I mean, the fact that Ravnica guild backgrounds give additional spell options to casters already made other backgrounds mechanically weaker. A predetermined feat or feat-level ability shouldn't be that much worse.
It's easy: you pick everything that ISN'T related to Eldritch Blast/Agonizing Blast.
Some amount of power creep is inevitable in any game that doesn’t remain static. I would say the amount of power creep seen in 5e is overall not too bad given the length of time. The slow release schedule probably helped a lot with managing it.
Slow release schedule combined with the release schedule being more adventures as a percentage of total product since at least 1e (I haven't done an actual survey of the numbers, so it might be "than any edition"). If you're not cranking out a new book full of spells and kits or feats every month or so, there are fewer opportunities to accidentally or purposefully introduce power creep into your game.
You could just give players who don’t want feats the option to take an ASI at first levelI am not digging this change either, even though I am strongly partial in favor of feats since 3.0
As a player, I almost never pass up the opportunity to take a feat, but as a DM I had some players who absolutely didn't like feats (I never understood why), and in 5e they had a choice... but now if background with feats become the norm, they don't have the choice anymore unless you consider a choice to stick with an older background and see the rest of the group laugh at you.
This isn’t any more “messed up” than taking the Berserker subclass for your Barbarian. Below average? Sure. Unplayable? Not at all. It’s not like we’re comparing a 3.5e monk who took crap feats to CoDZilla here.
