Classes as Feats

[Cosi]

EDIT: I forgot to specify, I'm asking this question specifically in the context of mid to high optimization characters like Dweomerkeepers and Incantatrixes and the like. Obviously the threshold is lower if you're looking at Barbarians who take Improved Trip or the like.

I first posted this in the Tiering thread in the context of the Monk, but I thought I'd post it on its own and open it up a bit.

The rules:

1. You get the class features, but not the chassis. Class features includes anything listed under "Special", plus other abilities like the Monk's Flurry of Blows.
2. You do not gain spellcasting, manifesting, or any similar ability. Roughly, if it's a citation to a list of abilities in another chapter, you don't get it.
3. You cannot take ACFs.
4. You get abilities at the same rate as the class, and you get abilities retroactively.
5. If the class grants bonus feats, you can't DCFS them away for infinite feats.
6. If the class has a code of conduct, behavior or alignment restrictions, you are not bound by them.
7. The feats have no prerequisites.
8. You can only take a class feat once, but you can take class feats for multiple classes.

Off the top of my head, some things that seem potentially problematic:

Druid: You get Wild Shape. 'Nuff said.
Factotum: Getting extra actions seems pretty good, especially for just the cost of the feat.
Rogue: Not as powerful as Druid or Factotum (though Octopus Druids getting Sneak Attack could be nasty), but everyone takes it as their 12th level feat because they can just take whatever feat they wanted to take as a Bonus Feat and pocket Sneak Attack, Evasion and other stuff.
Fighter: Similar to the Rogue, though you have to be taking a Fighter Bonus Feat to begin with. Still, people take Improved Initiative, and this is that + 10 more feats.
Artificer: Strictly better than item creation feats. Also lets you get all the item creation craziness of the Artificer as a Wizard or something.

So, what happens if you let people take a classes' class features as a feat? Which class feats are broken?

Off the top of my head, many Theurge PrCs get much easier to access.

[Caelestion]

So, what happens if you let people take a classes' class features as a feat? Which class feats are broken?

I don't see how the answer to this can be anything other than "all of them". Even the sorcerer where you pay a feat to summon a familiar at 1st-level is still far better than the established alternatives and that's the class which gets literally nothing else as special features.

[Telonius]

Off the top of my head, the Fighter class becomes entirely pointless. The one thing it had going over Ranger (or any other full-BAB class for that matter) - all the bonus feats - can be had in a single feat.

EDIT: I mean, consider this one.

Human Ranger
1: Fighter Class Feat (1st), Rogue Class Feat (Human), Power Attack (bonus Fighter feat), Sneak Attack, Trapfinding, 1st Favored Enemy, Track, Wild Empathy

So now he's pretty close to a tristalt Fighter/Rogue/Ranger. Not like that's the most powerful tristalt there is, but you could really stack on the synergy very, very quickly.

[Uncle Pine]

So do you mean that you can get 1st level class features from a class at the cost of a feat, then 2nd level class features from the same class (or 1st level ones from another) at the cost of a second feat OR that you grab all of the class features that a class gets from 1st to 20th level with a single feat? Because the latter is ludicrous. Like literally unplayable: suddenly a human with two flaws is a 1st level character with enough class features to fill four 20th level character sheets!?

[Cosi]

I don't see how the answer to this can be anything other than "all of them". Even the sorcerer where you pay a feat to summon a familiar at 1st-level is still far better than the established alternatives and that's the class which gets literally nothing else as special features.

I think this is less true in the power range I specified in the edit. A Shadowcraft Mage is looking at spending all his feats getting Shadow Illusion stuff online, and that seems better for him than Rage or Favored Enemy.

[Cosi]

So do you mean that you can get 1st level class features from a class at the cost of a feat, then 2nd level class features from the same class (or 1st level ones from another) at the cost of a second feat OR that you grab all of the class features that a class gets from 1st to 20th level with a single feat? Because the latter is ludicrous. Like literally unplayable: suddenly a human with two flaws is a 1st level character with enough class features to fill four 20th level character sheets!?

