RP feats help.

[Dragon_Bane]

Hay i have ben looking through the feats in d&d 3.5 /3.0 and i was thinking of haveing the people get extra feats if thay RP and deal with penalties and things of that nature so for example if a character is being almost dies alot they will get the die hard feat if they make good spot and listen checks often they get alertness i would also like to give a free regional feat and fluff feat more fluff stuff like that what do you think it is a good idea?

[aimlessPolymath]

Hm.

One thought is that the examples given will tend to reinforce things that the player already can do. If they have good investment in perception skills, then they will get the Alertness feat. If they have the hit points to survive the front line (i.e. the area of most risk), they end up with Diehard. As a result, they're somewhat gamable.

The second thought I have is that your examples given don't have a lot to do with roleplaying- they have to do with the variance of the game and character builds.

I don't know what regional feats/fluff feats you have in your game, so I can't comment there, but as long as the PCs are roughly equal, things should be fine.

[Dragon_Bane]

Hm.

One thought is that the examples given will tend to reinforce things that the player already can do. If they have good investment in perception skills, then they will get the Alertness feat. If they have the hit points to survive the front line (i.e. the area of most risk), they end up with Diehard. As a result, they're somewhat gamable.

The second thought I have is that your examples given don't have a lot to do with roleplaying- they have to do with the variance of the game and character builds.

I don't know what regional feats/fluff feats you have in your game, so I can't comment there, but as long as the PCs are roughly equal, things should be fine.

Will i would make sure thay did not abuse it but for the rp side i made a mistake it would more realistic per se it would be immersive and the playrs would rp more make more roles out of combate and thay would only get them for rping there roles and if they succeed consistently on it on a diifrent note i was thinking for classes that get anime companions and things of that nature have to find them and make a handle animal role to get one not just pop you got one in your down time.

[aimlessPolymath]

To elaborate a bit:

Suppose that a player did, in fact, make a lot of Spot checks (say), so he's rewarded by getting the Alertness feat. Let's trace back some of the possible reasons why this happened:
-There were lots of opportunities to make Spot checks. Why did this happen? The DM set up lots of chances for this to happen.
-The player invested skill points into Spot checks. This decision happened once, in character generation.
-The player remembered to use his Spot skill, even unprompted. In this case, the reward of making the Spot check is generally the information you get from it.
In the first situation, the player got the feat for reasons out of his control. In the second, he got the feat for decisions he made during character creation, not for playing his character well and RPing. In the third case, I would say that the information he got for making the Spot check is probably enough reward, since it's quite possible to bog down the game in rolls (especially multiple redundant ones- there's now an incentive for Spot checks at unnecessary times, or after another player already passed the check).


On gamability: I'm not talking about abuse, necessarily, but to some extent the perception of how the system works. There's a spectrum:
(Well-defined rules for how it works) -------------------------------------------(The DM decides arbitrarily)
The system is gameable, and players ------------------------------------------ Players have to appeal to the
can choose to work towards getting -----------------------------------------DM to get the feats they want.
the free feats. -------------------------------------------Feat allocation can feel arbitrary.

Neither end is bad, necessarily, but these are things to be aware of.

On animal companions:
Remember Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance mechanics by making them annoying to use.

[Dragon_Bane]

To elaborate a bit:

Suppose that a player did, in fact, make a lot of Spot checks (say), so he's rewarded by getting the Alertness feat. Let's trace back some of the possible reasons why this happened:
-There were lots of opportunities to make Spot checks. Why did this happen? The DM set up lots of chances for this to happen.
-The player invested skill points into Spot checks. This decision happened once, in character generation.
-The player remembered to use his Spot skill, even unprompted. In this case, the reward of making the Spot check is generally the information you get from it.
In the first situation, the player got the feat for reasons out of his control. In the second, he got the feat for decisions he made during character creation, not for playing his character well and RPing. In the third case, I would say that the information he got for making the Spot check is probably enough reward, since it's quite possible to bog down the game in rolls (especially multiple redundant ones- there's now an incentive for Spot checks at unnecessary times, or after another player already passed the check).


On gamability: I'm not talking about abuse, necessarily, but to some extent the perception of how the system works. There's a spectrum:
(Well-defined rules for how it works) -------------------------------------------(The DM decides arbitrarily)
The system is gameable, and players ------------------------------------------ Players have to appeal to the
can choose to work towards getting -----------------------------------------DM to get the feats they want.
the free feats. -------------------------------------------Feat allocation can feel arbitrary.

