PDA

View Full Version : What feats should be...



Orzel
2007-04-04, 10:01 PM
A feat should not give number bonuses.

Number bonus feats bad. Orzel no like. *hurls tree*

"You can make a Bluff check to feint in combat as a move action." Good.

"You get a +2 bonus on all Diplomacy checks and Sense Motive checks." BAD! SMASH! BAD! GRRR! *tree hits negotiator*

Some people say the problem with feats is that they don't pregress with levels. I say they shouldn't have to progress. There shouldn't be any number to increase except for size bonus and penalties.

A feat should give you a new ability or feature, give you another option when using an existing ability or feature, or make an existing ability feature not terrible.

Power Attack give you the ability to beat folk in the the head harder.
Improved Feint gives you another option for bluffing in combat.
Silent Spell lets you cast without the verbal parts.
Two Weapon Fighting makes TWF not almost completely useless.

A feat shouldn't just let you get a feature to a certian number a level or two faster.

Ranis
2007-04-04, 10:04 PM
Well, with my experience, the feats that add numerical bonuses are somewhat of a waste, but if you make them any better, they get horribly broken. I think that the reason they are included at all is for flavor reasons when qualifying for prestige classes.

ocato
2007-04-04, 10:08 PM
And of course you don't mean Versatile Performer because VP is teh awesome.


...I will fight you.

Orzel
2007-04-04, 10:14 PM
And of course you don't mean Versatile Performer because VP is teh awesome.


...I will fight you.

No. Versatile Performer makes A=B. no numbers.

And I could take you.

Hypothetical
2007-04-04, 10:17 PM
And of course don't forget that many of the Exalted Feats ( such as Vow of Non-violence for Example) do indeed gain bonuses as you level.

TheOOB
2007-04-04, 10:20 PM
I agree and disagree with you. I think feats that give numerical bonuses should exist, but they should be the minority. For example, if I'm playing a wizard, but my backround with working with snakes requires a high fortitude save, I should be able to use a feat to raise my fortitude save to represent this.

That said, I think many of the bonuses are too low (come on, +3 hp, get serious), and that a numerical bonus alone isn't enough for a feat, feats should allow you to do something you couldn't otherwise do. No one wants to take lightning reflexes and gain a whopping +2 to reflex saves, but if it gave +2 to reflex saves and evasion, well that would be something, and it still wouldn't be overpowered.

ocato
2007-04-04, 10:34 PM
It also adds a +2 to 90% of Perform checks, but I'm not arguing with you. I think you're right.

Edited.

Starsinger
2007-04-04, 10:35 PM
I agree, feats should be more useful than, "you gain a +1 on damage rolls on a tuesday, if you use a guisarme, while wearing a raincoat."

Orzel
2007-04-05, 04:04 AM
Well numbers isn't bad if combined with a not number abiity. Improved Disarm give +4 to the disarm checks but its main use is to prevent AoO and counter disarms.

As for feats like Lightning reflexes and great fortitude, they should be combined with minor abilities.

Kantolin
2007-04-05, 05:29 AM
I agree, feats should be more useful than, "you gain a +1 on damage rolls on a tuesday, if you use a guisarme, while wearing a raincoat."

DM: Huh... I wonder why PlayerA is being so descriptive tonight?
PlayerB: He's trying to delay until it's Tuesday for the bonus, and it's 11:58 now.


Personally, I'm actually okayish with number bonuses, so long as they actually mattered. A +2 or a +3? Kinda helps... a boost that goes up with levels would be nice.

Ranis
2007-04-05, 06:49 AM
I agree, I think Iron Will should be more along the lines of Indomitable Will, where , for example, when you fail a will save, there's a 50% chance you can roll it again. Then, Indomitable Will would be the next step in the mini feat tree, and so on and so forth.

The +2 to Will saves would be the candy attached to Iron Will to make it a little more worth picking up.

bosssmiley
2007-04-05, 11:52 AM
And of course don't forget that many of the Exalted Feats ( such as Vow of Non-violence for Example) do indeed gain bonuses as you level.

...as do the various heritage (Draconic, Celestial Infernal) feats, racial (Eberron Shifter) feats and (IIRC) divine feats. Most of these gain additional pluses or uses/day based on the number of feats of that type a character has.

goat
2007-04-05, 07:27 PM
The thing is, if you're facing someone of equal level in a contested roll, and you've both got the relevent skills maxed, that +2 bonus could end up making all the difference.

the_tick_rules
2007-04-05, 07:45 PM
i know having weapon focus and specilization has saved my fighters butt a couple of times. and when i get weapon mastery oh yeah.