You get all the class features for one feat, but you get them at the same rate the class does. So if you take the Monk feat at 1st level, you the abilities of a first level Monk. When you reach second level you gain the second level abilities of a Monk at no extra cost.

[eggynack]

Druid also seems pretty relevant for the animal companion. Fully replaces wild cohort, which is a pretty nice feat for upping the low level power of high tier builds.

[Uncle Pine]

You get all the class features for one feat, but you get them at the same rate the class does. So if you take the Monk feat at 1st level, you the abilities of a first level Monk. When you reach second level you gain the second level abilities of a Monk at no extra cost.
Suddenly playing an elf with Dark Chaos Shuffle is even more tempting.

[Caelestion]

I think this is less true in the power range I specified in the edit. A Shadowcraft Mage is looking at spending all his feats getting Shadow Illusion stuff online, and that seems better for him than Rage or Favored Enemy.

Well maybe, but even having to wait until the correct level means that only those people who actively don't want bonus fighter feats should not take the conceptual Fighter feat. 11 bonus feats for giving up my 1st-level feat? I'd be stupid not to.

[Flickerdart]

Off the top of my head, the Fighter class becomes entirely pointless. The one thing it had going over Ranger (or any other full-BAB class for that matter) - all the bonus feats - can be had in a single feat.

Fighter was always entirely pointless, but I think the "if it's a citation to a list of abilities in another chapter, you don't get it" rule disqualifies getting 11 fighter feats for a feat.

[awa]

I can’t think of any pc class that would fail to be broken as a single feat after the first couple levels.

Almost any class feat would be an excellent choice for almost any class. Significantly better than most other feat choices, I can’t think of many feats that scale as well as this thing.

At most something like a monk would synergize poorly with a heavy armor low wis fighter but even then prior to that complication at level 20 those ethereal and dim door once a day is worth a feat right there.

Edit I guess except fighter

[Cosi]

Well maybe, but even having to wait until the correct level means that only those people who actively don't want bonus fighter feats should not take the conceptual Fighter feat. 11 bonus feats for giving up my 1st-level feat? I'd be stupid not to.

Classes that themselves offer selectable bonus feats clearly skew things. The obvious fix is to simply change rule 5 to just not grant feats at all, though that clearly skews things (most obviously, Fighter now offers literally nothing). On the other hand, I'm not convinced it's terrible for the Fighter Feat to make it easier to pick up a combat style. Rogue is obviously a problem because it's strictly better than every feat ever, but it's also more useful if you take away the bonus feats.


Fighter was always entirely pointless, but I think the "if it's a citation to a list of abilities in another chapter, you don't get it" rule disqualifies getting 11 fighter feats for a feat.

True, but the intention was not to disallow bonus feats.

[Pleh]

So would this allow a Wizard to take the Wizard feat and get double the bonus metamagic and item creation feats?

[Caelestion]

Even if you ignore bonus feats, the Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger and Rogue classes are all feature-rich and are probably each worth at least half a dozen feats by themselves. This whole idea is just an invitation to disaster.

[Cosi]

So would this allow a Wizard to take the Wizard feat and get double the bonus metamagic and item creation feats?

Sure, but I think it's clear at this point that the classes that offer bonus feats as class features are probably too good.


Even if you ignore bonus feats, the Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger and Rogue classes are all feature-rich and are probably each worth at least half a dozen feats by themselves. This whole idea is just an invitation to disaster.

Barbarian gets you Rage (which is not appealing to casters), and some minor defensive abilities. Wouldn't you rather use Persistent Spell for that?

Bard is Bardic Knowledge and Bardic Music. I could see that being good.

Druid is called out in the OP as probably being too good.

I am not at all convinced Monk is worth a feat. It's a lot of abilities that aren't good. In the original thread the consensus was it it was worth maybe two feats.

Paladin gives you smite, remove disease, and a mount. I don't see this making the cut on a Rainbow Servant or Druid.

Rogue is pretty good, especially if you have a bunch of attacks.

