Is Expanding Feats the Answer?

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Everyone,

The following is what I'm broadly imagining regarding feats and a possible future edition (I'm trying to include terms from both 3e and 4e here). It is a pure spitballing of ideas so please don't read anything more into it than me doing a mind dump [I've been playing around with these ideas for a few years now].

Imagine

- Imagine if the Feat became the universal building block for character development.
- Imagine if what a Feat contained was greatly expanded.
- Imagine if the Feat took on the entire burden of character development.
- Imagine if you gained several Feats at each level.

The Feat

- Imagine if a single particular feat could do some (or most) of the below:
• Advance or alter the capacity with a particular skill (or one or more of a choice of skills).
• Advance or alter an ability score.
• Advance or alter a particular defense/save.
• Acquire a main exploit/power/spell or class ability.
• Acquire a possible secondary exploit/power/spell or class ability.
• Give access to a particular feature (such as Heavy Armor proficiency or some such).
• Provide a standard number of hit points (and/or healing surges if such was incorporated).
• Include a choice of possible non-combat advancement and capacities (be they powers, abilities or otherwise).
• Be a pre-requisite for further feats.
• Cost a certain amount of XP.
• Be classified of a particular level which in turn may be used as a pre-requisite or restriction to accessing.

A Tree - Picture of Feats in Action
Imagine that a character is like a tree with branches representing levels (each branch represents a level) and each branch has a number of leaves on it (the leaves being the feats). What feats a player may purchase for their character is dependent upon race, class, available experience points and other restrictions.

Analysis

This all obviously assumes that WotC is going to continue down the path of codifying the critical aspects of play. The primary advantages I see are:

- Because a feat contains so many aspects, it is quite easy to tweak a feat so that the power level of one feat is relatively balanced with another of that same "level". There are lots of things you can tweak up or down so that choosing a feat will be fair.

- You can structure bonuses according to type more effectively. This one is a little more subtle. Imagine if you have a feat that offers a +2 class bonus and another that offers a +3 class bonus. If this was the primary thing the feat offered, then the choice becomes obvious. However, because it is part of a suite of developments within the feat, the feat with the +2 class bonus may still be of value because of the other features the feat contains. The feat does not automatically become superseded because a different feat offers a slightly better bonus. In this way, you can control bonuses to make sure they don't get out of control, and that they stack fairly.

- You provide a natural way of "multi-classing" and individualising a character. Because you have so many levers to adjust a feat, you can make it fair and usable to a character "multi-classing" while making sure it is not over-powered or useless to a character whose class it typically belongs to.

Further Details on Feat Features

• Advance Capacity with a Choice of Skills
This is like the bonus situation above. However, because you decided to advance to "proficient" your Climb with a different feat, you instead have the option to increase a different skill to "proficient". There might be a small range of skills that can be advanced or a larger range depending upon what other features the feat offered.

• Advance Ability Scores
Imagine you had the rule that you advance an ability score every 2nd level. Imagine that among the feats you have chosen by this stage, you were given access to a choice of "strength" or "charisma". Because one of your feats had the "strength" increase and another had a "charisma" increase (with several feats having no ability score increase), this is why you have these options to choose from. However, the neat thing this allows you to do is to mesh ability score increases in more naturally with the flavour of a feat and to restrict certain ability score increases. This is interesting in that certain abilities may be increased more readily (strength, constitution and charisma are typical on most related feats), while other abilities (wisdom in particular) are harder to come by and may be weighted towards feats that may only be accessed at higher levels or require time or a particular background.

• Acquire a Power/Class Ability
This is pretty much what is says on the box. However, what you could have is again a selection of powers/class abilities where one is chosen from a couple of options. Again the focus here is on variety and flexibility rather than having a cookie-cutter style to character options.

• Providing a standard number of hit points.
The aim here is that you don't have the randomness of rolling, but you also don't have the "I'm this class so I automatically have this many hit points". I think it gives the variety that certain players enjoy without having to resort to randomness which can be unfair. It further helps to emphasise the flavour of certain feats over others. For example the toughness feat may have "8hps" associated with it while a far more neutral feat will have only 1hp (or possibly none). [It also assumes that hit points will remain rather than changing to an "action currency or something different again].

• Including non-combat abilities as part of the feat.
There is no longer a case of either/or when designing a character; both combat abilities and non-combat abilities are hard-coded into a feat.

