4e feats: So profoundly boring

[Person_Man]

Reading through 4e seriously for the first time now. Some stuff I like. Some stuff I'm not sure about. I get to feats.

And wow, 4e feats are the epitome of uninteresting. 90% of the feats gives you a minor bonus. +1 to Saving Throws. +2 to damage. Increased ranged by 2 squares. Some sound ridiculously situational, giving allies a minor bonus for 1 round to you or nearby allies when you fulfill an improbable criteria.

Things aren't as bad in the Paragon Tier (you must be 11th level or higher to take these feats). And the Epic Tier (you must be 21st level or higher) admittedly has some fun stuff. But should a PC really have to wait that long before getting anything worthwhile?

Anywho, I'd like the forum to prove me wrong. Specifically, I'd like to hear examples of why X feat is interesting or fun or worthwhile for any given situation, especially from people who have actually played.

I haven't played 4E yet. But I want to try. The races are clearly more interesting. The classes and their associated powers have some good options. The Skill mechanics are based on Star Wars Saga Edition, which I enjoy. But man, why even bother with feats if 90% of them provide such minor and/or boring effects?

Discuss.

[Bearonet]

Multiclass feats are inherently interesting, I think!

+1 damage may not be exciting, but when you're getting +1 from Two-Weapon Fighting, +2 from Backstabber, +1 from something else, and so on, it adds up and you pack significantly more punch.

[Logalmier]

Thats a shame, feats are one of my favorite things in 3rd edition-I can never get enough of them, so this is a pretty big blow to me, maby they'll introduce something else to make up for this...

[Azerian Kelimon]

Indeed, the Heroic feats ARE very boring. It would be foolish to say that is not the case.

As for the feats that are actually interesting, they're few. Durable, Power Attack, Wintertouched, and Toughness are examples of feats that are interesting. There's a few others, like Action Surge (Which is seriously powerful, as is Blade opportunist), but mostly, the feats are there to tide you over until the heroic tier, when things get interesting.

[Kizara]

Multiclass feats are inherently exciting, I think!

+1 damage may not be exciting, but when you're getting +1 from Two-Weapon Fighting, +2 from Backstabber, +1 from something else, and so on, it adds up and you pack significantly more punch.

Translation: It may be lame, but so is the rest of the system, so its comparably valuable.

Honestly, that's like saying 3.x Weapon Focus is amazing because it stacks with having a masterwork weapon...

[SamTheCleric]

Well sure, if you look at them in comparison to 3.x feats, you are going to think of them as boring and uninteresting.

However, 4e is not the same game as third edition.

[turkishproverb]

Well sure, if you look at them in comparison to 3.x feats, you are going to think of them as boring and uninteresting.

However, 4e is not the same game as third edition.

No, its not.

It's weak.

Castrated skill system, near nonexistent feats, taunts. It is a pen and paper MMO.

A bad MMO.

[SamTheCleric]

No, its not.

It's weak.

I disagree, as do many others.

[Edea]

I seem to remember many, if not most, of 3E's Core feats being pretty sucky, too, actually. It's the splats that had all the good feats in them. Maybe 4E splats will have more interesting feats in them?

I -do- agree that the heroic tier is...less than inspiring (though I'm happy for Expanded Spellbook). Paragon tier is just fine, imo. Epic tier doesn't have enough feats in it (and a couple of them are also...less than inspiring. What's with the radiant one, anyhow? SUPER-situational).

[Bearonet]

Castrated skill system,

You don't have to spend skill points on things like Profession and Perform anymore--you can just do them. Skills are more versatile, not less.

near nonexistent feats,

Heroic tears aren't that good, but low-prerequiste 3E core feats weren't that good, either--unless they were, say, Natural Spell. Weapon Focus, +2 skill feats, Toughness, all that. Improved Trip was an exception, but it was a "vastly superior to everything else, every competent strength fighter takes it" exception.

taunts.

4E doesn't have taunts. 3.5 had taunts. (Have you seen the "Goad" feat? The Knight class? The "Mindless Rage" spell?) 4E has fighters who are capable of stopping their enemies' movement, and paladins whose DIVINE POWERS punish the enemy, I think divine powers are allowed to do that.

It is a pen and paper MMO.

A bad MMO.

I never get tired of this. "I don't like it, so it's just like a game run by a computer!"

[turkishproverb]

You don't have to spend skill points on things like Profession and Perform anymore--you can just do them. Skills are more versatile, not less.

Translation: You're either maxed at something or you can't do it practically at all.

I never get tired of this. "I don't like it, so it's just like a game run by a computer!"

No, I didn't say that because I don't like it, I say it because the play style feels more like an MMORPG than almost any other RPG I've ever seen.

