Wishing for feats, legal?

[chilibean]

There is a very simple benchmark to use for this.
You gain an ability point every 4 levels. You can wish for an ability point (max of 5 per ability).

You gain a feat every 3 levels. So why not allow people to wish for a feat? A feat is worth less than an ability point, since you get them more often. All you need to do is require that they have all the prerequisites and limit them to 5 feats total from wishes.

The argument of ultra powerful wizards once they can cast their own wish spells is nicely handled by the 5 inherent bonus cap. So just use the same concept.

 

[kreynolds]

There is a very simple benchmark to use for this...

What is there an echo in here for crying-out-loud! Sounds like I'm sitting in a latrine!

 

[ashockney]

Other: Yes, you can wish for feat. No, it's not permanent.

 

[kreynolds]

Other: Yes, you can wish for feat. No, it's not permanent.

Wow...that was such...an amazing...explination. Why is it not permanent?

 

[Ma'varkith]

But then again, they might change the two feat per epic level rule when the book comes out.
Tata.

Epic-Level rules look absolutely nothing like the description that user gave you, and are pretty much the same as the character advancement rules we're all familiar with.

Sounds like your source has never seen a copy of the playtest document, and was either speculating or BS-ing.

 

[ruleslawyer]

The only restriction I'd put on wishing for feats (other than the "5 feats maximum" restriction), is that you must meet all prerequisites for the feat. BTW, I have no problems with characters "wishing themselves up a feat chain" or gaining the prereqs for a PrC in this manner. To those of you who do have a problem with this: at what level are characters in your games getting access to wish ? This spell really shouldn't be available to characters until around 17th level, with one or two wishes coming earlier in the game. Therefore, I really don't see a balance problem as far as eliminating PrC obstacles or gaining access to feat chains too quickly.

 

[kreynolds]

Epic-Level rules look absolutely nothing like the description that user gave you, and are pretty much the same as the character advancement rules we're all familiar with.

Sounds like your source has never seen a copy of the playtest document, and was either speculating or BS-ing.

Whoa, slow down there bucko. He's probably going off of the epic level docs released at GenCon.

 

[Roland Delacroix]

Epic-Level rules look absolutely nothing like the description that user gave you, and are pretty much the same as the character advancement rules we're all familiar with.

Sounds like your source has never seen a copy of the playtest document, and was either speculating or BS-ing.

Actually those rules were common everywhere right before news of the Epic level book was making the rounds. WotC threw out those rules as a hold over for people who were going to hit 20th level before the Epic book came out. Sounds like you havent been hip with the d20 news very long.

I don't think it's overly harsh - it keeps characters from wishing their way into a PrC, or to the end of a long Feat Chain. If they need the Feat to get into a Class, or they want to get something like Whirlwind Attack, then they need to work for it (by leveling up) just like every other character.

Unless you are giving your players Wishes at 5th level this is irrelevent. By the time a group gets wishes they will be high enough level that they probabaly couldnt complete a new PrC, and the best abilities are at PrC level 9-10 anyway. In most cases the tradeoff isn't worth it. I'm sure you could come up with some extreme case, but a naked character shouldn't even find a Ring of Three Wishes untill 13th level and certainly not cast Wish until 17th. High level characters should have high level powers not be glorified lamers just because the DM can't handle a high level group.

I can understand not wanting players to get too many feat chains, in the right game. I'm of the opinion that there are way to many cool feats out there to play anything but a Psi Warrior or Fighter (or Monk with the OA rules, or Psion with Resculpt Mind). Allowing to Wish for feats means even Bards can get cool feat chains, at a cost. Hell, Sorcerers almost need to be able to Wish feats they get so few.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

There is a very simple benchmark to use for this.
You gain an ability point every 4 levels. You can wish for an ability point (max of 5 per ability).

You gain a feat every 3 levels. So why not allow people to wish for a feat? A feat is worth less than an ability point, since you get them more often. All you need to do is require that they have all the prerequisites and limit them to 5 feats total from wishes.

A perfect explanation.

And I'll add this: If a character with 5 extra feats is going to somehow "break" the game, odds are good that the same character's access to Wish in the first place, is more than the DM can handle.


Wulf

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

There is a very simple benchmark to use for this.
You gain an ability point every 4 levels. You can wish for an ability point (max of 5 per ability).

You gain a feat every 3 levels. So why not allow people to wish for a feat? A feat is worth less than an ability point, since you get them more often. All you need to do is require that they have all the prerequisites and limit them to 5 feats total from wishes.

The argument of ultra powerful wizards once they can cast their own wish spells is nicely handled by the 5 inherent bonus cap. So just use the same concept.

A very reasonable argument. You are right that allowing wishing for 5 additional feats will probably not break the game, unless wishes themselves were going to break it anyway.

OTOH, I would disagree that a stat point is worth about the same as a feat, even if adding feats is more common. If I were to create a custom race for a campaign you were DMing, would you let me create a race that had -2 Str, -2 Cha and 4 bonus feats at 1st level? I suspect not.

Feats as much as much as class define the nature of the character, more so that stats IMHO.