Robert J. Schwalb Blog Discussion; Feats: Do We need them?

[Tony Vargas]

Eliminating powers? That's just crazy talk. Without powers, what do you do? Model everything you want a class to do with unique features? Return to vast spell lists for casters, and a handful of generic combat options for anyone else?

I can see eliminating feats that don't do what feats are supposed to do (provide character customization). Getting rid of all the 'feat taxes' that fix/patch/whatever the treadmill math, or this class feature or that race (or race/class combo), or otherwise make you pay for errat, sure.

By the same token, having more redundant/generic powers all dropped into a common pool for the source might make some sense. If it could be better organized than the way spells were in 3e. (Not everyone is going to use CB or future equivalents thereof, some will insist on buying and actually using books).


While it may seem like a lot of powers clutter the game up and create complexity, powers have actually greatly simplified the game by giving a single mechanical framework that can be used to describe the attack (and other action) options of any class of ay source, in a consistent way.

 

[FireLance]

Frankly, I don't think that there is any way that we're going to be able to get rid of powers simply because, at its most basic, a power is just a format to describe an action that a PC can take. Making a melee basic attack? That's a power. Moving your speed? That's a power, too.

Where I see potential future developments is changing the rate at which you gain powers. Certain classes could trade out gaining powers for more constant bonuses, for example (like some Essentials classes), or other changes to the "standard" mix of at-will, encounter and daily powers: for example, at level 3, some classes could choose between a constant bonus and an encounter power, while other classes might choose between an encounter power or a daily power (in a way, this already happens in the utility power choices for some classes). I suppose the ultimate in flexibility would be for every class, at every level, to be able to choose a new constant bonus, at-will power, encounter power, or daily power, but this would, of course, make it a lot more complex to balance.

Under such a framework, where feats might come in would be generic abilities that all characters have access to. At certain levels, a character could choose a generic ability instead of a class ability. The advantage to this approach is that players can now take or leave feats as a subsystem: if you don't want to use feats, you just pick abilities from your class instead.

Now that I think about it, this might be an interesting way to handle racial abilities, too, especially the advanced racial abilities that are currently handled through feat choices.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I suppose the ultimate in flexibility would be for every class, at every level, to be able to choose a new constant bonus, at-will power, encounter power, or daily power, but this would, of course, make it a lot more complex to balance.

Yeah, which hasn't ever worked out well for D&D. I think, if you're going to have a resource management factor (at-will, daily, encounter, milestone, consumable, whatever else) each class needs to get the same 'ration' of each sort of resource, because no resource of one type can ever be adequately balanced against a resource of another, because you can never be sure how many round will be in an encounter, encounters in a day, etc....

Under such a framework, where feats might come in would be generic abilities that all characters have access to. At certain levels, a character could choose a generic ability instead of a class ability.

This bit isn't a bad idea at all. Characters could gain attack and utility powers based on their class, but could swap out some of them for 'advanced' racial traits, or non-class/race related abilities (the 'legitimate' use for feats, now).

 

[UngainlyTitan]

snip ...
Under such a framework, where feats might come in would be generic abilities that all characters have access to. At certain levels, a character could choose a generic ability instead of a class ability. The advantage to this approach is that players can now take or leave feats as a subsystem: if you don't want to use feats, you just pick abilities from your class instead.

....

I think that swapping class abilities with generic abilities solves nothing. We will be back here having theb same conversation, perhaps with different people but the same conversation occuring. I think that feats and perhaps xlass abilities need to be siloed between combat and utility abilities. Otherwise, people will favour combat proficiency before utility.

 

[eamon]

Frankly, I don't think that there is any way that we're going to be able to get rid of powers simply because, at its most basic, a power is just a format to describe an action that a PC can take. Making a melee basic attack? That's a power. Moving your speed? That's a power, too.

I think you're responding to my suggestion to drop powers. I stated that rather bluntly - just as the blogpost did concerning feats - because I think there's a problem, and not because I seriously think nothing power-like should remain.

My objection stems not from the fact that there's a prepackaged ability labelled power (incidentally, stuff like second wind and moving your speed are not technically labelled so in the rules, but you are right that they could be). My objection stems from the way they're organized into class powers; and in the way boring, minor variants end up as entirely new powers. The same thing holds for feats. But whereas there are quite a few relevant open-to-all feats, there are fewer such powers.

In any case, I'm not trying to turn this into some kind of fanatical war between feats and powers. I just think there are way, way to many of both, there's too much duplication and near-duplication, and there are too few recognizable "classics" many characters might take. And on that score - bloated, non-differentiating, bland - powers score even worse than feats.

So it's not that all powers should go - the power mechanic is great! And it's not that all feats should go - the feat mechanic is one of the only real customization options in the game! But on the other hand, the way powers and feats are organised is terrible.

