Post/Author/DateTime	Post
GC1CEO 05-12-07, 04:15 AM	Do the rules require players to spend their feats and skill points they acquire during a level up or can they save them for future level ups??
Nezkrul 05-12-07, 06:05 AM	Got a PhB? Read the section about leveling up. Specifically states that you cannot save up feats and skill points; that they must be spent right when you attain the next level. But, DM's rule 0 can kick in, so RAYW.
Egres 05-12-07, 10:47 AM	Got a PhB? Read the section about leveling up. Specifically states that you cannot save up feats and skill points; that they must be spent right when you attain the next level. "Specifically"? Where, exactly?
squfof 05-12-07, 11:31 AM	I'm guessing Nezkrul is referring to the section "Experience and Levels," since that is where they talk about level advancement. I found no discussion there about whether or not you can save skill points or feats.... :P If you look at the chapter on Skills, p. 62, it says, "Spend all your skill points. You can't save them to spend later." This makes sense because skills buy different amounts of ranks in class or cross-class skills, which in turn depend on what class you just leveled in. If you could save skill points, you could circumvent the cross-class skill cost penalty, so your DM should probably not let you save skill points. However, I didn't see anything in the chapter on Feats that specifically says that you cannot save feats. Given that it specifically says you cannot save skill points, I would think that it would say something similar about feats if that is what was intended. Furthermore, off the top of my head, I can't think of a good reason not to allow this, so perhaps you can convince your DM to let you save feats.
risner 05-12-07, 12:12 PM	Why this comes up I have no idea. 1) 3.0 FAQ page 65 clearly states you can not save up a feat or skill point (but goes on to say that if the DM is friendly he could allow the player to think about it and choose his skill or feat later but all the pre-reqs must be met at the time he would have gotten the feat. In other words, if I wait until 20th level to pick my 3rd level feat, I would have to qualify for it at 3rd level without the benefit of levels 4th to 20th.) 2) The 3.5 PHB states you gain feats at set levels. No where in the text does it say anything about "and you can pick up any feats or skills you have not already chosen from previous levels." In effect, the rules are pretty clear that if you choose to not select a feat at 3rd level during the level up process, then you will have no further opportunities to select a 3rd level feat at any point in the future (a choose it now or lose it policy.) 3) The PHB II rules on feat/skill retraining can not be more clear that if you swap out a 3rd level feat at 9th level, the new replacement MUST have all it's pre-reqs covered with you as your 3rd level character (without any of the benefits of your 4th to 9th level class, skills, feats, etc.) You can not allow this because I will be heavily exploited. Imagine if 10 feats had Fighter 18th level as a pre-req and you had a Fighter that waited to his 18th level to pick up his 1st, 3rd, ... 15th and 18th level feats. He could pick up all the 18th level feats with an insane loophole like this. Why some people don't see this as a massive problem despite the rules being pretty clear, I will never know.
squfof 05-12-07, 03:37 PM	Why this comes up I have no idea. Maybe because some people are new, don't know the answer, or aren't sure where to find the answer? Seriously, if you are going to post, why don't you just answer the question and move on? The extra commentary will only make people feel stupid or angry. You do know that if the question itself irritates you so much then you don't have to respond at all, right? Back to the OP: Though the PHB doesn't say, "You can delay your choice of feats," neither does it say, "You cannot delay your choice of feats." In other words, there is no "choose it or lose it" policy specifically stated. And just because someone thinks it's clear does not mean that everyone else will think it's clear. Thus, the question of the OP. Not everyone has the PHB2, and even those who do don't necessarily play with the skill/feat retraining rules. Bringing up the PHB2 doesn't mean anything to such people. Besides, this is a pretty basic question that should be handled in the core three (PHB, DMG, MM). In fact, out of the 956 total pages in the core three, I found one sentence that adresses the skill question and none that address the feat question. More than likely, none of the authors ever thought someone would be willing to handicap themselves for a few (or more) levels in order to take a feat later on. However, since it is pretty clear how one might abuse the possibility of delaying skill choice, they specifically ruled this out. And as far as the "massive problem" that would result if you let people save feats, can anyone give a real example? A fighter that didn't take any feats until 18th level is just not realistic. Such a fighter would probably not live to see 18th level. In any case: First, the character is weaker until the feat is taken, so depending on the feat, maybe this penalty balances things out. Second, how many feats with a high-level prerequisite also do not have other feat prerequisites? Not so many in the core three, and probably not so many in all the non-core books. So the extext that one could "heavily exploit" this "loophole" is somewhat diminished by the fact that one needs to spend feats on the prerequisites -- you just won't have that many left over for all the high-level prerequisite feats you want. Non-core feats should be reviewed by the DM anyway, and an alert DM should not let you abuse the rules in this or any other way. Finally, not everyone will exploit a loophole just because it exists. Among such responsible players, delaying feat choice is probably not a problem.
Lucas Blackstone 05-12-07, 04:51 PM	To me it's very clear that you don't "save feats". When you get a feat it says you get it AT that level. It doesn't have to say in the PHB " You cannot save feats for a later level " because simply put, a later level is not an earlier one. If I reach level 3, and for some reason don't pick my feat ( I'm not sure if feat selection is required, but as I read it, it is. ) I don't get to select my feat at 4th level because it is not 3rd level. 3rd level is gone. 4th level is not AT 3rd level. The chance to learn that feat is gone. Off the top of my head, I suppose if you were level drained back to 3rd level, you could then pick up your feat, and then have the old level restored? But that's a whole different case then "feat saving".