Kind've like If WH40K made certain rules changes, I might say it played like a tabletop RTS.

[Illiterate Scribe]

I don't like it, so it's just like a game run by a computer!

You have it the wrong way round.

[kamikasei]

I think part of it is perhaps that "giving you new and interesting options and/or abilities" is now the job of powers. A lot of the customization you would do with feats in 3.5 is done with power selection in 4e.

I think.

[Bryn]

Does anyone have a copy of that motivator, with the circled dice, character sheets, minis etc.? The one that pointed out that 4e is still very much DnD? It would probably be appropriate.

[Pyroconstruct]

Everyone who isn't already multiclassing should really think about taking the multiclass Ranger feat. Pick an enemy per fight, +1d6 per tier to all attacks against them for the rest of the fight. And Nature training for free, whee.

[Roderick_BR]

It's supposed to be like that. You can't expect to gain an OMG! AWESOME feat right at first level. Better feats "costs" more (i.e., stacking with powers, or reaching higher levels). It's just that 3.x was lame when you could use 1 feat to get either a good or a bad feat. It's like paying a dollar for a single twinkie instead of a chocolate bar. It's just silly. So, yeah, now you need to make an effort to become good, instead of just picking 2-3 feats and calling it a day.

In a way, you could say that the paragon tier is more or less what the 3.5 would be around 3-5 level. They pushed the power curve back a bit.

And finally, by what I got from the reviews, feats are options to increase your character's abilities, not to work as whole class features (powers in this case).

[Bearonet]

Translation: You're either maxed at something or you can't do it practically at all.

Barring flat DCs like Tumble and Concentration (for avoiding opportunity attacks and defensive casting), wasn't that already the case? 3 ranks in Disable Device were going to do you no good.

No, I didn't say that because I don't like it, I say it because the play style feels more like an MMORPG than almost any other RPG I've ever seen.

I must have missed that while playing Keep on the Shadowfell. it felt just like D&D to me. What should have felt like an MMORPG to me?

I'm amazed to see sentiments like this expressed seriously. Is the forum like this all the time?

You have it the wrong way round.

I hate to question people's DMs, but... if your 4E game is just like a game run by a computer, is your DM a computer? That would explain the problem.

[Rutee]

No, its not.

It's weak.

Being OHKO bait at first level isn't weak, but having weak minor things (Feats) is?

Castrated skill system, near nonexistent feats, taunts. It is a pen and paper MMO.

A bad MMO.

Food for thought: In MMORPGs, your gear comprises the majority of your character's ability, in practice. In 3rd ed, your gear comprises the majority of your capability if you are not a caster.

[Malek]

Everyone who isn't already multiclassing should really think about taking the multiclass Ranger feat. Pick an enemy per fight, +1d6 per tier to all attacks against them for the rest of the fight. And Nature training for free, whee.

Not really... I've read somwhere that they erratad (sp?) that already so that Hunter's Quarry from multiclass feat works only for one turn.

[kc0bbq]

I must have missed that while playing Keep on the Shadowfell. it felt just like D&D to me. What should have felt like an MMORPG to me?

You have to run the first Kobold boss every week until everyone has the armor from him who can use it and the dig site until everyone has the item there. Then you're geared up enough to move on to the keep.

You're going to wipe - I mean TPK a bunch while learning the fights though.

[Spiryt]

I agree that boring feats and less skills are very dumb things in 4ed.
Limiting player choices only to his class powers is bad, especially that multiclassing is now more restricted.

In MMORPGs, your gear comprises the majority of your character's ability, in practice. In 3rd ed, your gear comprises the majority of your capability if you are not a caster.

If gear is really now less important it's jooolly good thing on the other side.

I must probably wait with conclusion till I see the Handbook though.

[Infinity_Biscuit]

Everyone who isn't already multiclassing should really think about taking the multiclass Ranger feat. Pick an enemy per fight, +1d6 per tier to all attacks against them for the rest of the fight. And Nature training for free, whee.

I prefer to think of it as only one of two ways to get Acrobatics outside of being a Ranger or Rogue, with the +1d6 damage as the factor that makes it better than Skill Training. I seriously took the feat for my Fighter just for Acrobatics.

[AKA_Bait]

If gear is really now less important it's jooolly good thing on the other side.

I must probably wait with conclusion till I see the Handbook though.

Although gear is less important, I'd say it's still pretty important. Magical items give you extra powers and some really useful bonuses without even needing to take an action (Bloodthread is awesome). They don't seem as make or break as they did in 3e, mainly because stat modifying magic items are gone, but they certianly aren't something that can be discounted as unimportant when building a character above level 1.