Starbuck_II
2007-04-05, 08:01 PM
I agree and disagree with you. I think feats that give numerical bonuses should exist, but they should be the minority. For example, if I'm playing a wizard, but my backround with working with snakes requires a high fortitude save, I should be able to use a feat to raise my fortitude save to represent this.

That said, I think many of the bonuses are too low (come on, +3 hp, get serious), and that a numerical bonus alone isn't enough for a feat, feats should allow you to do something you couldn't otherwise do. No one wants to take lightning reflexes and gain a whopping +2 to reflex saves, but if it gave +2 to reflex saves and evasion, well that would be something, and it still wouldn't be overpowered.
Only if the evasion was in no armor.

I say the Skill Focus feats are awesome. But Combat Casting sucks. (Prc requirement only).

My artificer can't fail UMD because of SF UMD with scrolls.

The_Snark
2007-04-05, 08:05 PM
There are a couple feats that are useful that have fixed bonuses. Improved Initiative, for example, because that's a hefty bonus and there aren't a whole lot of ways to pump your initiative. There's a feat that gives +4 on attacks of opportunity, which is awesome for a Karmic Strike/Robilar's Gambit/Improved Trip guy.

Diggorian
2007-04-05, 08:19 PM
i know having weapon focus and specilization has saved my fighters butt a couple of times. and when i get weapon mastery oh yeah.

Yeah buddy, it's sweet. I just got Melee Weapon Mastery (slashing), now I can Combat Expertise for the full 5 and still attack like a Str 16 fighter of my level. Welcome to flavor country! :smallbiggrin:


A feat shouldn't just let you get a feature to a certian number a level or two faster.

Why? *prepares to duck a hurled tree*

Kultrum
2007-04-05, 08:22 PM
yes and no for a character you pour over and personalize they make great flavor but on the other hand they usually are pretty pointless for a more optimized char.

Orzel
2007-04-06, 04:48 AM
Why? *prepares to duck a hurled tree*

Because numbers have an effeciency and effectiveness based on level. Feature don't.
A feat should a feature. Something that can't be mimiced without obtaining that feature. You can't gore without horns.

Diggorian
2007-04-06, 11:21 AM
How do you mean "effeciency and effectivenss based on level"? Weapon focus gives +1 to a level 2 and the same to a level 16.

TWF gives a numerical bonus, by reducing penalties. Is the problem numeric bonuses or the size of the bonus per feat?

Orzel
2007-04-06, 06:08 PM
How do you mean "effeciency and effectivenss based on level"? Weapon focus gives +1 to a level 2 and the same to a level 16.

TWF gives a numerical bonus, by reducing penalties. Is the problem numeric bonuses or the size of the bonus per feat?

Maybe I should have said "ineffeciency and ineffectivenss based on level". Weapon Focus is awesom level 1-5 but stinks past level 9 or so.

The problem is numeric bonuses. Numeric bonus can be simulated in many ways thus making each one less important. +2 to attack rolls could be created with 4 points of Strength, 2 points of BAB, 2 feats, a couple of spells, few special actions, a size bonus, and a weapon enhancement. But which of these are the easiest to increase at low levels? at mid levels? at high levels?

A numeric change should be side efect of an feature. TWF give you extra attacks, they just aren't as good.

Kel_Arath
2007-04-06, 10:41 PM
feats that add numbers just mean that you focus in doing those things better, so it makes complete sense to me

Innis Cabal
2007-04-06, 11:01 PM
i think they are a complete waste of a feat, ya get 7, if you have a question on what feat to take and are really stuck take improved init, cuase there is no character that cant use it

Tach13
2007-04-06, 11:21 PM
While the number granting feats aren't as cool as the new ability feats, they have their purpose. If I'm trying to make someone a great acrobat, Athletic is an option that is very useful at low levels, and while not quite so awesome at higher levels, it still gives the gain. They aren't something that most people take a lot of, but they give a nice boost for starting characters especally. And TWF is a number feat, +2 to attacks when wielding 2 weapons. It grants nothing completely new, but it's one of my favorite feats. While this is mostly a Rogue thing, I always concentrate feats on making me better at combat, and let the skill points handle the rest. If I was playing a spell caster or fighter, I might use a few more skill aiding feats.

