Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sparrowhawk Charm 12-24-05, 04:03 PM	I was looking at feats and realized that there are a TON of feats and an average of 8 feats for a WHOLE CAREER. There are literally hundreds of feats and lets face it, the "flavor feats" have little chance of making an appearance, instead the same old feats get used again and again (i.e., weapon specialization, weapon focus, power attack, improved initiative, etc.) My idea is this. Create a distinction of Minor and Major feats. Major feats are eligible whenever feats are normally possible. Minor feats could also be used at those times, but additional opportunities would occur 1 per level between every multiple of 3 (so, at levels 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19). This way a player could reasonably hope to see some maneuvers and lesser used feats that would add some individuality to a character. What do you think?
Jerks 12-24-05, 04:20 PM	The sheer number of feats available really makes it hard to narrow it down to the pitance of 8 feats you get. If you notice, in a lot of other d20 games, you get a lot more feats than in D&D. I'm not sure about your major or minor feat thingy, but it would be nice if feats scaled a bit more. If Dodge provided a scaling bonus based on your character level, it would take some of the sting from investing in it.
Sparrowhawk Charm 12-24-05, 06:50 PM	The sheer number of feats available really makes it hard to narrow it down to the pitance of 8 feats you get. If you notice, in a lot of other d20 games, you get a lot more feats than in D&D. I'm not sure about your major or minor feat thingy, but it would be nice if feats scaled a bit more. If Dodge provided a scaling bonus based on your character level, it would take some of the sting from investing in it. That's a good idea too. Scaling might make Dodge worth it. I like all of the options and scaling, though awesome for keeping up with the ever increasing difficulty of encounters, wouldn't allow for some of those feats that make a character an original. Yeah, other games have more feats, but when it comes to fantasy adventuring, I always end up a good old D&D. If you figure that a good character (avoiding an untimely demise) lasts for 15 levels or so, and one doesn't make a good character every day, most feats that may be of interest will never see play, especially since there are some feats that get used by many if not most players. I'm looking for a way to increase the number of feats a person can get without unbalancing the game, and without totally harpooning the feat heavy fighter class. Any ideas?
Sae Cael Oanar 12-24-05, 07:56 PM	the minor/major feat thing sounds kind of good. i often want a feat because i think its cool, but opt towards something more necessary.
BlingTheElf 12-24-05, 08:04 PM	There is nothing wrong with Dodge. It effectively increases your opponent's miss chance by 5% during your entire career. It scales perfectly. I would only take skill focus to qualify for a PrC faster, and even then I probably wouldn't. They are too weak.
Jerks 12-24-05, 10:14 PM	The only Skill Focus even worth considering from a "power" point of view is Skill Focus: Concentration. Unfortunately, many prestige classes have Combat Manifestation as a prerequisite, so you're stuck with that instead of the more universally useful Skill Focus. You may be right about Dodge. It provides a constant bonus as you increase in levels, but you have to admit it isn't sexy. Combat Throw...that's sexy. Combat Brute...that's sexy. Dodge, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization all do their work, constantly and will probably give you hundreds of more misses, hits and points of damage over the course of your adventuring career...but they definitely are not sexy.
James Wildspell 12-24-05, 11:45 PM	I don't know about how it scales from a power perspective, but Skill Focus is a good thing for certain skills. A trap-expert rogue will want Focus for Disable Device. Rangers will always find Focus good for a variety of reasons. Anyone with Use Magic Device can use that +3 bump for items that might otherwise be too risky to use. These are just a few examples, of course. What feats are good for a given campaign is a play-style issue. If your DM runs a campaign that is all fight or fight , then Feats like Skill Focus are probably a waste of PC resources. But different campaigns might have other foci: such as character development and role-playing. DMs and players should know enough about each other to know where the line is drawn. OK, I will stop now. :cool:
Sparrowhawk Charm 12-25-05, 08:19 AM	I don't know about how it scales from a power perspective, but Skill Focus is a good thing for certain skills. A trap-expert rogue will want Focus for Disable Device. Rangers will always find Focus good for a variety of reasons. Anyone with Use Magic Device can use that +3 bump for items that might otherwise be too risky to use. These are just a few examples, of course. What feats are good for a given campaign is a play-style issue. If your DM runs a campaign that is all fight or fight , then Feats like Skill Focus are probably a waste of PC resources. But different campaigns might have other foci: such as character development and role-playing. DMs and players should know enough about each other to know where the line is drawn. OK, I will stop now. :cool: Bling, you're right about dodge, but like Jerks implied, its not very exciting and it takes up one of your precious slots. Sae, what would be major or minor? Good insights about Skill focus. The skill focus feat COULD be useful for all the reasons mentioned and many more. The problem is tht under most circumstances, a player never gets to find that out. And Skill focus isn't the only misfit feat out there. A Question and a Challenge Question What are some other feats that "dangle in the wind" because there is never really any room for them? Challenge How can one remedy the situation and reasonably work more feats into the class progressions? Sparrowhawk
terulian 12-25-05, 09:42 AM	You... you can't be serious about Dodge scaling? That would completely unbalance that feat... Everyone would take that feat if it scaled to more than +2. Sure it's only against one opponent, but you're smart enough to make it against an opponent that counts. If it scaled with level, we'd see every monk in the multiverse taking that, and having an AC of 35 with a BAB of +15, thus no mortal kombat would ever ensue, thus killing the fun of being a monk : Mortal Kombat-ing other monks. This line of logic doesn't really work with feats. Feats purposes are to let you be a little bit better at something than you would have been. Sure, if you take skill focus at 1st level, you're twice as good as anyone else 1st level, save for those who have taken it, but you're also going to progress at that same level. If that scaled, then you would be able to blink your eye as easily as scale a cliff or pick a lock or whatever. Basically what I'm saying is that if you make scaling feats, you can bet your money that there are gonna be min-maxers like me, and munchkins like the ones I love to kill VIA min-maxing exploiting that like nobody's business.
