D&D 5E (2014) Ruminations on Overpowered Feats and Crafting New Feats

[Rhogar_Rarr]

Polls cannot contain my multitudes.

I allow all feats and I would probably work with my players to craft reasonable, but flavorful, feats if they wanted too. But the main reason this poll is not enough is that I give all characters a feat at level 1. I feel that it helps make their character far more unique and feel like an actual hero at level 1. Yes, this does make players more powerful, but remember, NPCs and enemies can use feats too.

 

[Tallifer]

I voted for by the book, but my caveat is that I also require the standard array method to be used in character creation. That way, choosing a feat over the ability increase is a more difficult decision. You’re not already starting out with an 18 in anything, and you have to decide whether you really want that feat, you want to increase your prime requisite, or remove the penalty you likely have.

Forsooth. Since feats are an option for more player power, they should come at a fair price.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Voted by the book.

I also give out one free feat to all PCs at 1st level.

 

[Li Shenron]

Do you use feats?

Yes.

If so, do you limit their use (in other words, specifically prohibit certain feats)?

No.

If you do use feats, have you tried crafting additional feats?

Not exactly, but as part of my 5e conversion of Rokugan I have converted 3e Ancestor feats. I treat them as "half-feats" in terms of value. I have not tested them in any campaign yet.

If you have crafted feats, how do you decide what is appropriate for the power level of a given homebrewed feat?

Since I haven't crafted them from scratch but only converted, my only issue has been to respect bounded accuracy, so for example to change flat bonuses into advantage or proficiency in the relevant feature.

 

[GameOgre]

I have experimented with 5E without using Feats by running a non-feat campaign alongside my feat using game. Unfortunately I also experimented with many other rule options in that game so I really am not sure of any conclusions other than it is possible to have a very fun game of 5E without Feats.

 

[Yaarel]

It is relatively easy to decide if a feat is underpowered or overpowered.

If someone is reasonably decent at character optimization, understanding synergy, but avoiding crazy exploits, then:

Choose which you would rather have more, a certain feat or the +2 to an ability score.

If you would obviously rather have the feat, then feat is overpowered.
If you would obviously rather have the ability score boost, then the feat is underpowered.

If you have a tough time deciding, then the feat is moreorless balanced.

Thats the rule of thumb, and works most of the time.

 

[Quartz]

I'd love to run a game where there were no ASIs, only feats. At character generation, instead of stat bonuses humans get two feats and all other races get one.

 

[77IM]

I allow feats, but I discourage them because I feel most of them are underpowered. (Compared to getting +2 to your primary ability, I feel it's almost always better to take the ability score, at least until it is up to level 20.)

However I picked the "I also homebrew" option because last session one of my players asked for a custom feat and we brainstormed it right there at the table and came up with something that I thought was slightly underpowered but he was really excited about.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

I use feats, and don't prohibit any feat in the PHB. Additionally, I allow material from selected Unearthed Arcana articles. I answered "by the book--if it's in the book it's allowed," but confess that I very recently drafted a homebrew feat for my OotA game that might see play. As that was, however, my first homebrewed feat ever for 5e and it's yet to see use, I opted to stick with the purist vote.