 

[triqui]

Yeah, which hasn't ever worked out well for D&D. I think, if you're going to have a resource management factor (at-will, daily, encounter, milestone, consumable, whatever else) each class needs to get the same 'ration' of each sort of resource, because no resource of one type can ever be adequately balanced against a resource of another, because you can never be sure how many round will be in an encounter, encounters in a day, etc....

I don't agree it's "needed". I agree it's easier, though, and maybe the effect you get is not worth the effort. But several games show you can use different managment factors for different classes and still be balanced (not locally balanced, but globablly balanced). It's just tougher.

World of Warcraft comes to mind: Warriors rage, Rogue's energy, Caster's Mana and Death knights Runes are completelly different resources with completelly different recharge systems, yet the system is balanced (when it's not, it's becouse of some *power* doing too much healing, too much damage, or too powerful rider, not becouse of the recharge system)

I'm not saying achieving balance this way is easy. But I think it's possible.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't agree it's "needed". I agree it's easier, though, and maybe the effect you get is not worth the effort. But several games show you can use different managment factors for different classes and still be balanced (not locally balanced, but globablly balanced). It's just tougher.

World of Warcraft comes to mind: Warriors rage, Rogue's energy, Caster's Mana and Death knights Runes are completelly different resources with completelly different recharge systems, yet the system is balanced (when it's not, it's becouse of some *power* doing too much healing, too much damage, or too powerful rider, not becouse of the recharge system)

I'm not saying achieving balance this way is easy. But I think it's possible.

I would say not only possible, but worthwhile. Starcraft, as an example, is probably the most popular RTS of all time. Its enduring popularity and status as an all-time classic is strongly based on its asymmetric race design, which gave you 3 ways to play which are all balanced with each other.

 

[tuxgeo]

Some thoughts on Feats:

1. Feats give access to options that don't fit neatly onto a planned schedule. PCs can take feats in their own preferred sequence, instead of taking them at the time that a class schedule specifies. This is one of the primary benefits of having feats, and informs much else.

2. Character-defining at first level:
• If I want my Tiefling Paladin to have the dark stain of a Warlock Pact that was sealed before the Paladin's holy vows were taken, a first-level feat can provide that. This characteristic really shouldn't be an optional feature of the Paladin class, because then you'd need a separate Paladin option for each possible multiclass that a Paladin could start with. Multiclass feats do something that class features shouldn't.
• If I want my Elf Bard to start adventuring at age 70 with a backstory including many decades of life experience before gaining arcane powers, a first-level feat "Bard Of All Trades" can reflect that. Few bards will have such extensive life experience, so this characteristic fits best as a first-level feat, not an optional class feature. (And probably not a racial feature, either.)
(In order to create the "backstory" effect that I'm looking for here, these feats must be available at 1st level.)

3. Skill powers (another of Schwalb's earlier projects):
These are alternative powers that anyone can take, requiring only high enough level and training in a specific skill.
The whole point is to provide alternatives to (overly) restrictive class power silos, so these should not be replaced by class features.
The "Skill Power" feat is one way to obtain these powers, and should be retained. This is an excellent use of a feat. (Great stuff, rjs.)

4. Racials: Classes give out powers and features in 4E, but Races don't; so the path for enhancing racial traits is provided by Feats.
Now imagine, for a brief while, that 5E is going to have a scheduled litany of Racial powers and features that PCs must choose among, paralleling the Class powers and features. How many such powers and features would there have to be? It would require huge amounts of space and imagination to come up with enough stuff to fill 30 levels for each of however many races there are now! The resulting page-bloat would be a killer.
Feats are a much better mechanic for inserting racial enhancements, because keeping those enhancements in the list of feats means that you don't have to come up with hundreds of pages of them, and you don't have to assign a specific level at which each one becomes available to the race getting the enhancement. (Why should an Elf only get "Light Step" at Level 4, or whenever -- why not at the time of the player's choosing?)

5. "Enhance this class power" feats --
Both the Arena Fighting Style feats and the Divine Domain Power feats offer specific advantages to the user of some specific 1st-level At-Will attack powers. That is drastically limiting, because it doesn't provide for retraining of At-Wills, and it doesn't provide for newer At-Will powers that become available later. The planned obsolescence in this category of feats is deplorable, and all of these feats should die a quick and horrible, editorial death (next session edition).

 

[knightofround]

Yeah this article really got me thinking about how ridiculous feats are. You need to make sure that each feat carries the same mathematical strength in order to be balanced. Oftentimes they're restricted by race/class, which makes you really start to wonder why they wernt class features in the first place.

What I would love to see is a D&D system where there were no powers, no feats, only abilities. Different abilities would have different "prices"; so it would be cheaper to pick up, say, ritual casting, instead of expertise. These abilities would be silo'd by class, however obviously there are going to be a lot of commonalities.

I think that would open up a lot of options for creativity. It provides infrastructure to both the "essentials" player and the "non-essentials" player.

Moreover I think it would make designing and modifing stuff like paragon/epic destinies much easier, since youve already tacked on point values to certain abilities.

 

[Jools]

OK then Wizards, bring on 5e!