Sparrowhawk Charm 12-25-05, 02:24 PM	terulian, you make a good point. The real issue is the very limited number of feats a stardard character gets, versus the incredible number of feats out there. Much in the way a kensi is devoted to a weapon, you almost have to determine a path of feats from the beginning and never stray. It makes the "well rounded character" concept difficult. How do you fix that? What about granting a free regional feat at character creation? This could help to establish the back story, plus ground the character (not just a fighter, but a fighter from the Dales). Maybe there could be a choice of 5 feats to select from for each area (after all, not everyone from a certain area will be lucky like heroes). What do you think? Sparrowhawk
Xabre 12-25-05, 03:11 PM	I would like to point out something, especially since this IS an Unearthed Arcana board... Please take a gander at the build that I'm currently working on, for a World of Warcraft game. This is, of course, using Unearthed Arcana, AND the minor variations that WoW uses for Rogue (which grants the special abilities that a D&D rogue starts getting at level 10 at level 3 instead). This is using Unearthed Arcana's Rogue variant that sacrifices sneak attack for fighter feats. This is heading towards a WoW class called Marksman (it's all about shooting). This class offers Bonus feats (only based on ranged feats). Human Level 1: Fighter 1. Feat for Level 1, Feat for Fighter 1, Feat for Human, Feat for Flaw #1, Feat for Flaw #2, Trait. Level 2: Rogue 1. Feat for Rogue 1. Level 3: Fighter 2. Feat for Level 3, Feat for Fighter 2. Level 4: Rogue 2. Feat for Rogue 2. Ability Upgrade. Level 5: Rogue 3. If you don't take the 'Special ability' (for instance, Improved Evasion), one choice is Bonus Feat. Level 6: Marksman 1. Feat for level 6, Feat for Marksman 1. Level 8: Marksman 3. Feat for Marksman 3. Ability Upgrade Level 9: Marksman 4. Feat for level 9. Level 10: Marksman 5. Feat for Marksman 5. Level 12: Marksman 7. Feat for level 12, Marksman 7. Ability Upgrade. Level 14: Marksman 9. Feat for Marksman 9. Level 15: Marksman 10. Feat for level 15. Level 16: Rogue 4. Feat for Rogue 4. Ability Upgrade. Level 18: Rogue 6. Feat for Rogue 6. Feat for level 18. Feat if no 'Special Ability' is taken. Level 20: Rogue 8. Feat for Rogue 8. The final count, I believe, is something like 24 feats. 22 if you take special rogue abilities. 20 if you say that you can't mix Unearthed Arcana's Rogue with the variant that World of Warcraft has created. Now, if you want to go really nuts... give him Vow of Poverty so that he can only use a blunderbuss (a simple weapon) his whole carreer, and you can tack on another 10 feats or so.
Sae Cael Oanar 12-25-05, 03:33 PM	i dont really know what would be major or minor. i dont often want to get dodge, but some of the things in its tree are very powerful. right now im playing a scout, and spring attack seems necessary. whirlwind can also be fun.
Xeviat-DM 12-25-05, 05:03 PM	Your better bet (yes it sounds like power creep) would be to make those feats better. If you notice, there are feats which grant a +4 bonus to a very specific check, but they also grant other bonuses too. Sure, a +3 bonus to all uses of that skill, but wouldn't it be better to reduce that bonus to a +2 bonus and add in some kind of special ability? Not really sure what it could be, but I think it would work better within the system. People with skill focus could do somethings that no one else could.
q'afuu 12-25-05, 05:39 PM	I've taken Skill Focus occasionally. Usually for something like Spot or one of the stealth skills, but also for Ride. And SF (Craft) or SF (Spellcraft) can be very useful for Artificers or casters respectively, especially casters who who like to research original spells or counterspell a lot.
Kem 12-25-05, 09:25 PM	Your better bet (yes it sounds like power creep) would be to make those feats better. If you notice, there are feats which grant a +4 bonus to a very specific check, but they also grant other bonuses too. Sure, a +3 bonus to all uses of that skill, but wouldn't it be better to reduce that bonus to a +2 bonus and add in some kind of special ability? Not really sure what it could be, but I think it would work better within the system. People with skill focus could do somethings that no one else could. Like take 10 in Combat X/Times per day?