[Caelestion]

The paladim also gets Aura of Courage, Divine Grace and immunity to disease, all the cost of a single feat. Barbarians get rage, fast movement, trap sense and the best uncanny dodge progression. Again, for a single feat, you can get evasion, flurry of blows, ki strike, slow fall, wholeness of body, diamond body etc.

What sort of games do you play in if they're not worth more than a "couple of feats"??

[Pleh]

Barbarian gets you Rage (which is not appealing to casters)

Unless you're a Rage Mage. :tongue:


The paladim also gets Aura of Courage, Divine Grace and immunity to disease, all the cost of a single feat. Barbarians get rage, fast movement, trap sense and the best uncanny dodge progression. Again, for a single feat, you can get evasion, flurry of blows, ki strike, slow fall, wholeness of body, diamond body etc.

What sort of games do you play in if they're not worth more than a "couple of feats"??

I dunno. The Monk Handbook I was using the other day was quite emphatic that Monk was not worth taking for more than 6 levels EVER.

[eggynack]

The paladim also gets Aura of Courage, Divine Grace and immunity to disease, all the cost of a single feat. Barbarians get rage, fast movement, trap sense and the best uncanny dodge progression. Again, for a single feat, you can get evasion, flurry of blows, ki strike, slow fall, wholeness of body, diamond body etc.

What sort of games do you play in if they're not worth more than a "couple of feats"??
Again, the context here is medium to high optimization caster builds. Paladin is worth it on a sorcerer because of the big bonus to saves, but it's not worth it on a wizard. It actually might be worth it on a druid, because of turning, but I'm consistently somewhat dubious about the power level of DMM on a druid. On barbarians, meanwhile, rage isn't all that good on most casters, for obvious reasons, always on longstrider isn't gonna impress anyone, and trap sense and uncanny dodge are kinda narrow. And monk is one of the major topics of conversation. I'm somewhat doubtful, because a lot of its utility is covered by a belt, leaving only somewhat reasonable stuff uncovered, and druids especially have really solid feats. These abilities you're listing are so marginal on a caster. They're not even that great on a non-caster. Seriously, slow fall? Super narrow feather fall?

[prufock]

This seems like pseudo-gestalt (/tristalt/quadristalt etc). One potential effect is that other feats (except bonus feats) just don't get selected any more, because a suite of class featuress is almost always better.

[Flickerdart]

Paladin gives you smite, remove disease, and a mount. I don't see this making the cut on a Rainbow Servant or Druid.

You can theurge your AC and special mount together with the Devoted Tracker feat. That's pretty baller, especially since paladin mounts can be pretty much anything per the back of the DMG. A 20th level "paladin" can use a base CR16 (or CR17 without flying) creature, and then apply +12 HD, +12 NA, and +6 STR/DEX from the druid.

[Caelestion]

Again, the context here is medium to high optimization caster builds.

Given that lots of people seem to think that high-op casters already win the game without trying, I'm not sure why Cosi thinks he needs to make them more powerful. Just go ahead and "win" with whatever shenanigans you usually do, without further breaking the game by giving them everybody else's class abilities if they want.

[Uncle Pine]

So, if you were a kobold would you rather get Dragonwrought or a whole additional class? Assuming one option restricted the other and you only had a single spare feat.

[eggynack]

Given that lots of people seem to think that high-op casters already win the game without trying, I'm not sure why Cosi thinks he needs to make them more powerful. Just go ahead and "win" with whatever shenanigans you usually do, without further breaking the game by giving them everybody else's class abilities if they want.
This isn't actually a thing you'd do in a game, really. It's just a thought experiment. That casters don't need more nice things is irrelevant.

So, if you were a kobold would you rather get Dragonwrought or a whole additional class? Assuming one option restricted the other and you only had a single spare feat.
Doesn't dragonwrought open some sorcerer level boosting stuff? Probably that one, for most classes you'd add. I don't remember how many sorcerer levels you get, so that might mean the difference on the higher end choices like druid and factotum.

[Twurps]

Off the top of my head, the Fighter class becomes entirely pointless. The one thing it had going over Ranger (or any other full-BAB class for that matter) - all the bonus feats - can be had in a single feat.

EDIT: I mean, consider this one.

