Feats as Treasure?

[Muaythaidaddy]

There's a relic, in my own homebrew, that allows a character of good alignment to gain an extra feat of their choice, if the relic is touched. However, the relic is extraordinarily difficult to find and reach.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Extra feats actually doesn't really alter the CR system. I give out feat every level and for the most part the PCs still do as well against foes of CR then when we use the normal feat progression.

Sure it does. If you give every PC an extra Improved Toughness at every level, you don't think such PCs will be grossly overpowered versus otherwise? All I can say is that your PCs are choosing non-combat or very suboptimal feats. That's fine and is entirely my point. The DM should be aware of whats chosen and plan appropriately. If everyone takes a skill focus, then clearly that doesn't affect much.

But, adding special abilities certainly modifies CR. Based on the guidelines for monsters, we get: "A suite of abilities that work together should be treated as a single modifier for this purpose. If the ability (or combination of abilities) significantly increases the monster’s combat effectiveness, increase its CR by 2. Minor abilities increase the creature’s CR by 1, and truly trivial abilities may not increase CR at all." I'd view Improved Toughness (2) as a minor ability and Skill Focus (basketweaving) as a truly trivial ability.

PS *Takes two drinks* Sigh.

 

[Crothian]

Sure it does. If you give every PC an extra Improved Toughness at every level, you don't think such PCs will be grossly overpowered versus otherwise?

I think they would be cheating since that feat can only be taken once. Feats are nice and everything but there are very few ground breaking feats that distrupt balance and make a 6th level character the equivilant of a 7th. The three extra feats my players have at 6th level is not the equivalant of 4th level spells for instance.

 

[Deset Gled]

I think this is a neat idea. As long as it is done purely on a case by case basis, and you have a good feel for the power level of your characters and in depth knowledge of their builds and the feats you'll be granting, it will probably be very fun.

There are a few problems that I see, though. First, granting extra feats will benefit more classes than others. The monk and druid, who have can benefit from a wide variety of feats but are limited in the number they can choose, will see this as a big power up. The fighter, OTOH, who already has almost every useful feat in the core rules, won't see it as a very big deal. Of course, if you choose what feats the characters get, or enforce heavy RP restrictions, you can lessen this effect a lot. This also has potential for allowing entrance to certain PrCs early (or completing feat trees early).

Bottom line, I think this is a nifty idea to try out in a party as a house rule, but if anybody ever published a book that attempted to spell out rules for it, I would shout "broken" at the top of my lungs.

 

[kenobi65]

I've seen this done in several RPGA campaigns, which fundamentally gave a feat (or something like it) as "certed treasure" (i.e., there's a piece of paper, called a "cert" or certificate, that says the PC has the treasure). Usually it's the result / reward for surviving a particularly nasty encounter, and typically, all PCs at the table are, in theory, eligible for it. Sometimes, the feat granted is specific; other times, it allows for at least some choice on the part of the player.

 

[Bad Paper]

not unbalancing: give out "skill point" feats to each PC. e.g. in one campaign, the DM gave these out. my cleric wound up with Skill Focus (Knowledge (the Planes)). the rogue got Nimble Fingers. I've forgotten the others, but I recall that the wizard got Spell Mastery (at first level, so it's relatively harmless).

 

[Corbert]

Occasionally I will give a book as treasure that if the instructions are followed grant a feat. However the PCs can only take it when they qualify for a feat normally, they don't get it as a bonus feat.

 

[Crothian]

Occasionally I will give a book as treasure that if the instructions are followed grant a feat. However the PCs can only take it when they qualify for a feat normally, they don't get it as a bonus feat.

So, is it just nice fluff then? Unless there is some reason they coul;dn't have taken the feat the next feat slot they get I don't see how this is really treasure.

 

[ForceUser]

I once gave out a magic longsword that granted the wielder the Combat Expertise feat with the sword. It was neat and not game-breaking.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I once gave out a magic longsword that granted the wielder the Combat Expertise feat with the sword. It was neat and not game-breaking.

That's basically a defending longsword but a whole lot better -- no loss of damage and up to +5 not limited by the weapon's enhancement bonus. If defending is accurately priced, I'd say that's a minimum +3 market modifier.

So, is it just nice fluff then? Unless there is some reason they coul;dn't have taken the feat the next feat slot they get I don't see how this is really treasure.

Maybe he allows you to take a feat without needing the prerequisites? Otherwise, it's worse than fluff, it's a detriment. Don't give me treasure that makes my life harder with no benefit.