Forged_Fury 05-12-07, 05:33 PM	Most people accept that you cannot save feats until later. The reason behind this is mainly because of PRC entry. Certain PRCs would be accessible a few levels before they are normally available if you were to allow later access to feats. Same thing with certain feats, such as those that have a BAB or Attribute prerequisite that you would meet after you hit the feat level and sometime before you get your next feat 3 levels later. These feats and PRCs have been balanced with the understanding they will only be accessible until later. -FF
squfof 05-12-07, 07:04 PM	These feats and PRCs have been balanced with the understanding they will only be accessible until later. Why couldn't it be that gimping yourself for a level or two (at least) doesn't balance out the benefit of taking a feat or PrC a level or two (at most) early? Same question for BAB or attribute prerequisites. Again, since you get at least one feat every three levels, we are only talking about at most one or two levels. That just doesn't seem to me like that big of a deal. It doesn't have to say in the PHB " You cannot save feats for a later level " And it doesn't have to say in the PHB, "You cannot save skill points for a later level," but it does. Can you explain why it specifically says you cannot save skill points, but it does not specifically say you cannot save feats? It seems to me that if you are the author and you are writing a section on how a character gains skills/feats, and you do not want players saving skills/feats, and you explicitly state that you cannot save skills, then you should also explicitly state that you cannot save feats. To not do so makes it seem like one is OK and the other is not. Sure, neither does it say you can save feats, but isn't it strange that the author felt the need to specifically rule out one activity and not the other? Sounds to me like either the author didn't think about it (because, honestly, how often does this come up?) or didn't think it was worth stating (maybe because gimping yourself balances whatever benefit you can wrangle out of saving a feat).
Nom 05-13-07, 07:06 AM	Oh, show a clue! PH pg 59: "upon attaining 3rd level and at every third level thereafter ..., the character gains one feat of your choice". There's the mechanic for gaining feats. There is no mechanic specifying what happens if you defer choosing the feat, or when you can choose it if you don't choose it then. To argue "The reason the rules don't specifically forbid you from deferring feat selection is because you are allowed to, even though there is no mechanic for this described anywhere" is just willful misreading. Sure, the author didn't think of it, but it's because he took it for granted that it's not legal, not because he wanted to leave the possibility open and enjoys leaving core mechanics undefined. :rolleyes:
Mirtek 05-13-07, 08:21 AM	neither does it say, "You cannot delay your choice of feats." In other words, there is no "choose it or lose it" policy specifically stated. Page 58 has the step by step rules for level advancement. Chosing feats is step 7. If you don't do stp 7, you can't proceed to step 8&9 to finish gaining your level. More than likely, none of the authors ever thought someone would be willing to handicap themselves for a few (or more) levels in order to take a feat later on. However, since it is pretty clear how one might abuse the possibility of delaying skill choice, they specifically ruled this out. Not likely. Delaying a feat isn't very crippling (IOh no, how can I possibly last one more level without the mighty +1 to hit bonus from Weapon Focus) and is a very powerfull way to abuse prestige class requirement.
RoninFrosty 05-13-07, 08:31 AM	You can claim willful misreading all you want, but that's not what this is. They're not misreading anything; they're reading the Rules as Written, which are lovingly referred to here as the RAW. Now, Rules as INTENDED may claim that you MUST spend the feat at level up, but because each DM uses the Rules as INTERPRETED differently, it's up to him. Me? I'd allow someone to save a feat, with the clause that you can only spend said feat at a level up. That way, no one can bust out whirlwind attack when I know for a fact that they didn't have it a moment earlier :-P Ooh, and for skills, I'd go with what squfof said. Saving skill points causes cross class confusion.
Bob Loblaw 05-13-07, 09:14 AM	The rules in this case do not require any extra clarification. You gain feats at certain levels and you choose what that feat is. I think sometimes people want to read into things just to be able to support something they know is going to change the dynamic of the game. The reason why saving feats until later levels is generally a bad idea is that it changes the power level of the game. Take Weapon Finesse as an example. It has a prerequisite of Base Attack Bonus +1. This means that rogues do not qualify at 1st level. They would qualify at 2nd level but they do not have a feat slot available. The feat is now a 3rd level feat for the rogue. If he is allowed to take it at 2nd level, his combat prowess improves faster than the game is designed to handle. Instead, if you want a more combat oriented rogue, you should either check out the option from Unearthed Arcana or begin multiclassing. This is exactly what the multiclassing rules are meant for. While this is a single case, imagine if all four players did this. Now the whole Encounter Levels system is affected because everyone is gaining power at different levels of play. Sometimes they are weaker sometimes they are stronger. There is no longer rhyme nor reason. I could qualify for feats much earlier than intended with the right amount of multiclassing. This then makes me qualify for prestige classes at different times than intended, often times sooner. If the rules had intended for you to save feats for later use, there would be an explanation on how that works. How many can you save? Can you spend them in rapid succession to gain a feat that has several prerequisites? Since I am weaker when I choose to save the feat, how does this affect my XP for that level? How much harder is the encounter per feat I don't spend? If I take a prestige class sooner, I am now more powerful than I would be normally, do I lose XP because the encounter is too easy? Too many questions. Just take the feat when you are supposed to.
squfof 05-13-07, 10:49 AM	Sure, the author didn't think of it, but it's because he took it for granted that it's not legal So he didn't take it for granted that it's not legal to save skill points, but he did for feats, right? :rolleyes: Why is one so obvious that it doesn't need mentioning, and the other apparently isn't obvious so it needs special mention? If anything, I think it's obvious that you can't save skill points (because of the class/cross-class distinction) but not so obvious for feats! And to assume "willful misreading" you have to make assumptions about the qualities of the person you are talking about, specifically munchkinism, which might not be fair. What if a new player shows up to game with his newly leveled fighter at level 2, and didn't realize/forgot he got a bonus feat. Are you going to force him to pick NOW, choose it or lose it? What if he says, "Can we just play now and I'll think about it later?" You know, not every question about rules is also a question about how to exploit rules.... Page 58 has the step by step rules for level advancement. Chosing feats is step 7. If you don't do stp 7, you can't proceed to step 8&9 to finish gaining your level. By your logic if I increment my character's saving throw bonuses before my character's BAB, then I can never go back and increment the BAB. That's just silly. In any case, where does it say this is a step-by-step process that must be followed in a particular order? These are just numbers to itemize a list! They could have written: A.) Choose Class... B.) Base Attack Bonus..., etc. Delaying a feat isn't very crippling Could it not be very crippling? Sure, maybe Weapon Focus can wait a level (at least that's what you might think until your next encounter where you just miss hitting by 1, then die in the next round from massive damage), but there are other feats that significantly increase the power of a given character, thus delaying such a feat would be more of a penalty. Clearly it depends on the feat, how/why you are saving the feat, etc. In other words, it's something that you should discuss with your DM since the rules don't expressly forbid it. The rules in this case do not require any extra clarification. Obviously, they do. Otherwise someone wouldn't have asked. I think sometimes people want to read into things just to be able to support something they know is going to change the dynamic of the game. What's the matter with you people? Do you only play with munchkins and never with new people or those without a 100% complete mastery of the rules? Do you really have to make the assumption that everyone who asks a question is trying to exploit loopholes? While I agree that it is simplest and probably best to not save feats, the OP was about whether or not you can. So everyone who came up with doom-and-gloom scenarios about how the universe will collapse if you allow this didn't really answer the question: Can you? I couldn't find anything core that said no, so naturally, the DM should make the call, taking into accout why, how, what kind of player wants to do this, how it will affect the game/others, etc. Clearly there are cases where it can cause problems, and in these cases the DM should say no. Otherwise, I just don't see the big deal.