Human Ranger
1: Fighter Class Feat (1st), Rogue Class Feat (Human), Power Attack (bonus Fighter feat), Sneak Attack, Trapfinding, 1st Favored Enemy, Track, Wild Empathy

So now he's pretty close to a tristalt Fighter/Rogue/Ranger. Not like that's the most powerful tristalt there is, but you could really stack on the synergy very, very quickly.

I fail to see how this makes a fighter pointless anymore than it does any other non-caster class.
A human fighter can take the rogue class features for a feat as easily as a rogue can pick the fighter class features, so the entire point becomes mute.
Basically it means only caster classes are worth taking (like they needed more nice things) and the human bonus feat becomes even more powerfull. Standard gish build:
Any full casting class
human bonus feat: Figher class features
1st level: rogue class features
3rd level: Druid class features
6th level: Barbarian (Raging bear with sneak attack anybody?)
9th level: Artificer (those wildling clasps really take it out on your wbl otherwise)
12th level: Paladin class features (Cha to saves, maybe should have done this earlier?)
15th level:...

Well, you get the point. There's no comparing this to any non-casting class, and it would wreak havoc on anything a 'normal' gish would find challenging.

Are these new feats on the fighter bonus feat list? Not that it changes my point, but it would solidify a solid first place in power for the 'fighter class features' feat.

As for higher op full caster builds, I'm guessing things like persistent spell and it's prereq's are worth more that fighter class features, but still: taking 'wizard class features' would grant you quite a few metamagic feats to select, and if 'cleric features' still grant domains, there's some nice feat granting domains out there to turn a single feat slot into more feats.

After that, even if 'fighter class features' don't grant you access to other 'class feature' feats, there are other classes that do. rogues can take a feat as a special ability without restrictions, so if you get to lvl 12 and haven't already chosen 'roque class features', you'd ALWAYS take it. As you can then use the lvl10 special ability to take the feat you wanted anyway. Hell, use that feat for 'wizard features' and use its feats for nice things. Marshal would allow the same kind of chaining once you have skill focus already (which I'm sure isn't a stretch), and I'm sure there are others.
(lets not even start on the ever-changing feat a chameleon would get)

In short: It would be the only type of feat anyone would ever take (from a optimization perspective, that is). All other feats would only get picked where this new type of feat is not allowed (fighter bonus feats, wizard metamagic feats)

[Cosi]

You can theurge your AC and special mount together with the Devoted Tracker feat. That's pretty baller, especially since paladin mounts can be pretty much anything per the back of the DMG. A 20th level "paladin" can use a base CR16 (or CR17 without flying) creature, and then apply +12 HD, +12 NA, and +6 STR/DEX from the druid.

That's burning two feats in a class that already has a lot of good options for relatively few slots. I'm also not terribly impressed by what you can do at 20th. What does that look like at 10th?


This isn't actually a thing you'd do in a game, really. It's just a thought experiment. That casters don't need more nice things is irrelevant.

I'm sort of vaguely thinking about using it in a game where everyone's a caster to ensure people can still get Rage or whatever if they want to go into something like Rage Mage.

[Caelestion]

I'm sort of vaguely thinking about using it in a game where everyone's a caster to ensure people can still get Rage or whatever if they want to go into something like Rage Mage.

Then just use the official gestalt rules and be done with it.

[Cosi]

Then just use the official gestalt rules and be done with it.

Gestalt lets you staple casters together, which is obviously dominant over doing anything else. Also, you can double PrCs. If I wanted to restrict it, I'd probably cap people at one feat, which is actually less power than gestalt.

[Caelestion]

Then don't allow stapling casters together. Either way, what you're trying to do is come up with gestalt combos for caster classes, so develop some guidelines and go with those instead.

[eggynack]

But what if you want a bunch of pseudo-gestalts? If we evaluate the feat value of a bunch of classes, this would allow for such a thing. Also, whether this gets used or not, it could still be an interesting thing to think about. Dunno why ya gotta be nay saying all over this thing. There doesn't seem to be anything particularly objectionable about it.

