DM Experience - free player feat?

[spbtc]

I'm going to be starting a new campaign soon and I'm thinking of ways to broaden the scope of player characters. One thing I'm considering is allowing a free feat at L2, with the restriction that it can't be a feat that is solely martial/offensive in application. I'm not doing this to make the players better monster killers, but more interesting and diverse characters. So, no Sharpshooter or Pole Arm Master, etc.

Has anyone allowed players a free feat? How did it work out? I understand that it would lead to a more "powerful" campaign, although I hope that by restricting the feat list that this won't be too unmanageable.

(I'm also planning on using the tool rules from Xanathar's to encourage and reward tool usage.)

[strangebloke]

I'm all for it, and have done this for years. Starting PCs with a free feat and generous point buy allows them to feel more freedom in customizing their characters which is really important.

I even allow combat feats! (Though gwm and ss and cbe are nerfed in my game)

[jaappleton]

I've had games where the DM let the players get a free Feat.

I believe that every table should do this.

Because of how infrequent Feats can be (for most classes... I see you, Fighter), and how character-defining Feats can be, AND because they also occupy the same slot as an ASI, I heartily suggest and encourage Feats to be given out to characters.

While the game is designed to get a character from level 1-5 quickly, because Tier 1 play is rudimentary (Especially if you've gone through it a couple times already), waiting around for level after level post level 5 (Even more of a slog if your Tier 1 play doesn't move quickly) to get the opportunity to take a Feat and have your concept really come together can be incredibly discouraging.

The last thing anyone wants is, "I really want to play THIS character.... but it doesn't come together until level 8, and its pretty poor until that point. I don't want to wait that long, I'll play something else."

The goal of the game is to have fun! Let them have fun! And remember the golden rule, please: It doesn't matter if its imbalanced, as long as everyone at the table is having a blast.

[kazaryu]

I'm going to be starting a new campaign soon and I'm thinking of ways to broaden the scope of player characters. One thing I'm considering is allowing a free feat at L2, with the restriction that it can't be a feat that is solely martial/offensive in application. I'm not doing this to make the players better monster killers, but more interesting and diverse characters. So, no Sharpshooter or Pole Arm Master, etc.

Has anyone allowed players a free feat? How did it work out? I understand that it would lead to a more "powerful" campaign, although I hope that by restricting the feat list that this won't be too unmanageable.

(I'm also planning on using the tool rules from Xanathar's to encourage and reward tool usage.)

i mean, giving players extra feats isn't really different than giving them magic items. it gives them more tools, it can increase their power levels to greater than the game itself is designed for. since you're taking combat feats off the table, that means you're going to get more exploration/social focused feats, so those types of challenges are the ones likely to get the boost. :shrug: it should be fine so long as you understand that that is what you're doing. Basically, just think of it like offering them magic items. it makes them stronger, but you can compensate for that if you need to.

[diplomancer]

If you're concerned about power players, I'd also ban half-feats, or that'd be an easy way to get an 18 in your prime ability.

[spbtc]

I even allow combat feats! (Though gwm and ss and cbe are nerfed in my game)

How do you nerf them? I've thought about reducing the damage bonus for SS/GWM to +5.

[spbtc]

If you're concerned about power players, I'd also ban half-feats, or that'd be an easy way to get an 18 in your prime ability.

I was actually thinking of specifically allowing half feats as I personally find it really discouraging to play 4 or 8 levels looking at that odd stat. Particularly if you're MAD.


i mean, giving players extra feats isn't really different than giving them magic items. it gives them more tools, it can increase their power levels to greater than the game itself is designed for. since you're taking combat feats off the table, that means you're going to get more exploration/social focused feats, so those types of challenges are the ones likely to get the boost. :shrug: it should be fine so long as you understand that that is what you're doing. Basically, just think of it like offering them magic items. it makes them stronger, but you can compensate for that if you need to.

It's a good point, although I find that D&D generally rewards combat and strong combat builds more than it rewards good exploration or social builds. And yes, I realize that is also very DM/campaign dependent, and I'm also giving thought to my game design for this. But I still think it's generally true that for most players pulling off a great combo or one-shotting the lieutenant is where the "fun" is.