Inigo Carmine 05-13-07, 11:13 AM	Everyone has overlooked a difference between skills and feats: Skills give you points to spend, feats don't give you any points; you just get a feat. I think everyone is in agreement you can't spend skill points after the level you receive them, but saying you can forgoe feats and gain more feats later is like saying you can forgoe your skill points at level 2 and take them at level 4 (as long as you spend them then). The quote about losing skill points is necessary because you have gained something, skill points, that otherwise could be saved until later. With feats, there are no such thing; you either take a feat, or you get nothing.
Dragoloth 05-13-07, 11:20 AM	If you want to save feats for later or gimp yourself now to gain a benefit from a PrC or anything else sooner that just seems wrong to me. D&D is a roleplaying game, so in character what could be your reasons for forsakeing knowledge(skill points or a feat) now? The PC learns through combat and instruction which is represented by gaining levels. Skills, feats, and class abilities are what the PC learns at each level so what would someone gain from missing part of their training? Saving a feat for later to gain a benefit sooner than intended is metagaming pure and simple. The is no reason to do this other than to create a character that gains benefits early. Can anyone give me a good RP reason of why someone would delay one part of training until later. There isn't one at least not a good one.
Perseus_Stoned 05-13-07, 11:26 AM	And to assume "willful misreading" you have to make assumptions about the qualities of the person you are talking about, specifically munchkinism, which might not be fair. What if a new player shows up to game with his newly leveled fighter at level 2, and didn't realize/forgot he got a bonus feat. Are you going to force him to pick NOW, choose it or lose it? What if he says, "Can we just play now and I'll think about it later?" You know, not every question about rules is also a question about how to exploit rules.... This one is though. 3.0 FAQ page 65 clearly states you can not save up a feat or skill point (but goes on to say that if the DM is friendly he could allow the player to think about it and choose his skill or feat later but all the pre-reqs must be met at the time he would have gotten the feat. In other words, if I wait until 20th level to pick my 3rd level feat, I would have to qualify for it at 3rd level without the benefit of levels 4th to 20th.)
squfof 05-13-07, 12:05 PM	Everyone has overlooked a difference between skills and feats: Skills give you points to spend, feats don't give you any points; you just get a feat. One might reasonably say that when you have enough experience to move to level 3 that you now have one feat "choice" to make, which you can "spend" on any feat for which you qualify. (In fact, in some places they refer to it as a choice.) Functionally, this is in every way the same as having skill "points" to spend, since by spending the skill point you are making the choice to increase, say, Tumble by 1 rank. You could equally say, "I choose for my character's Tumble ranks to increase by 1." I don't see much difference, but whatever.... you either take a feat, or you get nothing. But it doesn't actually say that, whereas it does for skills. It would have been clear if it did, but it doesn't. It wouldn't have taken much time/effort/ink, but they didn't. Thus the OP. so in character what could be your reasons for forsakeing knowledge(skill points or a feat) now? How 'bout this: You're in the middle of a wilderness adventure, far from civilization and advanced learning/training, and you don't have access to the knowledge/instruction needed to learn a particular skill/feat. During the adventure, you level-up to 3rd level. Rather than turn back so you can "get a feat," you keep on adventuring without taking a feat. At some point, you level-up to 4th level, then make it back to civilization and want to put in some time training with a new (exotic) weapon. Mechanically, you want to take the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword) feat. But you can't because that's "metagaming pure and simple," a "willful misreading" of the rules, or "heavily exploits" the rules, right? Actually, contrary to what has been said, it makes perfect sense to me from a roleplaying perspective. What, I level-up and suddenly BAM I have better attacks, better resistance to magic, etc.? BAM, I instantly know how to use the bastard sword, even though I'm in the middle of the woods, with no access to training, not to mention I might not even own a bastard sword and I presently have no way to buy one, right? In fact, I don't think that makes any sense from a roleplaying perspective. But, that is just my humble opinion. OK, here we go, regarding the 3.0 FAQ: Perhaps more relevant (to those of us who play 3.5 and don't want to have to check all previous versions for answers to rules) is p. 92 of the most recent 3.5 FAQ, where it says, no to both saving skills and feats. So it looks like the sky really will fall if you allow feat saving, since in 3.0 it was OK for the DM to allow this in a limited sense, while in 3.5 it's not.
risner 05-13-07, 12:14 PM	What's the matter with you people? Do you only play with munchkins and never with new people or those without a 100% complete mastery of the rules? Do you really have to make the assumption that everyone who asks a question is trying to exploit loopholes? Let us make sure we are not getting confused. 1) The Rules don't allow for delayed feat choice. 2) The FAQ indicates it may be ok to allow a new player to delay a feat. 3) All sources (the FAQ, PHB II) clearly state that when changing a feat from a previous level, you must qualify for it using only the features (BAB, skills, etc) of your character at the level the feat is positioned. In other words, if you are 6th level and changing your 3rd level feat, you can only use your skills, class levels, abilities, feats, etc that you had at 3rd level. The whole point the PHB prohibits choosing feats other than during level up is to prevent exploits. For example, I just built a Monk and had to choose my 1st, 3rd, and 6th level feats in a specific order. I was limited by my features at each level. If I had the option of delaying the choices, I could have build a significantly more powerful character.