Neither end is bad, necessarily, but these are things to be aware of.

On animal companions:
Remember Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance mechanics by making them annoying to use.

i see the points you make for feats i will fix that now for the animel copanions thay can also get one that is better then the base one in the book as a option by going and finding and doing a good couple handle animal check or go with the normel way for the basic one in the book.

[Goaty14]

Generally this looks like a good idea, but I'm worried that it could encourage players to metagame a bit more than they usually did. I.e you might see characters not taking essential feats because they know that they could get it later on.
Player: "My character is really aggressive and always goes out to bash their faces in! Please give him improved initiative!"

I'd rather give them traits than feats because then they'd still get bonuses to certain things, but also get penalties to whatever they sacrifice. That, or implement flaws if you don't feel traits are enough (DON'T let the players choose their own traits! Have the DM choose flaws that actually hurt their character).

i see the points you make for feats i will fix that now for the animel copanions thay can also get one that is better then the base one in the book as a option by going and finding and doing a good couple handle animal check or go with the normel way for the basic one in the book.

Is already a feat: Wild Cohort. Don't make the replacement feat better than the class feature though, since it might invalidate the point of taking the class (The thing that one character make him different than everybody else being given to everybody else might make him question why he's playing that sort of character. Imagine how the barbarian would feel if everybody else got rage)

[nonsi]

.
Here are some ideas to avoid metagaming . . .

Skills and bonus feats:
- All characters are entitled to a single skill feat (e.g. Alertness, Skill Focus) at 1st level.
- Classes with 8 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 4th level and every 4 levels thereafter.
- Classes with 6 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 6th level and every 6 levels thereafter.
- Classes with 4 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 8th level and every 8 levels thereafter.
- Classes with 2 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 10th level and every 10 levels thereafter.

Instead of the above, or in addition, you could allow all characters to gain a bonus regional feat at 1st level and at every level divisible by 6.



Limitations:
Fragmented level accumulation due to multiclassing doesn't grant bonus skill feats.
Prestige classes don't grant extra feats – neither skill feats nor regional feats.

Reason: Multiclassing and Prestige-classing are both part of char-optimization strategies. They always trump single-class advancement if you have any sense of what you're doing.

[JNAProductions]

.
Here are some ideas to avoid metagaming . . .

Skills and bonus feats:
- All characters are entitled to a single skill feat (e.g. Alertness, Skill Focus) at 1st level.
- Classes with 8 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 4th level and every 4 levels thereafter.
- Classes with 6 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 6th level and every 6 levels thereafter.
- Classes with 4 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 8th level and every 8 levels thereafter.
- Classes with 2 skill points per level grant a bonus skill feat at 10th level and every 10 levels thereafter.

Instead of the above, or in addition, you could allow all characters to gain a bonus regional feat at 1st level and at every level divisible by 6.



Limitations:
Fragmented level accumulation due to multiclassing doesn't grant bonus skill feats.
Prestige classes don't grant extra feats – neither skill feats nor regional feats.

Reason: Multiclassing and Prestige-classing are both part of char-optimization strategies. They always trump single-class advancement if you have any sense of what you're doing.

Yes, my Wizard/Greenstar Adept is SO MUCH STRONGER than a straight Wizard! /sarcasm

[nonsi]

Yes, my Wizard/Greenstar Adept is SO MUCH STRONGER than a straight Wizard! /sarcasm

There are exceptions to every rule. That's because an RPG cannot have perfect symmetry.
Still, that doesn't change the fact that the main drive behind multiclassing and prestige classing is to enhance character power.

Regarding GSA, it would be perfectly legit if the class had granted a total of +7 CLs (maybe even +8, but this would require an examination).

[JNAProductions]

There are exceptions to every rule. That's because an RPG cannot have perfect symmetry.
Still, that doesn't change the fact that the main drive behind multiclassing and prestige classing is to enhance character power.

Regarding GSA, it would be perfectly legit if the class had granted a total of +7 CLs (maybe even +8, but this would require an examination).

Point is, a Fighter (or Fighter-esque character) is going to be light years weaker than a Wizard, no matter how many dips they make.

[nonsi]

Point is, a Fighter (or Fighter-esque character) is going to be light years weaker than a Wizard, no matter how many dips they make.

Fair enough. How would you suggest one should restrict spellcasters regarding skill feats and background feats?