(total frustration) There MUST be an Extra Feats Academy around somewhere here ...

[Ace]

I'm hearing of more and more groups that take a new feat every level (or every even level) but I've never tried it myself. Maybe someone with experience in this could fill us in on how it impacts their game.

I did feats at every off level,1,3,5,7 etc -- I didn't see any problems with it but than again I banned prestige classes from that game too

PRC's IMO tend to be roughly equal to 1 feat or class ability per level for 10 levels

As for the 1 feat per level thing -- I plan to try that with my nexct game but its a core/blue rose/agot D20 game and all class abilities are feats in it

 

[Silveras]

I guess my question is why?
I've been reading some of your threads, and you haven't even played a 3E game, so why don't you play out the system as it is before trying to find the extreme cases that let you have umpteen extra feats. Half the time, I can't even find feats I really want.

I have found myself thinking along the same lines. Until you have tried the core rules in their "plainest" state, I am not sure what you would gain from finding a way to get a boatload of feats.

 

[Silveras]

I have never encountered any problem mixing d20 Modern and D&D classes, particularly in the direction of importing Modern to D&D. If you're willing to look into third-party d20 books, which I certainly am, why not consider Wizards' own "third-party" d20 material? :\

If for some reason you're opposed to the idea, Mongoose's OGL Conan offers an alternative Favored Class system in which you get a feat every five class levels in your favored class.

Great, glad you're happy with the results.

For me, I try to run a D&D game with strong archetypes and a very medieval feel. The D20 modern classes are different from the D&D classes in the same way that modern, post-Enlightenment society is different from the "Age of Faith" feel that underlies much of D&D.

Mixing the two is a perfectly good answer for a particular type of campaign.. something inspired by Sheri S. Tepper's True Game novels, for example, where the medieval society was the remnant of a formerly higher-tech culture, might work. For general D&D play in "standard" D&D (which is what the original question was about, unless I misunderstood), D20 Modern is not a good answer.

 

[MavrickWeirdo]

I did not see this suggested elsewhere

Magic Items

Ring of Feat X
Amulet of Feat Y

Essentially you are choosing to have magic items that grant feats rather than "spells"

 

[ForceUser]

I guess we're all just wondering what the point is. What happened to finding a concept that seemed fun to play and building that? Cherry-picking classes for maximum crunch is so 2001.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I have found myself thinking along the same lines. Until you have tried the core rules in their "plainest" state, I am not sure what you would gain from finding a way to get a boatload of feats.

Your post and the one you quote sum up my feelings exactly. Instead of trying to squeeze every erg out of the system right off the bat, I think trying it as it is in the Core would be best for a newcomer to the game. Y'never know...it could be fun.

 

[Greylock]

I did not see this suggested elsewhere

Magic Items

Ring of Feat X
Amulet of Feat Y

Essentially you are choosing to have magic items that grant feats rather than "spells"

Damn, you swiped my reply.

My last char had Gloves of Holding, and that sold me on the Feat Quick Draw. My latest char took the feat for real. The benefit to getting feats through equipment is that it adds to the char wealth. Helps the DM keep things balanced without tricks or worries. If your char is way below the recommended char wealth as per the DMG, a few feat items will fix him up, toot sweet.

 

[kenobi65]

Your post and the one you quote sum up my feelings exactly. Instead of trying to squeeze every erg out of the system right off the bat, I think trying it as it is in the Core would be best for a newcomer to the game. Y'never know...it could be fun.

Indeed. I know that Edena doesn't have a group to play with right now, so he's kind of stuck in "theoretical-land", with reading the rules and trying to figure them out...but I'd agree that it'd seem to make sense to try the rules "as-written", before deciding that you need to tinker with them.

 

[William Ronald]

Indeed. I know that Edena doesn't have a group to play with right now, so he's kind of stuck in "theoretical-land", with reading the rules and trying to figure them out...but I'd agree that it'd seem to make sense to try the rules "as-written", before deciding that you need to tinker with them.

My advice is to try the rules as written and get a feeling for them.

As for accelerating training, I think that the core rules are designed with the assumption that it takes time and experience to truly gain power. Indeed, power that is not earned can often be dangerous --- at least that is a fairly common theme in fiction. So, I think that trying to accelerate power without earning the prerequisite experience points. So, instead of hoping for accelerated training, a character would be better off earning the required experience points. (I do agree that drawbacks can be dangerous. I believe in playing villains and monsters effectively, so they may well try to take advantage of a character's drawbacks.)

The path to power for a character is long and hard. Indeed, most high level heroes SHOULD be able to tell stories of great victories and defeats, as well as friends who died along the way. So, I would argue that there is no real way in the core rules to truly speed up the process of gaining power. Adventuring frequently might help.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Great, glad you're happy with the results.

For me, I try to run a D&D game with strong archetypes and a very medieval feel. The D20 modern classes are different from the D&D classes in the same way that modern, post-Enlightenment society is different from the "Age of Faith" feel that underlies much of D&D.

Mixing the two is a perfectly good answer for a particular type of campaign.. something inspired by Sheri S. Tepper's True Game novels, for example, where the medieval society was the remnant of a formerly higher-tech culture, might work. For general D&D play in "standard" D&D (which is what the original question was about, unless I misunderstood), D20 Modern is not a good answer.

:\

Meh, if D&D captures the feel of the Age of Faith for you, bravo. I can't say it does for me. The Age of Faith for me does not mean shoehorning characters into alleged archetypes that, if they are even archetypical and not merely stereotypical (if that!), are archetypical for second-tier fantasy inspired by, but inferior to, Tolkien, Vance and Lewis, not for historical reality. In fact, second-tier fantasy that is second-tier in large part because unlike traditionalists Tolkien and Lewis (I'm honestly not sure about Vance), its authors were steeped in "modern, post-Enlightenment" mores and brought those ideas to a fantasy world - where, frankly, they're shown to be as silly, untenable and unrealistic as they really are.

Mind you, I come at this from the perspective of an actual feudalist, totally anti-so-called-"Enlightenment" in political/cutural/sociological outlook. d20 Modern does my allegedly medievalesque fantasy better than D&D because d20 Modern doesn't tell me what kind of allegedly medievalesque fantasy I'm supposed to play.

If anything, I'd say D&D would work better for a world in which modern society, with its notions of what a medieval world was or should be, had influenced a later feudal system.

In searching for feats, Edena opened up the discussion to include third-party sources (Dragonlance and Kalamar), so it seemed d20 Modern would be a valid resource. It's been a staple of every D&D campaign I've played in since its release, and never been used for a modern setting. Nor a "post-Enlightenment" fantasy world like D&D, but then, that's another story, no?