[strangebloke]

How do you nerf them? I've thought about reducing the damage bonus for SS/GWM to +5.

both Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter, instead of conferring a -5 to attack and a +10 to damage, apply a negative to your attack modifier equal to your proficiency and give you double your proficiency to damage.
-Sharpshooter no longer allows you to ignore cover.
-Crossbow Expert gives +1 to Dexterity instead of allowing a bonus action attack with a crossbow.
-Polearm Master only applies to quarterstaffs and spears if the weapon is wielded in two hands. When attacking with the opposite end of a weapon, no weapon enchantments apply to the attack and the weapon does not count as heavy for that attack.

.

As for half feats, unit can just let people buy up to 18 to start with and then it's not super important for people to cheese out an 18 at start.

[JNAProductions]

I don't give a free feat, usually, but I offer very generous stat allocation.


Ability Scores: Pick six numbers. These are your pre-racial stats. No number may be higher than 18 or less than 8. You may modify them freely up until the game starts, and may pick duplicate numbers.

I actually had to change it from its original iteration-it used to be 3 to 18, and too many people wanted to cripple their characters!

[jaappleton]

I don't give a free feat, usually, but I offer very generous stat allocation.



I actually had to change it from its original iteration-it used to be 3 to 18, and too many people wanted to cripple their characters!

I actually love having a 6 in a stat. Everyone has their weakness, even Superman his Kryptonite.

Best when you RP with it.

I once played a Druid with a 6 INT, found spell scrolls, and said "....these are just funny drawings" and tossed them aside. *I* knew what they were, but my character sure didn't. Especially not at second level!

[spbtc]

I don't give a free feat, usually, but I offer very generous stat allocation.



I actually had to change it from its original iteration-it used to be 3 to 18, and too many people wanted to cripple their characters!

Is there something more to that? What prevents a player from picking 6 18s?

[JNAProductions]

Is there something more to that? What prevents a player from picking 6 18s?

I've only had a player do it once, and that was in a kinda solo game that died quickly.

But really, most players have restraint. If someone does want to pick all 18s, I'll ask them if they're sure, and if they are, then cool. Generally, when in a group, I ask the players to moderate themselves and make sure everyone is more or less on par with each other.

The big thing is, I trust my players. If you can't trust your players to have fun instead of powergaming to the detriment of everyone's enjoyment, why play with them?

It does generally result in a higher power level than standard array or point buy-one 18 is pretty dang common, and it's not unusual to have someone with a 10 or 12 as their lowest stat. But if the player enjoys being strong across the board, it won't hurt my enjoyment.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The big thing is, I trust my players. If you can't trust your players to have fun instead of powergaming to the detriment of everyone's enjoyment, why play with them?
This. This this this this this. If you trust your players, if you can rely on them to be mature and supportive of one another, you can get away with pretty much anything. If you can't trust your players, it doesn't matter how many strict rules you put down, someone's going to push the envelope and someone's going to get annoyed.

I'm 100% in favor of the free feat at 1st. Especially in conjunction with the custom lineage rules that let you grab a second feat as any race. There are just too many cool character concepts that don't really work until you pick up a feat or two.

[Falconcry]

I’m new to DMing and tend to just run one-shots so power creep does not matter as much. I ban variant and custom but give every race a half feat at creation. I use the standard array but change the 8 to an 18 so folks tend to start with 20 in their primary anyway. Just need to build the encounter with that in mind. If their ability scores are already maxed you can get more creative builds if they can feat rather then using ASI.

[LibraryOfAlex]

I've just applied this rule all around:

Varied Background (Feats Variant)
Sometimes characters have special skills or traits that aren't represented by their race and background but instead come from intense training, mystical encounters, or intense histories.
At level 1, you may gain a feat. This feat does not grant an additional ability score increase and cannot be from this list:
• Crossbow Expert
• Elven Accuracy
• Great Weapon Master
• Lucky
• Polearm Master
• Resilient
• Sentinel
• Sharpshooter
• War Caster

I haven't done an extensive look over for more 'banned' feats; these were just my go-to ones. I also got rid of the half-feat ASI bonus to prevent above 18s. From what I've found, this leads to players picking feats that fit their character more and provide some interesting moments.

