Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mengu" data-source="post: 5320009" data-attributes="member: 65726">Good argument.I think it's a philosophical difference in approach. I find feats to be expensive, and there is a whole crowd of them. Say I'm playing a Dwarf Summoner Wizard. It's very easy for me to start burning feats on Toughness, Superior Implement, Expertise, Unarmored Agility, Improved Initiative, Implement Focus, Improved Tome of Binding, Second Implement, and my dwarf doesn't really have room to be more of a dwarf.The feat field is pretty saturated, unless we want even more power creep to make a race+class feat more enticing. I suppose this could be done with a new category of feat, as your "race+class" feat that's character defining and maybe counts as a multi-class feat, that gives you a free racial skill and some interesting per encounter benefit.If races aren't feeling different enough out of the gate, that's not something to remedy with feats. Honestly for me, the racial encounter power does a lot to show the distinction. Halflings and Drow, while they share a stat pair, feel rather different in play due to their racial features and powers, not necessarily feats.I guess in the long run I don't really care if new feats are race restricted or not as much as I care that they are both attractive *and* not overpowered.</blockquote>