TheOOB
2007-04-06, 11:30 PM
I think number granting feats need to exist, but I don't think they are ment to be taken. For example, in all but a very select few builds, skill focus is a worthless feat, but even so there needs to be a feat that allows you to have a skill bonus higher then your level and ability modifiers would normally allow.

Orzel
2007-04-07, 03:54 AM
My new house rule is that number feats only count as 1/2 a feat. Meaning when you gain a feat, you can choose 2 of them if both just grant a bonus to a check, roll, or DC. Lightning reflexes and Iron willl at level one.

Deepblue706
2007-04-07, 12:26 PM
That's interesting...but what if I made a Human Rogue, and took Stealthy, Skill Focus: Move Silently, Skill Focus: Hide, and ...heck, whatever else adds a bonus to a rogue character and fulfills your 1/2 feat thinger...all at level 1?

Let's say the character is "elite", having 25 pts.

So, I'll give him a 15 DEX: +2 bonus.

4 ranks in both move silently and hide.

+5 from the feats that enhance my skills

I have a +11 to both Move Silently and Hide, and still have another "1/2" feat to spend. That kind of bonus on two skills at level one? Are you sure this "1/2" feat thing is appropriate in all cases?

Dreyden
2007-04-07, 04:20 PM
Something no one's mentioned yet is the DM's point of view. For a DM, number increasing feats are essential. We have to run multiple creatures, be the eyes and ears of the players, and referee all at the same time. We usually get little to no time to think of the monsters' actions until their turn comes up and the game literally stops until we decide what the monster does. Show me an encounter with 4 different NPC statblocks, all different, with mainly 'extra option' feats, and you show me a much slower combat. This is part of why the Tarrasque has Toughness 6 times - not because it's statistically optimal, but because he's already got enough decisions to make (sort of, but taking 6 'new option' feats instead would be a nightmare.)

'New option' feats are great, but there's definitely a place for 'number' feats too, and that place is on a page with multiple statblocks.

Lord Tataraus
2007-04-07, 11:43 PM
Something no one's mentioned yet is the DM's point of view. For a DM, number increasing feats are essential. We have to run multiple creatures, be the eyes and ears of the players, and referee all at the same time. We usually get little to no time to think of the monsters' actions until their turn comes up and the game literally stops until we decide what the monster does. Show me an encounter with 4 different NPC statblocks, all different, with mainly 'extra option' feats, and you show me a much slower combat. This is part of why the Tarrasque has Toughness 6 times - not because it's statistically optimal, but because he's already got enough decisions to make (sort of, but taking 6 'new option' feats instead would be a nightmare.)

'New option' feats are great, but there's definitely a place for 'number' feats too, and that place is on a page with multiple statblocks.

I totally agree with you. My group says I'm their best DM because I run great combats. This is because I plan out my combats throughly, create my own enemies (used a monster manual twice), and put balanced war parties together. Of course some will have extra feats so what do I do? Weapon, Agile, Lightning Reflexes, Improved Initiative, etc. and they aren't "wasted" feat slots. Sure, an optimal build would most likely not have Lightning Reflexes, but it has saved quite a few enemies from fireballs to fight another round. So in closing, number feats are good, even if only to serve the DM.

Matthew
2007-04-09, 11:08 AM
Yeah, I like 'number increasing' Feats. They are just the most basic type. The Feat system is itself the problem, rather than a cetain type of Feat available within the system.

Diggorian
2007-04-09, 12:18 PM
Forgot about the ease of creature generation, good point Dreyden. They're actually not bad for players either.


The problem is numeric bonuses. Numeric bonus can be simulated in many ways thus making each one less important. +2 to attack rolls could be created with 4 points of Strength, 2 points of BAB, 2 feats, a couple of spells, few special actions, a size bonus, and a weapon enhancement. But which of these are the easiest to increase at low levels? at mid levels? at high levels?

A Feat given +2 bonus stacks with all of those mentioned, is non-dispellable, takes no spell slot, has no duration, no daily limit, cant be removed. It makes you 10% better at something universally.


TWF give you extra attacks, they just aren't as good.

The advanced versions of TWF give extra attacks, Two-Weapon Fighting reduces the penalties of dual wielding only. A big numeric benefit.