[Bearonet]

You have to run the first Kobold boss every week until everyone has the armor from him who can use it and the dig site until everyone has the item there. Then you're geared up enough to move on to the keep.

You're going to wipe - I mean TPK a bunch while learning the fights though.

So THAT's what we've been doing wrong!

[Johnny Blade]

I think part of it is perhaps that "giving you new and interesting options and/or abilities" is now the job of powers. A lot of the customization you would do with feats in 3.5 is done with power selection in 4e.

I think.

Yeah, but the feats are still needlessly uninteresting. I mean, they could have thought of something better.

Especially now that we have powers, actually. I mean, how many feats are there that augment your powers?

They should have made more stuff like Inescapable Force, even something simple like:

Mighty Blow
Prerequisites: Str 15, Power Source: Martial
Benefit: Whenever a target would be dazed by a martial power you use, it is stunned instead.

(They didn't already do that, I hope. I couldn't live with the shame. )


It just looks like they focused on powers almost entirely, while feats were more or less forgotten, as they are no longer the cool and shiny new thing.

[Kurald Galain]

People, people, powers are the new feats.

See, 3rd edition has several feats, like metamagic feats, fighter bonus feats, and so forth. Likewise, 4th edition has two main groups of feats, only by a different name: they have action feats (which are called powers) and things that give a bonus to something else (which are called feats).

[wodan46]

Has any of those comparing 4e to WoW actually played both of the games? Or even 1 of them? Or are you just basing your perspective on cherrypicking all the 4e rules which vaguely remind you of what you've heard about WoW? Those who have actually played both or at least 4e may contribute constructive criticism, while the rest should be encouraged to stop contributing their un-informed slanted opinions.

That said, 4e plays nothing like WoW. 4e plays somewhat like Command and Color games mixed with Fire Emblem, both of which are turn based tactical combat games.

[Draz74]

You don't have to spend skill points on things like Profession and Perform anymore--you can just do them. Skills are more versatile, not less.

Skills may be more versatile, because they're all a bit broader and there's no situational orphan skills like Forgery. And that's a good thing. But that's not really what you're proving.

What your argument about "not having to spend skill points on ____" shows is that Characters are more versatile. And you're right. Ridiculously more versatile. To the point that it really bothers some of us. Every Level 20 character is about as good at every skill, even if they're not Trained in it, as a Level 1 character who specializes their entire life around that skill. You can say all you want that it should be that way because "Level 20 is near-Epic!", but some of us just don't see every character as a Jack-Of-All-Trades, Master-Of-Some just because they're high level.

I want characters who can't Perform. Or who can't Swim. Having weaknesses makes characters more distinctive and believable.

Skills are more versatile in 4e. Characters are more versatile in 4e. But the skill system is SO much less versatile.

[Bandededed]

Well, that actually really makes me happy. The Fire Emblem games have given me many a happy day (and many an angry day, but they eventually turned into: Oh, keep the axe guy away from the 5 swordmasters...I'm an idiot).

And on skills, did anyone notice there's a feat (a heroic feat, no less) that gives you a +2 on all untrained skills? Jack of All Trades, or something similar. Suddenly, you're 40% better at all untrained skills, as compared to the bonus you get from training in the skill.

[Bearonet]

Has any of those comparing 4e to WoW actually played both of the games? Or even 1 of them? Or are you just basing your perspective on cherrypicking all the 4e rules which vaguely remind you of what you've heard about WoW? Those who have actually played both or at least 4e may contribute constructive criticism, while the rest should be encouraged to stop contributing their un-informed slanted opinions.

I'm going to quote something on another forum, here...

I just played Keep on the Shadowfell, and it was awful! I had to wait for the module to load for freaking ever. Then we had to go back and forth waiting for the first kobold encounter to respawn until everyone who could use it got the stuff they were carrying!
In town, the DM would only have the NPCs say the same thing over and over, and one wanted me to bring him 5 wolf ears! And when I tried to hit him he was invulnerable! And the DM used minis with round blue bases for the NPCs. BLUE CIRCLES, I THINK YOU ALL KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

It only went downhill from there. The recharge time on my powers is so long I can't even spam them during fights and the fighter can only hold aggro on creatures that come near him in the first place--and not even consistently, he has to actually hit them when they try to move away! Screw that, I want my freaking taunts!

Don't even get me STARTED about how many times we had to grind Irontooth before he dropped a good item! And that boss is ****ing hard, that sucked! Not to mention the fact that we had to fight our way through the instance every time, and the kobolds respawn WAY too fast.

Oh, and it was way too easy to figure out which NPC was the traitor. As soon as we got that quest we got the "accuse her" conversation option.

Worst part is, all my fellow players would do is bark orders and say "lol" and "stfu noob". It's like in-character doesn't even exist anymore!