Had he been able to choose mroe feats he definitely would have kept the more interesting situational feats.
Or, if feats which added to attack and damage weren't as available and so prominently better for his character.
Nonetheless, I still maintain that it was his choice to emphasize his combat prowess. (Of course Alertness was a poor choice for a ranger anyways, since his superhuman perception prevented him from ever being surprised.)
Of course it's his choice. He'd just be less effective if he didn't. Which is a shame. In a perfect world picking feats that are flavorful and appropriate for your character would not notably detract from the character's effectiveness.
I do wonder at this point how many feats are considered automatic for different character types. Like if you look at 16th level characters of various races and classes in a vacuum (ie, before attaching a personality) and ask what feats they should definitely have, before considering RP based choices.
Like a dwarf ranger, you'd have people go dwarven weapon training, weapon expertise, lethal hunter... maybe those two feats that give +5 damage with prime shot and apply prime shot to melee attacks as long as that'd work for your group. Dwarven durability might get listed, cause it's totally cool, but maybe buckets of healing isn't of interest. Deadly Axe might get listed, but it's really not that big a damage difference. I'm sure there are others that certain people would note as basically necessary, I don't actually know paragon dwarves or rangers that well.
So, then you'd look and go 'Well, I really want to take Linguist instead of <Expertise/Dwarven Weapon Training>' and go 'Well, am I okay losing +2 attack or +3 damage (equivalent) on every single attack, of which I make ten or more per battle, or about 200 per adventure, in exchange for this feat which will help once per adventure at most and can be easily replicated through item, ritual, or a cool RP scene with charades'
And yeah, it's hard to fault anyone for taking the one the game is beating them over the head with math to take.
It's not a real choice. They're crazy not to take it. And so you might as well write it down and remove one slot from consideration. Is that a tax? Well, that's just a fancy way of calling it that way. Perhaps it's an injustice, instead. Perhaps it's a theft. Perhaps it's piracy, apparently that word is all the rage for things it's not, and it evokes cries of Yarrr and thoughts of ninjas, so it's totally on the cool meter.
Me, all I care is that it's one less feat I get to look for something neat for my character. One more feat that will widen the gap between those in the Know and those just showing up to have some fun. One less opportunity for 'Ooh, you took X. Neat!'
It's great for the effectiveness of the character. It's kinda sad otherwise. Not good for the game. If it's so important characters get that, then just give it to them all*. If it's not important, don't put in a feat that is better than all other feats.
That and I'd like to see more variety in the weapons people use. Like that dwarf ranger using a hammer in one hand and an axe in the other. I've even got a good mini for that, but taking the feats twice is all kinds of bonkers.
* Poor Paladin Scions of Arkhosia... need weapon expertise for their sword, implement expertise for their holy symbol, and... just are 2 hit behind... on all of their breath weapon/paragon effects.