Well, some of them. I would definitely recommend you check-in with what your players choose and make sure its really what they want, and to remind them about their abilities just in case. Had a druid with shield master who just didn't use any of the benefits from it for an entire arc, around 10-12 sessions. Had to start letting them know what applied when.

[EggKookoo]

Not exactly the same thing as they can't keep it for free, but I give the Lucky feat to every 1st level PC. They can keep it until they hit their first ASI at 4th. This helps with the swinginess of the first few levels.

But I do think I might also start letting the PC keep it or swap it out for another free feat at 4th. I like customization. Perhaps the next time I start a campaign...

[Sillybird99]

Not exactly the same thing as they can't keep it for free, but I give the Lucky feat to every 1st level PC. They can keep it until they hit their first ASI at 4th. This helps with the swinginess of the first few levels.

But I do think I might also start letting the PC keep it or swap it out for another free feat at 4th. I like customization. Perhaps the next time I start a campaign...

This is a cool idea, but not necessarily helpful in concept actualization. As a player, I'm less worried about surviving to level 4 than I am worried about making my character mechanics match my concept.


I’m new to DMing and tend to just run one-shots so power creep does not matter as much. I ban variant and custom but give every race a half feat at creation. I use the standard array but change the 8 to an 18 so folks tend to start with 20 in their primary anyway. Just need to build the encounter with that in mind. If their ability scores are already maxed you can get more creative builds if they can feat rather then using ASI.

I really like this idea. None of the half feats are really overpowered and most of them have a lot of flavor. I might even go as far as letting people still play 1st level feat races, but not letting them take feats that would boost them above an 18 in a single stat or to an 18 in a second stat.

[strangebloke]

The big thing is, I trust my players. If you can't trust your players to have fun instead of powergaming to the detriment of everyone's enjoyment, why play with them?



This. This this this this this. If you trust your players, if you can rely on them to be mature and supportive of one another, you can get away with pretty much anything. If you can't trust your players, it doesn't matter how many strict rules you put down, someone's going to push the envelope and someone's going to get annoyed.

I agree in principle, but I would add that more or less restrictive character creation rules serve an additional purpose beyond "reigning in players who are power gaming to the table's detriment."

Strict character creation rules allow power gaming to be non-disruptive, and that's conducive toward fun for a lot of people. Feeling that they've "won" the character creation minigame, that their character's strength is a result of smart decisions they made at level one, is an element of what players enjoy and that makes them enjoy their character more throughout the rest of the campaign. Even if the ultimate benefit to optimization like this is pretty small, its still fun for people.

It's kind of the whole logic behind having complicated character creation and combat rules in the first place.


I'm 100% in favor of the free feat at 1st. Especially in conjunction with the custom lineage rules that let you grab a second feat as any race. There are just too many cool character concepts that don't really work until you pick up a feat or two.

With all I said above, I agree with this completely. DND is at its core a power fantasy, and allowing people more powerful customization options and stronger overall characters is good for them.

[dafrca]

Strict character creation rules allow power gaming to be non-disruptive, and that's conducive toward fun for a lot of people. Feeling that they've "won" the character creation minigame, that their character's strength is a result of smart decisions they made at level one, is an element of what players enjoy and that makes them enjoy their character more throughout the rest of the campaign. Even if the ultimate benefit to optimization like this is pretty small, its still fun for people.

Interesting, I never would have thought to word it this way and yet it makes perfect sense to me. :smallsmile:

[Leon]

I would give everyone the Skilled Feat for free at Level one were I do get around to DMing again. Never enough skills/tools to be had, gives some classes much more flex to do outside of the narrow line of combat.

[ProsecutorGodot]

We've always done free level 1 feat at our table. Nobody has used that one for GWM, SS or XBE yet.

