You know what I'd like to see go away?

[Andor]

Er... yes you can. It specifically calls out in the feat that you can power attack with unarmed strikes and natural weapons.

Uh.. well.. that is.. ... How did I miss that?

Oh well. The principle still holds.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

Uh.. well.. that is.. ... How did I miss that?

Oh well. The principle still holds.

See, if you want to point out the goofy part, it's that gauntlets are viable power attack weapons ,as they're filed under "Unarmed Strike" on the weapons table, but spiked gauntlets aren't, as they're technically martial light weapons.

 

[Jhaelen]

Prerequisites have to go or be streamlined to use the same format for every feat, e.g. character level or a certain number of feats from the same group...
...which leads to the next requirement: there needs to be a consistent way of grouping feats.

Currently we have thousands of feats that defy categorization. There's simply no good way to order them in any meaningful way. Finding a feat that does something specific almost requires posting on an internet forum.

Finally there should be an easier way to measure how powerful a given feat is. If feats require a certain character level you get this for free, otherwise they need to be assigned a level of some kind.

An example for a better system has already been given: Iron Heroes
I'd add the maneuvers from ToB as another example how feats might be organized in a better way.

 

[Rechan]

Personally, I think there are some feats that shouldn't be feats; everyone should just be able to DO it.

Prime example: Power attack. Sacrificing your BAB for more damage isn't an ability that would break the classes if you just let everyone do it.

Conceptually it's the offensive equivalent of Fighting Defensively (-4 to attack, +2 dodge bonus to AC) or Combat Casting (Concentration check DC 15+spell to avoid AoO). The character is swinging recklessly, but is going to hit harder.

 

[WayneLigon]

Personally, I think there are some feats that shouldn't be feats; everyone should just be able to DO it.

A very good idea, and it would fold in some of the less optimal feats into the rules system. I would hope that with the advent of action points that we can emulate any feat for one round; you see a lot of heroes in books, movies and comics do certain things a few times, but hardly any of them use their most optimal attack all the time (All Power Attack All The TIme). In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing a huge selection of feats you could only use by spending an action point.

 

[DogBackward]

One of the things I've done in a few of my games is similar to that idea. Everybody can use Combat Expertise and Power Attack for up to 5 points, with the BAB limit still in place and no doubling of the Power Attack for two-handed weapons. The Improved Combat Expertise/Power Attack feats can be taken at BAB +6, and allow you to exceed the +5 limit. Greater Combat Expertise lets you gain an additional +50% bonus to AC when wielding a long-hafted weapon (quarterstaff, spear, etc...), while Greater Power Attack lets you add +50% to damage when wielding a weapon in two hands.

It seems to work pretty well, really.

 

[Branduil]

I don't see why people feel the need to nerf power attack. Most of the time it's statistically worthless, even with 2x damage.

 

[Enforcer]

I more hope they get rid of just plain stupid feats. When I saw Dodge show up in Star Wars Saga I nearly cried. Toughness is in the same boat.

 

[amethal]

I don't see why people feel the need to nerf power attack. Most of the time it's statistically worthless, even with 2x damage.

Yeah, the only time it gets used is when the druid wildshaped into a dire bear has cast bite of the weretiger on himself, or when the fighter has been polymorphed into a stone giant. In both cases they are also benefiting from aura of vitality for another +4 strength.

This type of corner cases are only happening in every single fight, with our current party.