squfof 05-13-07, 02:21 PM	1) The Rules don't allow for delayed feat choice. "The Rules" = core three? If so, then neither do they explicitly forbid delayed feat choice. Thus the OP. 2) The FAQ indicates it may be ok to allow a new player to delay a feat. Actually, the most recent 3.5 FAQ says NO to delayed skill/feat choices. It seems to me that the answer to this question given in the 3.0 FAQ is more reasonable, as it allows for DM's discretion. But that's just me. 3) All sources (the FAQ, PHB II) clearly state that when changing a feat from a previous level, you must qualify for it using only the features (BAB, skills, etc) of your character at the level the feat is positioned. In other words, if you are 6th level and changing your 3rd level feat, you can only use your skills, class levels, abilities, feats, etc that you had at 3rd level. This is all fine, good, reasonable, except...retraining feats isn't the same things as delaying feat choices. So what does this have to do with delaying feat choices? The whole point the PHB prohibits choosing feats other than during level up is to prevent exploits. For example, I just built a Monk and had to choose my 1st, 3rd, and 6th level feats in a specific order. I was limited by my features at each level. If I had the option of delaying the choices, I could have build a significantly more powerful character. I missed the part where "the PHB prohibits choosing feats other than during level up." Oh yeah, that's because it's not there. :P And your monk is a fine example of a situation in which the DM should probably say no, depending on just how "significantly more powerful" your character would become with delayed feat choices. I advocated DM's discretion from the get-go precisely because there are situations where it's no big deal, and I'll admit that there are probably many situations where it might be a big deal. In every game, a player should always speak with the DM before doing something on which the rules aren't 100% clear. And whether or not delaying feats is something that is allowed isn't made 100% clear by the core three, thus the OP. Everyone who says that the rules "do not require any extra clarification," or that "Most people accept that you cannot save feats until later" are just disguising their opinions as some sore of general consensus in order to sound authoritative, and are not being particularly helpful.
wal9000 05-13-07, 02:43 PM	"The Rules" = core three? If so, then neither do they explicitly forbid delayed feat choice. Thus the OP. If you want to look at it that way, the rules don't explicitly say a lot of things. The example is that it doesn't say that when you're dead you just lay on the floor and don't do anything. Maybe at -10 HP you stop being unconscious and keep on fighting. It doesn't say you can't. A more related example would be spells. A wizard casts Bull's Strength. It states that "The subject becomes stronger. The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to strength." It doesn't say "The subject becomes stronger right now. The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to strength right now. The subject cannot choose to temporarily forgo the effects of this spell in order to gain them at a later time." From reading the spell would you infer that the target can pick when he wants it to take effect? I certainly wouldn't. So, someone please explain the difference between these two statements: "At 3rd level and every three levels thereafter (6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, and 18th), he or she gains another feat." "The subject gains a climb speed of 20 feet." Sure would be nice if I could just have someone cast Spider Climb on me before I go adventuring and decide not to "gain" a climb speed until it would be useful to me.
DarkRhystar 05-13-07, 02:45 PM	"The Rules" = core three? If so, then neither do they explicitly forbid delayed feat choice. Thus the OP. The PHB also doesn't say that Humans can't breathe fire. Does that mean they can? This is all fine, good, reasonable, except...retraining feats isn't the same things as delaying feat choices. So what does this have to do with delaying feat choices? The inherent concept that a 3rd level feat is a 3rd level feat and not an 18th level feat is specified in retraining restrictions. Taking a feat at a later level using that level's abilities to meet the prerequisites breaks the rules. I missed the part where "the PHB prohibits choosing feats other than during level up." Oh yeah, that's because it's not there. :P Like the ability for Humans to turn into giant space hamsters and eat people right? The argument that just because X book doesn't explicitly say Y cannot be done is not a valid argument for allowing Y to be done. This is especially true when the context and later books seem to disallow Y.
Azog_the_Firvin 05-13-07, 04:36 PM	Not choosing a feat right away is a bit like taking a useless feat you never use, then retraining later for what you really wanted. I'd allow the not choosing as long as the player obeys the retraining rules when he finally does choose a feat. In either case, the real limitation is that when you do put the feat you want in there, it has to be one you'd have qualified for at the level the feat was granted. That's part of the balance issue. Sure, a character going from 1-20 is gimped for a bit by not choosing feats, but for a character starting at level 12, just saying that 'I never selected feats at 1, 3, 6, and 9, and I want them all now' isn't actually playing out the gimping. And in either case, you shouldn't get 5 feats that require level 12/15 skill ranks/spell level 6/whatever.
Banatine 05-13-07, 05:04 PM	Is it just me, or is squfof the only person who is having 'trouble' understanding the rules about gaining feats? This whole thread could have been answered with the following: Yes, you must spend skill points and feats at the levels you get them. You can't save them for later.
squfof 05-13-07, 05:24 PM	The argument that just because X book doesn't explicitly say Y cannot be done is not a valid argument for allowing Y to be done. This is especially true when the context and later books seem to disallow Y. By the same logic, it is also not a valid argument for NOT allowing Y to be done. If the rules are silent, then you must turn somewhere else for help... Anyway, if you read the entire thread, you'll see that I, for one, am in no way advocating that position. What I am advocating is that when the rules don't explicitly say you can (or cannot) do something that a player has asked about, the DM needs to make a judgement call, preferably based on the conditions at hand, on the experience of the DM and player(s), and common sense. Just saying, "No, that's just wrong/broken/munchkin/etc." is heavy-handed, especially when it is trivial to think up examples where it is perfectly OK to let a player take a feat one or two levels late. The PHB also doesn't say that Humans can't breathe fire. Nor does it say that you can. No previous experience necessary to deal with this one, I imagine most DMs with any common sense are going to say no here. But I suppose that a DM could rule that yes, humans can breathe fire...not that I would...and if I did it would be a house rule that I would announce at the start of the campaign. Sure would be nice if I could just have someone cast Spider Climb on me before I go adventuring and decide not to "gain" a climb speed until it would be useful to me. I suppose it's possible that someone new to playing spell-casters might get confused like this, but anyone who has read the description of Delayed Blast Fireball, for example, will see that you probably can delay some spells and not others; otherwise "Delayed" isn't necessary. If the player isn't sure, an experienced DM can clear it up. Is it just me, or is squfof the only person who is having 'trouble' understanding the rules about gaining feats? I guess you might get that impression if you didn't read the entire thread carefully. Actually I have no trouble at all with the ruling that you must pick feats at the level at which you get them, and I have said that this is probably the best and certainly the simplest way to go. I also suggested that it wouldn't be a big deal if a DM allowed feat saving, provided the DM didn't feel that the player was "up to something."