[strangebloke]

We've always done free level 1 feat at our table. Nobody has used that one for GWM, SS or XBE yet.

There's a paradoxical thing going on with optimization where IME the biggest power gamers often don't play the most broken subclasses simply because they want to own their character more. They want to be something new and unique, not just anothing hexblade 1/paladin x.

[False God]

I would suggest making a list of feats you feel fall into "interesting character customization" as free offerings rather than say "hey you have a free slot but I get to say what it can or can't be."

That way you can instead frame it as "Hey I thought it would be cool to offer some free extra customization and these are the feats I felt best fit that idea!"

I've offered free feats at 1st level for everyone. (V-Humans get 2 yes) It works out pretty well, even with combat feats! I'm the DM, I don't care if they can kill the low-CR monsters quickly, the players and their characters aren't a threat to me. "Killing the monster" is usually only one available route to success, and I take the 4E approach of assigning XP on the basis of encounters, which may or may not even include monsters! Resolving the situation is the goal. If "killing the monster" is the route players want to take, who am I to keep them from taking combat feats?

---
To add: I also give a free feat at each tier(1, 6, 11, 16) to encourage additional customization, it's only 4 feats. This isn't 3.5. Nothing's going to break.

I only give an initial explanation of why as "I'd like to give you the opportunity to take some extra feats that more fully round out your character idea." If they go an all-combat route after that, that's fine. If they fluff out their character with interesting feats, that's great too.

----
My experience tends to be that players that come from older editions and more RNG-based DMs and have less experience with role over roll games and less exposure to more storytelling systems will focus on combat-oriented abilities at first. If they continue to play with me they'll find that hitting things is only one of many routes to success and will often expand their feat (and other class ability) selection to include more niche and situational and non-combat elements. (This is also why I allow retirement and retraining at any time via reasonable means.)

D&D is a combat-centric system, if you want characters to themselves be less combat-centric, you're not going to get that with just giving them "fluff feats". You're going to need to present situations where combat is only one of many solutions, and often not the best solution, and of course allow for players to present unique and interesting solutions you may never have though of.

[Nod_Hero]

Our main GM usually gives out a free racial feat at character creation.
Depending on your build that can be awesome.

The Icewind Dale campaign I'm the GM for, I allowed everyone to take the Tashas 'Skill Expert' feat.It seems to be a popular decision-- stays equal for all, but everyone has a touch of customization that's specific to their character.

[Leon]

Reading one of the other threads made me think a bit more about topic and would expand Ritual Magic and Magic Initate to the list of free feats to choose from. More skill or have a smidgen of magic to flex your out of combat options (or in combat with the Initate)

[stoutstien]

There's a paradoxical thing going on with optimization where IME the biggest power gamers often don't play the most broken subclasses simply because they want to own their character more. They want to be something new and unique, not just anothing hexblade 1/paladin x.

Aye. Self applied restrictions is the true last step in the optimizing life cycle. Not only is it more rewarding to make a "lower" rates option preform with the meme builds it also means you have to actively seek solutions to challenges.

**Insert meme about PC being a time traveling dimensional witch on a bicycle.**

[Saelethil]

I let all my players take an extra feat at level 1 (including V human so he got 2) and a slightly better standard array. When I did this I told them that this would be so that I could throw more interesting combats at them earlier and honestly we’ve all had a blast. They get to feel heroic and I get to be a nasty little gremlin when I homebrew monsters (more attacks, magic resistance, anti-magic zones, slightly nerfed legendary resistances and legendary actions). They’re 7th level now and it has been very freeing in monster design and encounter balance, I just have to keep an eye on monster damage output since most of the PCs still have normal HP for their level.

[Garresh]

I've done this for like 5 years with no restrictions. Free feat at level as long as they meet the requirements.

Part of the reason variant human is popular isn't the power(though it is strong). It's because a lot of fun playstyles are feat gated. Giving it at level 1 is a small power boost, but the benefits are worth it. Plus since everyone gets one it doesn't affect party dynamics.