[Caelestion]

Well, given that the value of the feats vary wildy depending on who's taking them, what's contained within the feats and even personal taste, that's an awful lot of calculations ahead, without even the guarantee of people agreeing with you. If you want to do that, go right ahead, of course.

[eggynack]

Well, given that the value of the feats vary wildy depending on who's taking them, what's contained within the feats and even personal taste, that's an awful lot of calculations ahead, without even the guarantee of people agreeing with you. If you want to do that, go right ahead, of course.
Sure. If it didn't have a bunch of thinkery involved, it wouldn't be a particularly interesting thought experiment. I'd figure that, if you're putting this into an actual system, then you'd want to set the feat value as it would be on the classes where it's most useful. The more general problem though might involve more individual cases.

[Twurps]

Ok, we'd need some additional rulings though.
So let's say feat chaining is out. maybe al classes that grant either general or metamagic feats are out. Is fighter still OK? It would become a pretty staple feat, but mundane's having nice things might be a good thing?

how about rogue, is it out? or are just the extra feats it gives out?

Can you take as many as you like? or just 1 or 2?

I would think druid would still come out on top. Caster? Be a wizard, get wildshape from 'druid class features' and take natural spell at 6th. Your now a druid (already pretty powerfull) but with wizard casting and extra metamagic feats.
Mundane: Get wildshape from 'druid class features' and be a bear with any mundane chasis.

It's more powerfull then a single class, but I guess that was the idea of the exercise.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

It'd be an interesting variant, that's for sure. Kinda like a higher order Swift Hunter, Daring Outlaw, or Tashalatora.

I'm not sure about the whole "If a class grants bonus feats, it no longer does so in feat form" thing - frankly, characters don't get enough feats anyway, and these feats are already on par with any of the strongest feats in the game whether they themselves grant bonus feats or not, so I would be inclined to just let them have them. Sure, everyone takes "Rogue" at level 12 and "Fighter" whenever they'd pick up a feat on the Fighter bonus list anyway, but that could serve make things interesting (and in the case of "Fighter" could allow some otherwise impractical weapons and tactics which would otherwise go unplayed) and isn't going to really affect the power ceiling of your game, just bring up the floor.

I'd make sure the class feats aren't bonus feats for any class, though.

[eggynack]

Interesting thing I just thought of. Can you take a feat that's of the class you are, and, better question, how good is that? My first thought, obviously, was double-druid. The baseline is two animal animal companions, but perhaps more interesting is applying a bunch of ACF's, I'm thinking shifter druid, swapping out the base animal companion and resist nature's lure with the sub levels, and maybe going aspect of the dragon for wild shape, and probably swapping a bunch of other class features too. Wizards get to pick up a bunch of wizard feats, as well as both a familiar and, say, abrupt jaunt, and you'd wanna swap scribe scroll for improved initiative or something. These tactics are probably worth at least a feat, I think.

[Cosi]

Ok, we'd need some additional rulings though.
So let's say feat chaining is out. maybe al classes that grant either general or metamagic feats are out. Is fighter still OK? It would become a pretty staple feat, but mundane's having nice things might be a good thing?

I'm of two minds on the whole feat chaining thing.

The advantage is that a lot of characters are very feat starved, and the ability to take get a 11-for-1 deal on Fighter feats make taking them at all much more appealing.

The disadvantage is that they outclass a lot of other feats. I don't know if a Shadowcraft Mage would rather grab sneak attack and evasion or get his Shadow Illusion boosting feats, but he would clearly like to do both of those things by taking the Rogue class feat or the Wizard class feat.

I think this applies to any class that gives relatively unrestricted bonus feats (so Rogue or Fighter yes, Monk probably not).

Oh, and recursing should probably banned. No taking the Rogue class feat then picking the Fighter class feat as a special ability.


Can you take as many as you like? or just 1 or 2?

Not sure. I can see a limit or not. For now, I assume no limit.


Interesting thing I just thought of. Can you take a feat that's of the class you are, and, better question, how good is that?

Yes. In general, it seems pretty good, in no small part because you get to keep your class features while PrCing. Maybe Druids go PrC now?