DarkRhystar 05-13-07, 05:41 PM	By the same logic, it is also not a valid argument for NOT allowing Y to be done. If the rules are silent, then you must turn somewhere else for help... The rules are not silent. The PhB2 rules of retraining make it ever more clear. The only thing the rules aren't doing is waving a flashing neon sign saying "DO NOT DO THIS!" Anyway, if you read the entire thread, you'll see that I, for one, am in no way advocating that position. What I am advocating is that when the rules don't explicitly say you can (or cannot) do something that a player has asked about, the DM needs to make a judgement call, preferably based on the conditions at hand, on the experience of the DM and player(s), and common sense. Just saying, "No, that's just wrong/broken/munchkin/etc." is heavy-handed, especially when it is trivial to think up examples where it is perfectly OK to let a player take a feat one or two levels late. Perfectly OK in your opinion. At level 3, you gain a feat. If you wish to not gain a feat, you need to break the rules. Pure and simple. Nor does it say that you can. Which is exactly why it's an awful argument that holds no water and shouldn't be used. I guess you might get that impression if you didn't read the entire thread carefully. Actually I have no trouble at all with the ruling that you must pick feats at the level at which you get them, and I have said that this is probably the best and certainly the simplest way to go. I also suggested that it wouldn't be a big deal if a DM allowed feat saving, provided the DM didn't feel that the player was "up to something." Which is entirely useless. The OP isn't asking "Is it possible to house rule this," rather he's asking "Is this within the rules?" Great, you've established the DM can house rule things. Yay. It's totally irrelevant.
Banatine 05-13-07, 05:41 PM	I guess you might get that impression if you didn't read the entire thread carefully. Actually I have no trouble at all with the ruling that you must pick feats at the level at which you get them, and I have said that this is probably the best and certainly the simplest way to go. I also suggested that it wouldn't be a big deal if a DM allowed feat saving, provided the DM didn't feel that the player was "up to something." In that case, I apoloigise for being rude. I was simply getting the impression that you were trying to say that you can do something because the rules don't explicitly say you can't. In the case of DM interpretation, i would say that you really should follow the guidelines that the others have mentioned instead.(that if you held your feats back, when you decided to take them, you have to have been able to have taken the feat at the time the slot first became accessible.
squfof 05-13-07, 06:13 PM	The rules are not silent. The PhB2 rules of retraining make it ever more clear. As I said before, this is unsatisfactory for someone who does not want/have the PHB2. Your point would have more force if you pointed to the 3.5 FAQ, at which point I would say that if the DM accepts the 3.5 FAQ as being on equal footing with published book material (or whatever else the DM is using), then yes, it's clear what to do. I, personally, would accept the 3.5 FAQ answer, but I would keep an open mind if a player made such a request. Perfectly OK in your opinion. Unlike some other people who have posted here, I never claimed that my posts represented anything but my opinion. But that's what a discussion about unclear rules is, exchange of opinions. Sometimes the rules are ambiguous (need a DM ruling), sometime the rules suck (need a house rule). Before I saw the 3.5 FAQ I thought we were in the former, since I thought it was weird that the PHB explicitly says you cannot save skills, but does not specifically say you cannot save feats. At that point, the answer wasn't clear, so I offered my opinion. Was that where I went wrong? Which is exactly why it's an awful argument that holds no water and shouldn't be used. A careful re-reading of my posts reveals that I never used this argument as proof of anything...other than it's weird that the PHB explicitly says you cannot save skills, but does not explicitly say you cannot save feats. Given the similarity between skills and feats (you get a certain number of skill points/feats at each level, and you make choices), I thought this was weird. Great, you've established the DM can house rule things. Well, before I saw the 3.5 FAQ, it wasn't so much a house rule that I was proposing as an interpretation to what I thought was a point of uncertainty. After reading the 3.5 FAQ I agree, it would be a house rule, and one that I don't think would necessarily blow up a game in every application, by the way.... In that case, I apoloigise for being rude. Thanks for the apology, no big deal. But I have to ask, and I'm being serious, why ever be rude? Do you find that it ever helps in any way?
Banatine 05-13-07, 06:41 PM	i suppose when i was typing that, by judgment (being impared by me currently having a cold), told be to insult what i misguidedly beleived to be intentional ignorance. once again, i'm sorry.
wal9000 05-13-07, 08:48 PM	I'll echo the general opinion and say that I'd handle this by having them take a "useless" feat like endurance or magical aptitude and allow them to replace it at a later level, provided the feat they replace it with is one that they would have qualified for at the level that they gained the worthless feat.
DarkRhystar 05-13-07, 09:11 PM	As I said before, this is unsatisfactory for someone who does not want/have the PHB2. That's almost like saying you shouldn't get a ticket for driving 90 mph through a residential area because there isn't a speed limit sign. At that point, the answer wasn't clear, so I offered my opinion. Was that where I went wrong? Maybe, it was the same place the driver in the above example did. :P A careful re-reading of my posts reveals that I never used this argument as proof of anything... "I missed the part where "the PHB prohibits choosing feats other than during level up." Oh yeah, that's because it's not there." This statement leads me to believe otherwise. Well, before I saw the 3.5 FAQ, it wasn't so much a house rule that I was proposing as an interpretation to what I thought was a point of uncertainty. After reading the 3.5 FAQ I agree, it would be a house rule, and one that I don't think would necessarily blow up a game in every application, by the way.... Something doesn't have to blow the game up with every application to be a bad thing. Thanks for the apology, no big deal. But I have to ask, and I'm being serious, why ever be rude? Do you find that it ever helps in any way? Sometimes there is only perceived rudeness when none really exists due to the inadequacies inherent to the medium of communication. Mostly though, it's just a lack of smileys. ;)
squfof 05-13-07, 09:55 PM	That's almost like saying you shouldn't get a ticket for driving 90 mph through a residential area because there isn't a speed limit sign. Almost, but not quite, since some people don't recoginize PHB2 and all its contents as "the law." I see it more as it's the law if the particular gaming group says it's the law. I, for one, don't own the book, and I find it hard to make a ruling using a book that I don't have. I do, on the other hand, have access to the FAQ. For some reason I forgot all about it when I first posted, which I sincerely regret.... This statement leads me to believe otherwise. "This statement" was a response to a previous post of risner. I was saying that I don't see a prohibition in the PHB against saving feats. I didn't claim it proved anything, just that I didn't see the prohibition, despite his statement that it exists in the PHB. That is all. Sometimes there is only perceived rudeness when none really exists due to the inadequacies inherent to the medium of communication. Mostly though, it's just a lack of smileys. Well, if someone apologizes for being rude, I'll assume they were being rude. But you're right -- it's hard to tell who's being an a$$ and who just lacks people skills that are compatible with my own. In any case, "no big deal."