• Pre-requisites are important.
They help to balance certain abilities and particular bonus levels so that you engineer characters of similar overall capacity. Pre-requisites could include:
- Class: Perhaps certain feats are only available to a particular class, or if you are of a particular class, choosing this feat offers a further bonus, ability or power. Perhaps this feat costs less in terms of XP if you are of a particular class.
- Age/Time: Perhaps mastery in a particular craft or skill requires so many years of experience. In this way, you can give such capacity to a "low level" character without having to have them be of some ridiculous level to achieve this (this is more an issue for skills from a 3e perspective more so than a 4e perspective).
- Race: Perhaps a feat is only available to a particular race, or again being of a particular race entails unlocking further benefits of the feat.
- Level: Each feat may be general (can be chosen by anyone) or it may be restricted to being of a particular minimum level.
- Ability Score: maybe you have to have a particular score in a specific ability to acquire the feat. Or perhaps it is a case of either be of a particular level or have a particular ability score. In this way, a strong character may gain access to a feat slightly earlier than their level would normally allow. You could also invert this so that a pre-requisite was actually a maximum instead. Perhaps only the foolish or uncharismatic may garner access to a particular feat or to a feat earlier than level would normally allow.
- Background/Theme: Perhaps a feat is only available to a PC with a specific background or theme.
- Other Feats: This is the classic chain approach where you need other feats to gain access to other ones further along the chain. Quite similar to SWSE.
- Special: Some feats may require that you have done particular things that can only be accomplished in game such as defeating a Lich, orchestrating a Coup, or perhaps even something as simple as achieving "Paladinhood". Maybe you have to have "criticalled" a number of times using a particular exploit or attack? Maybe the Toughness feat is only available to a character who has naturally healed from deep in the negatives, or when they have had no healing surges left.
- Other restrictions.

• XP Cost
This is the interesting one where you vary the cost of a feat. If you assume that PCs gain experience points that are held until they are spent, then you can create a few interesting dynamics. Some characters may prefer a range of cheaper abilities while others will hang on to purchase a more expensive feat. This ties in to opportunity cost and the interesting character creation situations that provides. Obviously, the higher the "level" of the feat, or the more restricted you wish to make it, the more expensive it is.

The other thing this ties into is how many feats a particular PC of a particular race or class gets at each level. You may have short-lived races have fewer feats at each level so they advance in level quicker than long-lived races. However, long-lived races may start with more feats (or earlier access to "better" ones). So tying this to XP cost, if you generally purchase cheaper feats then you can advance in level a little more quickly while if you spend the XP on "better" feats, then you might advance in level just a little slower. This taps in ever so slightly to the advancement curves of AD&D where thieves might advance very quickly while other classes might vary in pace. Tying this in to the flavour of a class might be an interesting and subtle overall effect. It also allows magic to be more powerful than the mundane but be suitably restricted so that the overall balance between different classes is maintained.

• Level
As discussed, this is your main way of restricting feats offering a particular bonus level (+2, +4 etc.). As such, it ensures a "cap" of sorts so that skill modifiers can be kept within a suitable range.

Different Feat Types

Imagine if feats were of different types:

- Racial Feats
- Background Feats
- Class Feats
- General Feats
- Archetype or Theme Feats

• Racial and Background Feats are chosen at first level with some providing the basic genetic features of a race or sub-race, while other feats provide the social or background features of a particular race.

• Class Feats are your bread and butter feats that are usually associated with a particular class (even though they don't need to be restricted to that class).

• General Feats are open to everyone but may have age or time restrictions. More useful for flavouring an NPC but still open to PCs who may have a particular background.

• Archetype or Theme Feats are special feats that may only be acquired when a PC has achieved a particular "thing" during play. The main reason here is to differentiate between what a PC can potentially do and what they have actually done. This is linked to the special restrictions highlighted above (defeat Lich, orchestrate coup, achieve Paladinhood, get so many critical attacks, craft a special item, naturally heal from almost certain death and so on).

Anyway, I thought I would post this up and see if it got anyone thinking. Be as critical as you want by the way. If you don't think something would work, exploring why creates interesting discussion. And, remember that this quite heavily codified approach is not everyone's cup of tea and that's cool too.

Edit: An example from a future post that may help show a rough idea of what I'm thinking
For example, let's imagine what the "Toughness" feat could possibly look like (a really rough draft as I have not pinned down in my mind even the major features of a PC yet).

TOUGHNESS
Your tenacity and raw toughness make you difficult to stop or keep down. Your well known to be able to take a hit and still smile before exacting revenge upon your enemy.

Prerequisites: Constitution 15 and the Character must have recovered naturally on their own from a critical condition. [XP 2500]
{No idea yet what exactly a “critical” condition is but you get the idea. I have a bunch of ideas in relation to damage and healing but that is well and truly a different thread. The aim here is that the toughness feat must always be earned from in game circumstances rather than simply selected by the player. XP cost would place this feat above the initial levels).

[Constitution]
{Tag to indicate that constitution is an option and may be picked for the next ability score increase}

[10hp]
{I imagine 10hps for a single feat would be at the absolute tippy top of the hit point range}

[Fortitude +2 {Special}]
{As highlighted before, there most likely needs to be three different categories of bonus type. You would also then have the (special) bonus type which like dodge or un-named bonus types always stack with anything.}

Gutsy Recovery
Exploit: The character can initiate a second wind even when at negative hit points or with zero surges left. Initiating a second wind is a minor action for your character. {Comparatively: normally a character must be conscious or have surges left to initiate a second wind.}
Tally: Whenever during an encounter your character initiates a second wind when at negative hit points or with zero surges left, tick one of the tick boxes.