If I was refining the rules, I might ban it because it seems like it doesn't promote the kind of diversity I'd want the system to. On the other hand, getting Druids to PrC is pretty good on that front.

[Telonius]

I fail to see how this makes a fighter pointless anymore than it does any other non-caster class.
A human fighter can take the rogue class features for a feat as easily as a rogue can pick the fighter class features, so the entire point becomes mute.


Assuming you're not going for a spellcaster (which does win the game anyways), I'm looking at the BAB/saves/skills chassis. Which would you pick: Fighter20 with a Ranger Class Feat, or Ranger20 with a Fighter Class Feat? Compare it to any of the other full-BAB classes. Fighter gets a poorer skill selection, fewer skill points per level, and worse saves in almost every case. (Slightly higher hit points and armor proficiency probably isn't enough to overcome that, for Ranger). Even Samurai gets a better set of class skills. When you can take a better chassis and get the whole class for the cost of a feat, there's no reason to actually take the class.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

I'm of two minds on the whole feat chaining thing.

The advantage is that a lot of characters are very feat starved, and the ability to take get a 11-for-1 deal on Fighter feats make taking them at all much more appealing.

The disadvantage is that they outclass a lot of other feats. I don't know if a Shadowcraft Mage would rather grab sneak attack and evasion or get his Shadow Illusion boosting feats, but he would clearly like to do both of those things by taking the Rogue class feat or the Wizard class feat.

I think this applies to any class that gives relatively unrestricted bonus feats (so Rogue or Fighter yes, Monk probably not).

Oh, and recursing should probably banned. No taking the Rogue class feat then picking the Fighter class feat as a special ability.

What's the difference between taking the Fighter class feat as your Rogue special ability bonus feat at level twelve and taking it with your next normal feat? It's not like they're getting more feats than they would otherwise. Unless you're concerned with a level one Human taking a level of Wizard or Druid or whatever and then the Monk class feat which grants them the Fighter class feat which grants them the Psychic Warrior class feat (which isn't the most useful thing in the world, without its manifesting, but still, more bonus feats) and so on so they're a Wizard 1//Monk 1//Fighter 1//Psywar 1//Rogue 1//Bard 1//etc. etc. with an ECL of 1. 'Cause I could see how that might get a little silly. But then again, allowing pseudo-gestalt with a feat is a little silly, so why not embrace it. I suspect it could be fun, and lead to some things getting play which otherwise wouldn't, which is nice.


Yes. In general, it seems pretty good, in no small part because you get to keep your class features while PrCing. Maybe Druids go PrC now?

If I was refining the rules, I might ban it because it seems like it doesn't promote the kind of diversity I'd want the system to. On the other hand, getting Druids to PrC is pretty good on that front.

That would remove one of the obstacles for Druids taking PrCs - the fact that most of them aren't very good, or don't advance casting would remain, however. Though, actually, if you're looking to encourage the use of PrCs you might consider allowing them to be taken with a feat too. There's some really cool ones out there, that I've always wanted to try, but never used because they don't advance casting or their prereqs are too costly or they do what they do at the expense of other core-competencies of the character in question which keeps them from mechanically expressing the character I wish to play. This could get around that.

But, I guess the real question is "What kind of diversity are you trying to encourage?"

[Twurps]

Assuming you're not going for a spellcaster (which does win the game anyways), I'm looking at the BAB/saves/skills chassis. Which would you pick: Fighter20 with a Ranger Class Feat, or Ranger20 with a Fighter Class Feat? Compare it to any of the other full-BAB classes. Fighter gets a poorer skill selection, fewer skill points per level, and worse saves in almost every case. (Slightly higher hit points and armor proficiency probably isn't enough to overcome that, for Ranger). Even Samurai gets a better set of class skills. When you can take a better chassis and get the whole class for the cost of a feat, there's no reason to actually take the class.

Ranger offers a trade of there, with an extra good save vs figher. The fighter would be strictly worse than the barbarian though (same BAB and saves, but barb has more skill points and HP.) So I guess that would make figher obsolete. (And we'd have to compare ranger to barbarian, meaning a bigger trade off in HP, but fewer in skills)


...