Bob Loblaw 05-13-07, 10:18 PM	What's the matter with you people? Do you only play with munchkins and never with new people or those without a 100% complete mastery of the rules? Do you really have to make the assumption that everyone who asks a question is trying to exploit loopholes? There are many people on these boards who try to do just that. I'm not saying the original poster is doing this. I like to be consistant regardless of the amount of experience of the player. Clearly there are cases where it can cause problems, and in these cases the DM should say no. Otherwise, I just don't see the big deal. I disagree. The DM should remain consistant with his rulings. Saying "yes" sometimes and "no" at others based on how he feels at that moment for the same rule is just confusing. The book does not need a rule stating that you cannot save feats for later use. Since the book says you get a feat at level X, then you get that feat and use it. If you allow feats to be saved, why not other abilities as well? Wizard bonus spells comes to mind. Can I save my free spells every level and just use my money to buy the lower level ones? It would be awesome to save spells so I can get 40 level 8 and 9 spells free (the cost to find and scribe these spells is rather large). Consistency is important. The DM should make sure he understands the ramifications of changing what is written. He should make a point of trying to understand why the rules work the way they do. Even small changes can have a big impact.
squfof 05-13-07, 11:20 PM	There are many people on these boards who try to do just that. I don't disagree. However, to automatically assume "willful misreading," a desire to "heavily exploit" the rules, "metagaming pure and simple," or any other such act of munchkinism probably isn't the best way for anyone to proceed. I guess asking for a thoughtful response without all the unecessary and probably unwanted judgements is too much to ask? The book does not need a rule stating that you cannot save feats for later use. Since the book says you get a feat at level X, then you get that feat and use it. If you allow feats to be saved, why not other abilities as well? I'll ask again: Why do you think the author felt a need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving skill points, but apparently didn't feel a similar need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving feats? Will you admit that it's at least a little bit odd? Will you admit that if the author was going to omit anything then the author should have written a rule that explicitly forbids saving feats, since it's immediately obvious how problems can arise if you allow saving skill points due to the class/cross-class skill distinction? Saying "yes" sometimes and "no" at others based on how he feels at that moment for the same rule is just confusing. "Feels at that moment"? I'm not advocating that a DM should decide on a whim, dice roll, or other random method. Wizard bonus spells comes to mind. Oh, come on, a wizard that only gains spells from scrolls found? Maybe if you have some under the table deal with the DM to feed you the spells you want/need. And, as you said, lots of gold. This is almost, but not quite as ridiculous as the fighter who takes no feats up to level 18 example. Otherwise, you're right: it's important to be consistent. But it's also important to be fair, open-minded, and use a little common sense. In my 2nd level fighter example, I think it would be fair to let him choose his feat later. Same thing with my 4th level character who wants a bastard sword example. I would have no problem at all telling these players, "go for it," especially if no one else in the group objected. I would even let a fighter save all his feats until 18th level, surpressing laughter as best as I could as I told him -- if a fighter can make it to 18th level without feats, then I'm doing something seriously wrong. I might even allow a wizard to never take spells, since again, I think it's ridiculous. After both characters died I'd pull those players aside and say, "OK, stop being a munchkin. Seriously."
Forged_Fury 05-13-07, 11:34 PM	I'll ask again: Why do you think the author felt a need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving skill points, but apparently didn't feel a similar need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving feats? Will you admit that it's at least a little bit odd?" Not having a PHB in front of me, I am pretty sure there are several author and editor credits for the book. The most likely culprit is multiple individuals working on different parts. Even in editing, one person could read the Level-Up rules, refer to the chart, and think, "OK, I get a feat at first level and any other level divisible by three, cool." No real need for a statement that says you can/cannot save feats for later levels. At the same time, another editor could read the skill section and see that a statement was added stating skill points had to be spent at the level they are gained. The editor covering that section may even think, "I'm glad they cleared that up." Still, not necessarily required. Really, that is where the FAQ comes in, it attempts to clarify these rules. Sometimes it does a good job, other times not so much. -FF
Bob Loblaw 05-13-07, 11:51 PM	I don't disagree. However, to automatically assume "willful misreading," a desire to "heavily exploit" the rules, "metagaming pure and simple," or any other such act of munchkinism probably isn't the best way for anyone to proceed. I guess asking for a thoughtful response without all the unecessary and probably unwanted judgements is too much to ask? I never made that claim. I did say that there are people who are trying twist things to suit their tastes. I don't think the original poster is one of those people. You'll also notice that I did give a detailed response on why I feel the way I do. I'll ask again: Why do you think the author felt a need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving skill points, but apparently didn't feel a similar need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving feats? I won't try to second guess why the authors did what they did. There are plenty of assumed reasons, some valid some not so valid. Personally, I don't think it was necessary to write the rule. Will you admit that it's at least a little bit odd? Nope. I don't find it odd at all. I do find it odd that we see this question pop up on the boards frequently. The only reason they ask the question is because they want to increase the power of their character before his time. The rule does not explicitly state one way or the other. Common sense says that you should not be able to save the feat. Will you admit that if the author was going to omit anything then the author should have written a rule that explicitly forbids saving feats, since it's immediately obvious how problems can arise if you allow saving skill points due to the class/cross-class skill distinction? Skill points are a function of class levels and feats are often a function of character level. In many cases you want to use feats right away. I have a feeling that the authors didn't foresee this problem. "Feels at that moment"? I'm not advocating that a DM should decide on a whim, dice roll, or other random method. To me, case-by-case is the same thing. Make a ruling and stay with it. In the spirit of keeping things simple, I would say that you cannot save feats. Oh, come on, a wizard that only gains spells from scrolls found? Maybe if you have some under the table deal with the DM to feed you the spells you want/need. And, as you said, lots of gold. This is almost, but not quite as ridiculous as the fighter who takes no feats up to level 18 example. There is no rule that states I cannot do this. Why can't I? I can research the spells I desire and spend the money accordingly. It would be cheaper to buy several low level spells and save the higher level spells to be free later. I would have few consequences doing this. Otherwise, you're right: it's important to be consistent. But it's also important to be fair, open-minded, and use a little common sense. In my 2nd level fighter example, I think it would be fair to let him choose his feat later. Same thing with my 4th level character who wants a bastard sword example. I would have no problem at all telling these players, "go for it," especially if no one else in the group objected. I would even let a fighter save all his feats until 18th level, surpressing laughter as best as I could as I told him -- if a fighter can make it to 18th level without feats, then I'm doing something seriously wrong. I might even allow a wizard to never take spells, since again, I think it's ridiculous. After both characters died I'd pull those players aside and say, "OK, stop being a munchkin. Seriously." I am very fair and open-minded as DM. I expect my players to work with the rules given and to multiclass accordingly. If you need or want some feats at a different rate, then you will have to work for it. Common sense, in this case, dictates that you cannot save feats for later use. The rules say to choose your feat when you level. The rules do not say anything else about it. Common sense says that you choose your feat now.