Tick boxes
Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ
{I have no idea yet how many tick boxes there should be but I’ll guess at 20 to start with.}

Half: The PC gains a further 4 hps.
Complete: The PC gains one point of constitution.
{This is used for making the pre-requisites for certain feats relying on all of or half of the tick boxes being ticked. The half and complete abilities are garnered when half and all the tick boxes are completed.}

”Aspect”:
The PC chooses one of the following:
- Tough as nails
- Scarred Intimidator
This aspect can be initiated during a critical point during a social encounter (with the effect being a bonus or penalty). If particularly successful or disastrous, the DM may direct the player to tick one of their PC's toughness tick boxes.

Rough as guts but hopefully this works as an example of how I'm viewing a feat as a collection or suite of abilities. It is meant to represent a key feature of the character.



Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[AeroDm]

The idea of broadening the role of feats has two main pit falls for me.

First, let's imagine that you develop enough levers (and instructions on how to use them) to perfectly balance every feat in the game. The choice between any two feats is now indifferent. What you haven't balanced, though, is that you still have a limited number of feat slots. So while any two feats are equal, the synergies between any two feats are not.

For example, let's pretend that +1 atk with sword, +1 atk with bow, +2 dmg with sword, and +2 dmg with bow are all perfectly equal feats. The moment I take +1 atk with sword, the +2 dmg with sword feat is now more powerful than either bow feat because of my previous choices--I plan to use the sword for a lot of my actions, so sword feats are now more powerful.

This issue is exacerbated by the fact that you get more feat slots. The more potential to acquire power in any one silo, the more important it becomes to efficiently coordinate those resources to consolidate power in that silo. This leads to people solely focusing on feats the push their one area of expertise and trying their hardest to avoid any actions that fall outside their narrow focus.

Second, I actually think that fewer levers might lead to easier balancing because it forces the tradeoffs to be more poignant and defined. If you have dozens of little variances between feats, I suspect you'll quickly find choice-fatigue paralyzes most players. They'll resolve their paralysis by growing indifferent, which would be a shame because it looks like you have a great template set out to provide a lot of choice and customization.

[My two cents]

 

[MichaelSomething]

Could you tell me how this is different from a point buy game?
Well adding requirements to what you can buy makes it different but anything besides that?

 

[Dice4Hire]

I think the feat idea is a bit clearer than point buy, but not by much.

Amd the problem with point buy uysually is putting everything into one area and nothing in other areas. Will this be balanced here?

 

[delericho]

If the game is remaining class/level based, then I suspect it would actually be better to remove feats entirely. Have players pick a race/class/theme combination and then customise their character using powers.

If the game is effectively becoming a point-buy system, then your notion of expanding the feats is quite a neat way to do that, without the system becoming very fiddly.

 

[Jhaelen]

Could you tell me how this is different from a point buy game?

That was my immediate reaction, as well!

Imho, feats are the most ill-defined component in character building in D&D 3e and 4e. I'd much rather see them go completely than trying to expand their role and importance in defining a character.
Feats have the greatest variance in 'power' or 'usefulness' of all character-building components which is why I see them as the #1 source of balance problems.

I'd like to see backgrounds, themes, and class (and racial) options to replace any need for feats. Thinking in 4e terms, I'd only keep the equivalent of multiclassing feats to be able to add a 'splash' of something otherwise unavailable to a given character.

 

[Desdichado]

First, let's imagine that you develop enough levers (and instructions on how to use them) to perfectly balance every feat in the game. The choice between any two feats is now indifferent. What you haven't balanced, though, is that you still have a limited number of feat slots. So while any two feats are equal, the synergies between any two feats are not.

Could you tell me how this is different from a point buy game?
Well adding requirements to what you can buy makes it different but anything besides that?

I agree with the latter quote; does that mean, then, for the former poster and those who agree with him, that you you believe all point buy games are inherently unbalanced?

 

[Mallus]

Imagine you are playing Savage Worlds.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

I don't see how it would work.

I'm not inherently against the idea, but here's my concern(s):


In 3e, a problem was the wide range of saving throw differences at high levels. E.G. Rogues were GONNA make a reflex save, and almost certainly fail a fort or will save.

Now, I'm not one for "all characters are the same/super balanced", however:
1. I think there have to be some basic "level driven" balances like hit points, saves, damage output scaling rougly. I was more or less happy with this in 3e (though not completely, it was a bit imbalanced at high lvls) and I think 4e made this too much of a focus.
2. I'm imagining characters who are even more specialized (e.g. a fighter who takes attack feats every single time) at the expense of hardiness...but to a silly level.


This reminds me a bit too much of the Skills and Powers and other Player's Option books from late 2e. Our experiments with them led to too much min maxing (even when trying not to).



I suppose we could take a page out of 4e's book and give the feats categories? E.G. Every level you get three feats. You must take one offensive, one defensive, and one utility feat.

Overall, I'd like to see a bit more character tweaking, but also a slight bit of the character "skeleton" smoothed out.

 

[Smoss]

I used a similar concept when I wrote my own RPG system loosely based on the SRD. It is a "point buy" style system - each feat costs 1 "point" (Called experience points - hmm...)

There are other bits too, such as buying techniques for 2 xp a pop (They are buffer than feats). Buying abilities... Buying "hero dice"...

It works extremely well - But keep in mind my RPG is a classless and level-less system. So a bit of a different beast from D&D.
Smoss