Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wayne62682" data-source="post: 2958162" data-attributes="member: 40455">FWIW my and my group's problem with the plethora of feats is that there are so many that you could literally make hundreds of characters and never use the same feats twice.  I also dislike, as has been previously said, that the majority of feats are absolutely worthless and aren't worth spending a feat on.  Most of them seem more like Traits, and if D&D had a good Flaw/Traits system (not that trash in Unearthed Arcana) these "feats" might be better served to flesh out a character.  Specifically I'm talking about the ones that give you +2 to two skills; thse should be TRAITS that you get in addition to feats to flesh out your background (like Edges/Flaws in White Wolf games)As it stands, however, I would never waste a feat on "flavor"; you already get precious few feats as it is.  The choice is good, the fact that the majority of feats shouldn't BE feats is bad.  Worst of all are feats that shouldn't even be feats.  Weapon Finesse, for example, should apply by default to those weapons (and my DM houseruled that it does) without requiring a feat.  Point Blank Shot should be the default (ANYONE has a better chance to hit up close).  That feat in FR that lets you theme a spell's visual effect should be something that's allowed automatically (obviously you wouldn't get the slightly increaded Spellcraft DC to identify it) without a feat.  Don't get me wrong; I like the choices.  But I think it's a little too much when you actually sit down and compare useful feats with the feats that serve little to no purpose in the game but are good for background/flavor.</blockquote>

Verification