kalstrand 05-14-07, 12:04 AM	It has been ages since I looked at a 2nd Edition PHB but I think you could save your proficiencies. Skill points would be the closest equivalent to the proficiencies from 2E so perhaps the author cleared that up in the first printing of 3E and it has been a simple hold over since then.
risner 05-14-07, 06:43 AM	"The Rules" = core three? If so, then neither do they explicitly forbid delayed feat choice. Thus the OP. Actually, the most recent 3.5 FAQ says NO to delayed skill/feat choices. I missed the part where "the PHB prohibits choosing feats other than during level up." Oh yeah, that's because it's not there. :P Look, the core 3 do prohibit it if you apply any common sense to what is written. There is zero evidence of any allowance or acceptance to your theory. I didn't notice the prohibition in the 3.5 FAQ at first, but it does back up what is written in core. If you want to play by the rule "I will twist all I can manage on every little word to exploit the game as much as I possible can to the greater harm of the game" which is sometimes called RAW on this board, fine. Enjoy, but know most people won't play with you. I wouldn't.
risner 05-14-07, 07:05 AM	I'll ask again: Why do you think the author felt a need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving skill points, but apparently didn't feel a similar need to write a rule that explicitly forbids saving feats? This is almost, but not quite as ridiculous as the fighter who takes no feats up to level 18 example. Skill point saving was consider (most likely) something people could get confused about. Since each level grants you a certain number of points and not a widget like a feat. It feels more like a "pool" or "money" where feats are more like abilities or features. When reading the book, it is clear you can't delay a feat and may have been less clear about skills. The fighter 18 example is absolutely not ridiculous, since some campaigns may start at 20th level. A fighter who delayed to 18th level to gain all his feats in a 20th level campaign didn't pay anything for the power grab.
squfof 05-14-07, 11:49 AM	I never made that claim. ... The only reason they ask the question is because they want to increase the power of their character before his time. Although I was not the person to originally ask the question, I got involved in the discussion because I too wanted to know the answer. So this accusation could just as easily apply to me. Except, I'm not interested in increasing the power of any of the characters I play in ways that would cause game balance issue. So I repeat, maybe it's not necessary to assume munchkinism, especially with people you don't even know. I really don't see the reason for doing so, unless one is looking to offend people, but maybe this is a topic for another thread.... Look, the core 3 do prohibit it if you apply any common sense to what is written. Common sense varies quite a bit from individual to individual, both in content and application. Some people think it is the common sense thing to do to save every spare penny for their old age; others think it is common sense to enjoy your life now instead of waiting until 55 to start doing so. It's pointless to say which individual has common sense -- both philosophies have advantages and disadvantages, and one might make sense to you and the other make sense to me. To authoritatively declare one is common sense is just an attempt to bully someone intellectually. Look, while I disagree that the PHB is crystal clear about whether or not you can save feats, I do agree (and have previously said so) that the default is and probably should be to not save feats. Additionally, I expressed scepticism about how wicked broken it would be to let someone save feats, and that I would, in the rare cases in which it came up, make a judgement call based on the specific example. I am in no way trying to twist the wording (or lack thereof) of specific rules to try and get my way, because this was (I thought) a discussion about whether or not this is/should be allowed. My responses were constructed mainly to counter bone-headed pseudo-arguments like, "It's obvious!" or "It says clearly in the PHB that you can't." or "Only a munchkin would want to do this." The two examples I was given as to how this would cause problems (the fighter without feats, and the wizard without spells) just didn't convince me -- in fact, they convince me only of how stupid it would be to take feat saving to the extreme. Yes, feat saving would be more of a problem if you construct a high-level character, but the HUGE difference would be that such a player didn't have to pay the penalty of playing for 17 levels with no feats. Such a player would be asking for the benefits of saving feats without paying the associated cost. Of course I would say no.
tarkin 05-14-07, 12:48 PM	The PHB clearly says NO, if you read the entire book. The section about leveling up states you must do it then. This section is not part of the SRD, because the SRD ignores everything having to do with leveling up (xp to level, etc.) The fact that you can't find it does not make it not there. The FAQ confirms this, and every single time they let you 'trade out' a feat they are clear that you must take a feat that you could have taken at that level. While there are people that House Rule against this, letting you 'save feats' or skill points, this is clearly a house rule. It definitely lets you take certain Prestige class earlier than otherwise. ------------- As for the idea of it being 'fair' to let people pay know with less power to get more power later, it ignores the many potential abuses, not the least of which is not everyone builds characters from scratch. Usually when you die, your DM lets you build a character new character that is not starting out at 1st level.
