Feats?

[Destiny reached]

Why do feats come only every third level (for most classes, that is)? My friends and I were discussing making a campaign in which feats come every second level. Is there any reason not to do this?

[Garagos]

I've heard of many people who use this houserule. As long as everyone in your group agrees with it there is no reason not to at least try it. It shouldn't break the game too much unless you have a lot of heavy optimizers in your gaming group.

[Person_Man]

Remember that when the Player's Handbook was originally written, there just weren't a huge number of Feats available, and many core Feats are very build specific. (Or in the case of virtually every Skill related Feat, mostly useless filler). And when you design a system, you have to assume that most players are going to start with just the core rules.

[Bakeru]

The DM in the game I'm in likes to hand out feats as rewards for accomplished missions. It has gone... slightly out of hand, with level 10 characters having 7 more feats then we should have >.>
Still, since none of us really optimises, and feats are actually choosen from a whitelist he allows us to use, it's pretty harmless.

[Studoku]

Pathfinder does this and it doesn't break anything.

Another option if you want to give players more feats is using flaws (Unearthed Arcana, also on the SRD).

[Waddacku]

Honestly, I'd consider a feat per level.

[supermonkeyjoe]

The DM in the game I'm in likes to hand out feats as rewards for accomplished missions. It has gone... slightly out of hand, with level 10 characters having 7 more feats then we should have >.>
Still, since none of us really optimises, and feats are actually choosen from a whitelist he allows us to use, it's pretty harmless.

I did that in a a game I ran, but limited it to a list of the "rubbish" feats that no-one takes like alertness and such that were relevant to the quest in hand. Everyone seemed to be ok with this.

[navar100]

Ignoring the controversy over the changes of some feats, Pathfinder does offer more feats at every other level, and it works out fine.

It feels like you get too few feats now because there are so many with all the splat books. There could be a lot of feats you want, but you can't get them all and waiting for the levels to progress can be frustrating. It could still be you get too few feats even way back when the game was first published and it was just the PHB, but that impact wasn't so strong if it was. Classes getting bonus feats was/is a big deal.

[Gotterdammerung]

I am in a campaign now where we get 2 feats whenever we would naturally get one feat. The second feat must be used for out of combat feats though.

Personally, I dont see a problem with feats every 2 levels as long as it is universal. Keep in mind it will shift the class balance a tiny bit though.

[Keneth]

Pathfinder does this and it doesn't break anything.

QFT because I don't have much else to say on the matter.

[Telonius]

It would probably allow earlier entry into some PrC's, or earlier access to feats with a lot of prerequisites. Fighter now has only 2.1-ish times more feats than regular characters instead of 2.57-ish times more feats.

If the DM's being really picky about it, he'd have to reassign feats to every Monster in the Manual. Any feats that have BAB prerequisites might have to move to a different level, depending. But that's really only a problem if the DM decides to make that much more work for himself.