I strongly recommend it at all tables.

[Garresh]

There's a paradoxical thing going on with optimization where IME the biggest power gamers often don't play the most broken subclasses simply because they want to own their character more. They want to be something new and unique, not just anothing hexblade 1/paladin x.

Because as potentially OP as optimizing is, we want to have fun same as anyone else. D&D isn't a game you "win" like a pvp game. All my characters are optimized, but around a theme not simply being able to roflstomp encounters. But nobody has ever had issue with it because I love playing support charactsrs. I actually love optimizing healers to make them a viable playstyle despite the unfavorable economy of it.

But OP things make it too easy and therefore not fun. I'm never touching Twilight or Peace domain clerics for that reason. It's simply too much power.

tldr; Minmaxing/optimizing isn't a negative trait despite what people say. The issue is people treating the game like a contest rather than a cooperative experience.

[spbtc]

Lots of great things to think about. The primary reason I'm considering L2 for the free feat is that most of the players in this upcoming game are total or relative novices. Putting it off to level 2 allows them a couple of sessions to get a feel for things and maybe have a better idea where they'd like to take their character.

[Kane0]

Feat at level 1 is great, doesn't really break anything and helps with a lot of character concepts getting off the ground earlier without needing to worry about numbers so much.

I prefer to limit it to not be strictly combat feats to encourage the players to diversify rather than double down but that's a personal preference.

[stoutstien]

I just integrated a lot of the feats into the base rules so the extra feats aren't needed.

[strangebloke]

I just integrated a lot of the feats into the base rules so the extra feats aren't needed.

IMO charger at the very least should be in the core rules yeah.

[Yakk]

I did a pass to make all feats in the same league as PAM/GWM/SS/XBE. (Yes, this includes "non-combat" feats).

Then you get an extra feat *and* an extra HD (1d8 for medium, 1d6 for small, 1d10 if you have powerful build or equivalent) at level 1.

[The_Jette]

I've been in a lot of campaigns where the DM allowed a free feat at level 1, no restrictions. And, yes, that has led to some people taking vHuman and managing to start a campaign with an 18 in one stat. But, it's never caused any issues with game balance. And, funny enough, I've never actually seen anyone take GWM, or SS, with their starter feat. Taking a -5 to hit at level 1 when you only have a +5 or +6 to hit to begin with is a huge disadvantage. And, yes, you'd gain enough damage from those feats to one shot pretty much any CR 1 or lower enemy. But, you're talking about a CR 1 or lower enemy. It doesn't take much to one shot them. So, what I'm saying is, it won't overbalance your game whether you make any restrictions or not. In the end it's your choice as the DM what to allow, though. Knock yourself out. It'll just be more fun for you and the players.

[Arcturus]

Our group has been doing this for about 4 campaigns now (and a few one shots). I’ve experienced it as both a player and DM and it has not really been an issue - even without restrictions. It definitely make levels 1-3 a lot more interesting.

I’ve seen polearm master and heavy armor master and both of those seemed just fine. A gloom stalker with sharp shooter was the one that got closest to “a bit much”, but even then wasn’t too bad given that attempting to use it resulted in quite a few misses that would otherwise have been hits.

[Kurt Kurageous]

I've been doing this and more for many games I've run.

I have placed no restrictions on feats, but I do restrict certain race/class/background combos because I see no way it could happen in the world (mine or Sword Coast).

Giving a free feat makes 1st level characters competent at something, and makes teamwork even better because each character can lean more into their role earlier.

The free feats at creation has created no issues since 2015. So I went further. If we start a campaign at 1st level, I give my players a choice of a feat or an ASI.

OT, I also use a different HP method. Your die roll is taken as is, or is subtracted from the maximum value of the die. This means on a d8, a roll of a 1 means you gain 7 HP, 2 gets 6, etc. The "worst" roll is the middle value (4), meaning the players are a little tougher. I did this because I was still trying to master combat encounter building for the 6-8 encounter adventuring day. I gave up, but kept the method as it was popular. And again, no real difference on the game.