Regional Feats: Racial Requirements

[atemu1234]

The Militia feat lists specific races as being capable of taking it, but a quote in PGtF says that you can ignore racial recommendations. Which should I listen to?

[Drackstin]

your best bet is to ask the DM, but if there is a rule for it, see if its in the same book or is the same ruling for everything. normally race is a more important prerequisite for a feat.

[weckar]

Depends on whether you're using it in a Setting-based game or not. If you're just filching it, it's a DM call who would be likely to have such a background.

[atemu1234]

I approve it personally (as did my DM) but the thing is, I posted it here to ask what other people's opinions on it are.

I have a homebrewed campaign setting, so I don't exactly use "regions". However, I do make sure people's backstories fit the feats. For example, you can't be a born-and-raised farmer who's never wielded a sword but somehow have the Militia feat.

[sideswipe]

I approve it personally (as did my DM) but the thing is, I posted it here to ask what other people's opinions on it are.

I have a homebrewed campaign setting, so I don't exactly use "regions". However, I do make sure people's backstories fit the feats. For example, you can't be a born-and-raised farmer who's never wielded a sword but somehow have the Militia feat.

i also dislike the pre made settings. they are dull and too restricting. yes maybe they are good for playing in once, but once you have played an ebberon campaign you have played them all. homebrew settings can be so much more diverse.

[Vhaidara]

My group generally ignores racial prerequisites as a whole. On some things you still need a flavor connection (Runesmith still requires exposure and practice with a more runic-based magic system, which dwarves have [but not only dwarves]), but on others you don't (Arcane Archer)