1st Level Feats

[BlackRose]

So for a few years now I've been playing with my group where we allow first level feats for every character (variant human must pick skilled, or a xanathar human feat as their racial feat) and I've quite enjoyed it. I like that it allows for more races to be viable for a build you want that may require more feats or asi's than normal. I realize that it leads to extra power early on but so far I feel like everyone enjoys the ability to customize their character further. I'm curious how many other players do this and what your experience has been, or why you do or don't allow it

[Man_Over_Game]

I've occasionally done something similar, usually to add diversity.

I'll treat it as a bonus feat that's dependent on their background, usually a half feat.

In response, though, no variant humans.

[intregus]

My table does the same thing but you must pick a racial feat

[Man_Over_Game]

My table does the same thing but you must pick a racial feat

Lots of Elves, I'm sure.

[Max_Killjoy]

I think it's a great idea, with the "subject to review" caveat. No hard and fast rules, just "DM must see it in the context of the whole character, and check off on it".

Just a way for more customization and diversification to take place.

[BlackRose]

Oh ya, we definitely make sure the feat is signed off on first, and we have a hard rule that if the feat includes a stat increase it can't be raised above 17 (we always use point buy)

[Laserlight]

I prefer 1st level feats. If someone took vhuman I'd want to see what feats he took, although the problem there is more due to OP Feats than getting two of them. I don't recall anyone taking vhuman, though.

[intregus]

Lots of Elves, I'm sure.

Not really, but my table is there to role play so even when we do get elves we usually prefer the subrace specific feats.

[Chronos]

What does picking racial feats have to do with being there to role-play?

[Max_Killjoy]

What does picking racial feats have to do with being there to role-play?

"Lots of elves" seems based on the idea that elves get great racial feats.

If the group is more concerned with building to the character concept, and less concerned with creating the most mechanically efficient builds, then they're not choosing race based on who gets great racial feats.

[Gilrad]

I'm getting ready for a Ravnica campaign and the DM also gave us "free feat, subject to DM approval, with a starting stat cap of 17" and I think it works really well. He also gave us a higher point-buy, but the cap of 17 really puts some pressure on how you choose your ASIs, which is good.

[Petrocorus]

I do this on my table.

Consequently, i forbade Vuman, and gave an extra skill to the Suman.

[CTurbo]

I like giving a free feat at level 1 and banning variant humans. As mentioned above, don't let anybody start with an 18.

[intregus]

What does picking racial feats have to do with being there to role-play?

I'm assuming he's talking about the racial feat elven accuracy which is a really good feat mechanically.


"Lots of elves" seems based on the idea that elves get great racial feats.

If the group is more concerned with building to the character concept, and less concerned with creating the most mechanically efficient builds, then they're not choosing race based on who gets great racial feats.


Yep! You nailed it!.

[PeteNutButter]

If you are going to ban variant human, standard human is going to need a significant buff, like more than just one skill. The standard human is terrible.

It won’t matter as much if your group is heavy RP but it still sucks to be the player with no dark vision, no racial skills, no racial perks, and relatively the same stats to show for it.

[mephnick]

I give a free feat from a cherrypicked list of "weak" feats that never get used. No build defining feats like PAM or GWF. The half feats in the list don't come with their ability bonus.

[DarkKnightJin]

For the one-shot I've run, I've given each player a Feat at 1st level, but barred Variant Human.
And the Sharpshooter, Great Weapon Master, and Lucky Feats are outright forbidden to be picked.
If they later want to take it with their choice of ASI or Feat, they're welcome to do so. But they're not getting it for free.

[Petrocorus]

If you are going to ban variant human, standard human is going to need a significant buff, like more than just one skill. The standard human is terrible.

It won’t matter as much if your group is heavy RP but it still sucks to be the player with no dark vision, no racial skills, no racial perks, and relatively the same stats to show for it.

I really don't think the Suman is that terrible. +1 to all stats is weak, but not awful.
And if we homebrew, one bonus skill is already a perk, even if we could go up to two.

If you look at other races, they are not all on par with the half-elf or the warforged. Many races have racial "perks" which are not that interesting. Like natural attacks that you'll almost never use, or that are good only for some kind of build.

Look at the Goliath for instance, beside the bonus skill, they have only one racial feature of note, and no darkvision neither. And their +2 to Str is not going to be useful for anybody else than a frontliner. The Aarakocra have a flight speed and nothing else, (maybe their ability scores). The Mountain Dwarf has ability score bonuses that will lead him toward classes which already have armor proficiencies.

I think that Suman +1 skill is on the average of races. Not the best, but probably one of the most versatile.

[CTurbo]

I really don't think the Suman is that terrible. +1 to all stats is weak, but not awful.
And if we homebrew, one bonus skill is already a perk, even if we could go up to two.

If you look at other races, they are not all on par with the half-elf or the warforged. Many races have racial "perks" which are not that interesting. Like natural attacks that you'll almost never use, or that are good only for some kind of build.

Look at the Goliath for instance, beside the bonus skill, they have only one racial feature of note, and no darkvision neither. And their +2 to Str is not going to be useful for anybody else than a frontliner. The Aarakocra have a flight speed and nothing else, (maybe their ability scores). The Mountain Dwarf has ability score bonuses that will lead him toward classes which already have armor proficiencies.

I think that Suman +1 skill is on the average of races. Not the best, but probably one of the most versatile.


Goliaths get "Powerful Build", the Athletics skill, "Stone's Endurance", and "Mountain Born" which is admittedly more of a fluff.
Aarakocra's get flight and unarmed strikes but flight is probably the single greatest racial feature of all and their stats are among the best possible options.


