeah, the point the two of you make about watching out for breaking Feat Chains by getting rid of prerequisites is a good one. Doing this type of thing is dangerous with higher level characters.

Great tip.

 

[Samloyal23]

This can be a trap even if you don't break a feat chain. Remember Fezzik? He stopped training in some of this unarmed feats and had trouble fighting Westley because of it...

 

[underfoot007ct]

I've started using that optional rule where a PC can exchange out one Feat when he goes up a level and is elligible for a new Feat (thus, an old Feat gets changed and a new Feat is gained).

This seems to be working out pretty well.

Are there any problems in the way of unintended consequences that I'm not seeing?

Opinions about this opitional rule, pro or con?

It works fine in 4E, it is called retraining.

It makes a poor feat choice, not impact the char for the char life. It also ofter more choices as new books are published.

 

[El Mahdi]

Are there any problems in the way of unintended consequences that I'm not seeing?

Opinions about this opitional rule, pro or con?

This is one of the parts of 4E that I absolutely loved. I haven't encountered any unintended consequences.

Sometimes players just make a bad choice as they go up in levels. The small effect on story or continuity due to the retcon seems a small price to pay to me to have a player that enjoys their character. I also haven't encountered players using it for mechanical optimization. If that's a concern however, only allow a player to do it no more than two or three times over the life of the character.

 

[Sekhmet]

In my experience, as long as you add a caveat that they can retrain a feat for a feat that they would have been eligible for at the level they took the feat to be retrained, everything works out fine.
If you took Weapon Finesse at level 1, and then at level 6 realized that you never used it and would like to change it, you'd have to change it to another feat you could have gotten at level 1.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

We've used retraining for new players who wanted to alter their build once they learn more about the game and are open to other options, and also for experienced players who have experimented with a new character build only to discover it wasn't as useful in play as it did in concept.

 

[Li Shenron]

I've started using that optional rule where a PC can exchange out one Feat when he goes up a level and is elligible for a new Feat (thus, an old Feat gets changed and a new Feat is gained).

This seems to be working out pretty well.

Are there any problems in the way of unintended consequences that I'm not seeing?

Two possible issues on the top of my head:

- There may be feats designed specifically to be taken only at level N or later, with also the intent that a character could not have more than one at such level. With your house rule, at level N the character takes two such feats already, one legit and the other by retraining a previous feat.

- An extension to the previous issue, is that at level 20 (or whatever) the character may end up having many powerful feats that the designers assumed no one could have that many because of the level prerequisite, but the character has retrained all his low-level feats for high-level feats.

I don't think it's a significant issue tho...

Other than that, I hate retraining rules, but that's just me.