squfof 05-14-07, 01:30 PM	The PHB clearly says NO, if you read the entire book. I've read the entire PHB, probably several times over if you count re-reading parts here and there. After doing so, I respectfully disagree with you that the rules are clear about feat saving. I take it you're one of those people who expects me to agree with your opinion based solely on the fact that you authoritatively say, "NO," right? The section about leveling up states you must do it then. Oh, I'll make the change on my character sheet and write something to the effect of, "gained one feat." But, to me, that is separate from choosing my feat. Sort of like I'll write, "gained 8 skill points, and gained 145 gp from last session." It turns out the rules say I can't make the skill point choices at a later level, but I am in no way required to spend all my gold at this level. And it doesn't say I must "choose" my feat at level-up, just that I gain a feat. If it had said no feat saving, or you must choose a feat at level-up, then I'd say it's 100% clear, but it doesn't, so for me it's not so clear. It was only the similarity between skills and feat and the explicit ban on skill point saving that caused me some confusion. So I'm not just saying, "the rules don't say I can't, so I can," -- it's more subtle than that. Again, I accept that no feat saving is the most simple and natural interpretation and I'm not necessarily advocating feat saving, just that the PHB isn't 100% clear to me on this question. And again, I've seen the 3.5 FAQ and I think anyone who accepts that as official rules should not allow feat saving...except in very exceptional cases, which is why I like the wording in the 3.0 FAQ. The fact that you can't find it does not make it not there. You're right, the fact that I can't find it has nothing to do with whether or not the rule is there. But after reading about how I cannot save skill points, I thought the absence of a similar explicit ban on feat saving might leave open the door for feat saving, especially when it seemed more obvious how problems/confusion would arise if you allowed skill point save than with feat saving. Since I, personally, accept the 3.5 FAQ as being official, that pretty much settles it for me, and probably everyone else.
AtmaWeapon 05-14-07, 03:29 PM	All pen and paper rulesets are, by definition, permissive rulesets. If it is not explicitly stated you can do something mechanically, by default you cannot without the DM invoking rule 0 and ruling that you can. That is the glory of Rule 0 - It allows the DM to create permission where none exists, and thus arbitrate both situations that the game mechnics do not cover (by effectively creating an addenum "on the fly") , as well as grant new permission through homebrew rules, house rules, etc. A wizard is given permission to cast spells, not allowed to do so due to lack of a rule stating they cannot. A rogue can find traps with a DC higher then 20 because of a rule that gives them permission to do so, not by virtue of the rules neglecting to deny them access. Humans cannot breath fire not because the book specifically states that they cannot, but in fact because there is nothing that gives them permission to. If it doesn't give you explicit permission to do something from a mechanics standpoint, you cannot. As you are not explicitly given permission to save feats, it is not allowed. Any further clarification is unnecessary.
risner 05-14-07, 04:24 PM	Oh, I'll make the change on my character sheet and write something to the effect of, "gained one feat." But, to me, that is separate from choosing my feat. Sort of like I'll write, "gained 8 skill points, and gained 145 gp from last session." Your whole position is flawed. The PHB is rather clear you can not save a feat. Feats are not based on a point system (like gp or skills.) Point Systems may lend themselves to the idea they can be saved for later (which is almost certainly why they felt the need to point out you can't save skill points.) I suspect none of the authors ever thought anyone would think feats could be saved. PHB and page number: p6 "Select a Feat" p59 "Upon attaining 3rd level ... must meet any prerequisites for that feat in order to select it" p87 "Acquiring Feats ... feats are not bought with points. A player simply chooses them" Thank the dictionary for circular references, but: Select = "chosen from a number or group by fitness or preference" Choose = "to make a selection" Acquire = "to come to have as a new or added characteristic, trait, or ability" Gain = "advantage acquired" They all suggest that you choose from a selection of available feats at the time. None of these suggest you can delay the selection. Your argument including carrying the holy banner of RAW (which proves at -10 you stand up and cast wish 40 times in a row) helps your problem. The problem that the PHB doesn't suggest in any way that feat choice can be delayed.
ArcturusRann 05-22-07, 05:15 PM	As to the rules: PHB, p.59, section titled Level Advancement, number 7. "Upon attaining 3rd level and at every third level thereafter...the character gains one feat of your choice." This does not state that you gain a feat that you may select at some future time, but that you get one "of your choice," directly and explicitly stating that a selection must be made upon reaching a level. One other thing I'll point out here is that there are only three reasons to either allow rules that are not in the basic rules or counter those rules: common sense, flavor (beauty of story and/or character) and balance. So addressing those three: Common Sense-In this area, first is the point that unlike skills, which are class dependent and thus mean you can have different points at different levels, Feats are always at 1st level and every level divisible by 3, so there's no ambiguity as to when you attain them. Also, since these represent a steady advance in the character's abilities that is very similar to the level system itself, it seems both counterintuitive and impractical to suggest that it's sensible for a character to "save" feats for later selection. Flavor-Again, referring to the idea of steady advancement, the only way that you could sensibly have a character hold their feats until later is if the character somehow had his development stunted. But this is what levels, level drain and so on, are all about, so if this occurred, there would (and should) be no character experience points. Balance-This has been thoroughly addressed previously, so I'll just briefly reiterate that doing this allows acquisition of feats before a character should have them. For a new campaign, I just recently realized that my Beguiler would be unable to have Weapon Finesse at first level, much to my dismay. But there is a rhyme and a reason for it and, even if it would only upset balance a tiny bit, I won't ask for any sort of exception. So there is no convincing reason to allow it, and the rules directly state that you cannot by requiring you to select your feat when you gain it. What further issue is there?
Gorbeck 05-22-07, 06:56 PM	I'm not entirely sure why this is still a discussion. The very first question on page 92 of the 3.5 FAQ says: Can a character choose to delay a choice (such as spending skill points or selecting a feat) until a later level? No. All choices regarding character advancement must be made as soon as they become available. You can’t save skill points from one level to another, nor may you delay selecting a feat from, say, 3rd level to 4th level. If you don't want to follow the FAQ then that's your choice but I've always been under the impression that the 3.5 FAQ exists to clarify rules questions so that the DM doesn't have to. EDIT: Sorry, didn't realize the discussion effectively HAD been over...since the 14th.
ArcturusRann 05-22-07, 07:26 PM	Oops, my bad... Somehow when I went to look at the date, I misread it as being yesterday and took it to be current. My apologies.