Feats: Not enough or too many?

[Thaniel]

I'd also add that we have too many feats that could essentially be one feat.

QFT.

I think I'm gonna go through all my books one day and try to narrow such things down.

Edit: I welcome donations to this cause

 

[pogre]

I voted too many feats, but the reason is not because I'm being overwhelmed - it is due to playtesting. The core feats were rigorously play-tested and I have confidence they are fairly balanced. I do not sense the other sources have been as thoroughly play-tested.

If a player wants a non-core feat I almost always approve with the caveat it is being play-tested at that point and I can retroactively nix the feat.

 

[howandwhy99]

I voted: never enough. They could publish 1000 more feats and I could still use more. Of course, I don't think I'd approve more than the slimmest fraction of those, but the larger the selection the better.

 

[Celtavian]

re

With all the extra books, there are too many feats and not enough feat slots. 7 feats is fine for the PHB, but not the PHB, PHB 2, Complete books, Draconomicon, LIbris Mortis, all the Forgotten Realm books, and every other feat from every other WotC or non-WotC source. Need more feat slots, I'm drowing in feat choices because I can't actually take them.

 

[Hussar]

It's a little strange though. People talk about there are too many feats, but, I hear no complaints that there are too many spells, or too many different magic items, both areas which have vastly more material. Feats are similar to both in that they allow the players to bend/break rules.

Why the dislike of feats but not other areas?

Personally, I feel that there can never be enough feats. Granted, there are many poor ones, but, then again, in any large pile you always have some things that are bad.

 

[3catcircus]

There are way too many feats. Not because of the quantity, but because of their organization (or lack thereof).

An easy way to make the wealth of feats easier to deal with (both GM and player) is to have all of the "general" feats be subdivided into different categories: ranged feats, melee feats, style feats, movement feats, etc.

Additionally, graphical representations of the predecessor-successor relationships between feats would really be nive (think PERT charts for feats.)

 

[CRGreathouse]

Nymph smoochies??? Where? Where?

-The Gneech

Nymph’s Kiss [Exalted]
Prerequisites: Good alignment, maintain an intimate relationship with a good aligned fey (such as a nymph or dryad).

 

[Aaron L]

Both.

Not enough good feats. Too many junk feats.

I can get behind that.

How can more options be bad? If theyre bad options, of course

I can always use more good feats. Every book that comes out, I look forward to seeing something new and interesting. PHBII should have proven that new feats can be really good, and that not everything is covered yet. The high level fighter feats in that book were great, but there could still be more.

 

[Tuzenbach]

In my ideal universe, 4e would also be published in two versions: the lite version consisting of the PHB/DMG/MM, and the deluxe version that consists of about a dozen books: A core rulebook, then books for feats, spells, psionics, magic items, classes, monsters, and so on, essentially reprinting the entirety of 3e, but done in a consistent and complete manner (between MM, MMII, MMIII, MMIV, FF and the sourcebooks, there's probably enough monsters for two or three books the size of the current MM, so I'd rather have three books).

Hey, stop using my imagination!

 

[Odhanan]

Feats: Not enough or too many?

Never enough. The real barometer of the feats' versatility isn't how many have been published, but how many see regular use in a game. How many characters use Cleave and Great Cleave? How many use Toughness?

The last real good additions to the feats' collection were those included in PHB2. On the thousand(s) feats available, only a few -dozen(s) maybe?- see regular use at game tables. That tells me a lot on the quality/balance of the others.