As far as the standard human goes, I do believe it's one of the worst possible picks. I have long houseruled that the regular human gets the option of either +1 to all stats, or +2 to any two stats and they automatically get the Prodigy feat.

[Petrocorus]

Goliaths get "Powerful Build", the Athletics skill, "Stone's Endurance", and "Mountain Born" which is admittedly more of a fluff.

Mountain Born is a ribbon, and so is Powerful Build on a table that doesn't track encumbrance. How often do you actually need to push or drag something that's too big for your already high Strength?



Aarakocra's get flight and unarmed strikes but flight is probably the single greatest racial feature of all and their stats are among the best possible options.

Flight is awesome for sure. Though its utility may be reduced inside a dungeon, it is still good even then. Their stats are definitively good. But unarmed strike for 1d4 +Str damage? This is a ribbon, nothing else. And they have no other racial features at all.



As far as the standard human goes, I do believe it's one of the worst possible picks. I have long houseruled that the regular human gets the option of either +1 to all stats, or +2 to any two stats and they automatically get the Prodigy feat.

You seem to really want the human to be better than most of other races, not just on par with them?

[MoiMagnus]

So for a few years now I've been playing with my group where we allow first level feats for every character (variant human must pick skilled, or a xanathar human feat as their racial feat) and I've quite enjoyed it. I like that it allows for more races to be viable for a build you want that may require more feats or asi's than normal. I realize that it leads to extra power early on but so far I feel like everyone enjoys the ability to customize their character further. I'm curious how many other players do this and what your experience has been, or why you do or don't allow it

I start campaign at level 4, or level 3 with level up at the end of the first session. I consider that characters at level 1 are not yet adventurers (the wizard hasn't finished university, since he does not have his arcane tradition, etc) so I only use them when I want to make an "origin story" for the characters.

(Or if I have a lot of beginners. Level 1 is also better to introduce someone to D&D, but you certainly don't want to give them an extra feat to beginners at level 1)

[PeteNutButter]

Mountain Born is a ribbon, and so is Powerful Build on a table that doesn't track encumbrance. How often do you actually need to push or drag something that's too big for your already high Strength?

Flight is awesome for sure. Though its utility may be reduced inside a dungeon, it is still good even then. Their stats are definitively good. But unarmed strike for 1d4 +Str damage? This is a ribbon, nothing else. And they have no other racial features at all.

You seem to really want the human to be better than most of other races, not just on par with them?

Powerful Build is actually a chase feature for a grappler. Being able to lift pull push double weight often comes up.

Flight is singlehandedly the most overpowered racial feature. Note: AL bans all flying races for being too strong.

Some races get features that might be niche, but they can be put to use on a specific build, such as the Powerful Build. The mountain dwarves you mentioned, might not benefit from the armor proficiency often, but they do benefit from starting with two 17s, ending up with two 18s at level 4 is a nice boon. Humans are worse than vanilla, they have no flavor.

Then add on the racial feats in Xanathar's. The dwarfs and elves all have cool feats, while prodigy is a glorified rogue dip.

[Petrocorus]

Powerful Build is actually a chase feature for a grappler. Being able to lift pull push double weight often comes up.

I don't see it. The only times when this will come up, it's when you grapple a creature and then want to move her. In this situation, Powerful build is good indeed.

And a 16 Str already let you lift or pull 480 lbs, this is enough for most situation. So Powerful build can be good, but it is situational.


Flight is singlehandedly the most overpowered racial feature. Note: AL bans all flying races for being too strong.

It is very powerful indeed. Even i banned it at first.
Until i let a player try the Aarakocra in the Wave Echo Cave from LMoP and saw its power could be greatly reduced by the environment.



Some races get features that might be niche, but they can be put to use on a specific build, such as the Powerful Build. The mountain dwarves you mentioned, might not benefit from the armor proficiency often, but they do benefit from starting with two 17s, ending up with two 18s at level 4 is a nice boon. Humans are worse than vanilla, they have no flavor.

I was talking from an optimization PoV. Suman with a bonus skill is certainly not awesome, and probably not the best race for any build, contrary to Vuman that is the best race for most of builds. But it is certainly not the worst race neither, for any build.

I am not arguing they would be very good, i'm arguing they would be average.



Then add on the racial feats in Xanathar's. The dwarfs and elves all have cool feats,
Oh, i totally agree with this. Those racial feats are clearly a bump for those races.


while prodigy is a glorified rogue dip.
Expertise in Athletics for a frontliner?

[Kurt Kurageous]

From the beginning I've given a feat as we start at first level. I use standard array only.

I allow variant humans their two feats. Otherwise it's nerfing humans, meaning fewer of them.

No limits. No restrictions. No problems. Ever.

I power build as best as I can for my players to ensure they have interesting, capable characters they want to play from day 1, not someday when they reach level x.

[BlackRose]

I start campaign at level 4, or level 3 with level up at the end of the first session. I consider that characters at level 1 are not yet adventurers (the wizard hasn't finished university, since he does not have his arcane tradition, etc) so I only use them when I want to make an "origin story" for the characters.

(Or if I have a lot of beginners. Level 1 is also better to introduce someone to D&D, but you certainly don't want to give them an extra feat to beginners at level 1)

That's how we usually go too. I say level 1 feat but I just mean a free beginning feat in general. We typically start at level 3 for the reason you said, that's when their archetypes are chosen at the latest and they've actually become the unique character they're playing as. I usually feel like level 1-2 is just a grinding slog where often times characters aren't any more unique than the weapons/armor they use.

[LordEntrails]

Nope, we don't allow. Never had anyone ask to and never had a concept that we couldn't handle with what we already have.