That would remove one of the obstacles for Druids taking PrCs - the fact that most of them aren't very good, or don't advance casting would remain, however. Though, actually, if you're looking to encourage the use of PrCs you might consider allowing them to be taken with a feat too. There's some really cool ones out there, that I've always wanted to try, but never used because they don't advance casting or their prereqs are too costly or they do what they do at the expense of other core-competencies of the character in question which keeps them from mechanically expressing the character I wish to play. This could get around that.

But, I guess the real question is "What kind of diversity are you trying to encourage?"

That's an interesting idea. I don't think prereq's will mean much anymore (as they become very easy to come by), but it would solve the 'no casting advancement' issue. It would however again make a few feats very staple (Yes please to a pious templars 'mettle').

[Firest Kathon]

I haven't read through the entire thread, but I just want to point out Pathfinder Variant Multiclassing (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/character-advancement#TOC-Variant-Multiclassing) (VMC) because it has not been mentioned so far. It is also an approach where you trade feats for class features, but with little choice.

[weckar]

Honestly, why would you still take any other feats :smallconfused:
And why would you as a base class take anything other than a full caster? Chassis doesn't matter that much...

[Twurps]

....
And why would you as a base class take anything other than a full caster? Chassis doesn't matter that much...

Not that I don't agree (I might have even mentioned it earlier in the tread), but what is the difference with a 'normal' game?
If we're just going for power, full casters have always been the way to go.

[eggynack]

Though, actually, if you're looking to encourage the use of PrCs you might consider allowing them to be taken with a feat too.
You'd probably need a rule that says you can't use a feat gained through a class granted feat to be used for a class. Otherwise, things get scary. I don't think many base classes have unbounded bonus feats, but a few prestige classes do. Just imagine using a feat to take rogue abilities, and then using one of the rogue special abilities for a feat that you then use on loremaster, and then you use a feat granted by that for some other class that may or may not exist.

[Kobard]

Isn't the whole "Class features as feats" basically a huge chunk of the premise for Green Ronin's True20 system?

[Jack_Simth]

So, what happens if you let people take a classes' class features as a feat? Which class feats are broken?Basically, all of them are stupidly-powerful. Different ones are gems for different builds - Anything Wis-based is going to love Ninja. Anything Charisma-based is going to enjoy Paladin. Druid is pretty much a no-brainer for nearly anyone (Wildshape, animal companion). Anything Int-based will love Factotum. And so on.

Most (not all) PrC's become useless - instead of paying the resource tax, you just take one feat. Take, for instance, the Archmage. It requires three feats, 15 ranks in two skills, and a bunch of spell picks. With this, you spend one feat and get five high arcana's... by 5th level. the Loremaster feat is a gimmie for anyone with a bit of Int - The "Applicable Knowledge" Secret is "Any one feat" - if you have a +7 Int mod, you can get that at the first level of the class. Anyone without an Int penalty will take it by 9th. Warshaper combines crazy-well with Druid: Anyone can get Fast Healing. Master of Many Forms is also quite the contender, as is Master Transmorgifist.
Edit: And then there is the insanity that is Chameleon!

... you probably weren't thinking that Prestige Classes were still classes when you started this....

[Morphic tide]

Personally, I'd not allow the full classes as feats, instead giving specific parts of the class that progress at a reduced rate(one or two levels for some, fractional for others) as feats, with several different features for each class.

For instance, Flurry of Blows and Monk's Unarmed Strike make for good feats, because one is a general "nice thing" and the other tends to only be worth it for natural attack spam builds because it's magic items are annoyingly expensive and ineffective.

Another is the Trapfinding and Trap Sense of Rogue, along with Sneak Attack. The trap stuff is to banish the ridiculous need for a Rogue that exists for the sole purpose of being able to disarm magical traps. The Sneak Attack would have to be at fractional progression rather than delayed to deal with the issues of how Sneak Attacks stack with certain classes. Totemist with the full Rogue Sneak Attack progression, even if delayed, is a monster because they can stack that damage on every hit.