Xeviat-DM 12-26-05, 04:54 AM	Like take 10 in Combat X/Times per day? You know ... why not just take 10 any time? And possibly take 20 at half the speed. That won't let anyone do anything they normally couldn't do, but it will let them do it more regularly.
RaspK FOG 12-26-05, 05:31 AM	I like the Skill Focus feats; I even took it back in 3e when it granted a mere +2 bonus on the relevant skill checks and I still remember my DM's face when I rolled those 40+ Perform checks over in Dis with my bard. :D Talk about making an impression!
Phoenix Knight 12-26-05, 01:19 PM	You know ... why not just take 10 any time? And possibly take 20 at half the speed. That won't let anyone do anything they normally couldn't do, but it will let them do it more regularly. Not all skills are well-suited to allow taking 10 or 20, however. Use Magic Device, for one - which is one of the most likely candidates for Skill Focus. We recently had a game where my cleric made a number of wands for the rogue. She had to take SF to get it to work regularly enough though, considering we were relatively low level.
Xeviat-DM 12-26-05, 03:57 PM	Not all skills are well-suited to allow taking 10 or 20, however. Use Magic Device, for one - which is one of the most likely candidates for Skill Focus. And why not? Shouldn't characters get something out of spending one of their few feat slots, especially a rogue who only gets 7 or so? Being able to take 10 any time won't increase the quality of your successes, just the frequency.
Phoenix Knight 12-26-05, 04:14 PM	And why not? Shouldn't characters get something out of spending one of their few feat slots, especially a rogue who only gets 7 or so? Being able to take 10 any time won't increase the quality of your successes, just the frequency. I think you can't take 10 on Use Magic Device because rolling a natural 1 prevents you from using the skill further on the same item that day. I'm just saying that's the rule. The OP could choose to disregard it, if desired. I have also thought taking 10 on Knowledge checks is weird, since there is no retry and represents something you either know or don't. Being calm might effect your ability to recall, but taking 10 can effectively lower your potential (the price for avoiding catastrophic failure). Of course, that makes Knowledge checks in general weird, since, why is it random whether you know something or not...? I think a rule like that might need a few stipulations for the use of certain skills... Allowing the user to take 10 on Concentration and get +2 is way better than getting even a +4 bonus. Disguise is theoretically rolled by the DM when the character comes into contact with someone that might see through the diguise. Allow the character to take 10, and it eliminates the rule "you can't be sure how good your result is." Same thing with Forgery and a few others. You also can't take 10 on Speak Language ;) I'd say there's probably a reason a rogue can't get skill mastery until 10th level. That ability says the rogue can take 10 if stress or distractions would prevent her. I'd say use that precedent (as opposed to saying you can take 10 even if the rules prevent you). Of course, if the DM is not worried about many of the mentioned skills, it's not really an issue. I would personally not care much about any except UMD, which I think should carry some risk. And yes, the feat slots available are too few. I prefer one every even level (as Iron Heroes, and some other systems).
Lina_Inverse 12-26-05, 04:14 PM	And why not? Shouldn't characters get something out of spending one of their few feat slots, especially a rogue who only gets 7 or so? Being able to take 10 any time won't increase the quality of your successes, just the frequency. Allowing you to take 10 on something is 50% or so of the time basically giveing you a +9. If you can always take 10, you always succed.
Arnkel 12-26-05, 06:06 PM	In my group, I allow each character to start with 5 Feats(3 regular, 1 racial, 1 regional), and they gain a new feat every level. Races and classes that get bonus feats still get them(in the case of fighters, a whole lot more). Thus far I haven't had a problem, and we've been to epic levels a few times.
FriendoftheDork 12-26-05, 10:06 PM	Seperating feats into minor and major ones could be a good idea, but is hard to implement as they are all "supposed" to be balanced. In my game I've just boosted the skill feats. SF gives you the chosen skill to always be considered a class skill, in addition to it's bonus. For Alertness etc. you either get the skills as class skill OR the +2 bonus with it. Want a sneaky fighter? Now you can get one! (and not just one with +4 total). Guess what, it worked. A fighter/rogue did take skill focus.
Lina_Inverse 12-26-05, 10:26 PM	In my group, I allow each character to start with 5 Feats(3 regular, 1 racial, 1 regional), and they gain a new feat every level. Races and classes that get bonus feats still get them(in the case of fighters, a whole lot more). Thus far I haven't had a problem, and we've been to epic levels a few times. No fighters in your game huh?
NineInchNall 12-26-05, 11:52 PM	There is nothing wrong with Dodge. It effectively increases your opponent's miss chance by 5% during your entire career. It scales perfectly. Ack. This is poor statistical analysis, and it bugs me. A +1 AC bonus is hardly ever a 5% change in miss chance. An example would be AC 20 vs. attack bonus of +9. The attacker has a 50% miss chance. Increasing the AC to 21 makes him have a 55% miss chance - an increase of 10%. Back to the topic at hand, though, Skill Focus feats are very popular for character concepts that rely on them. I have a character that focuses on Dilpomacy, so he almost requires Skill Focus.
Sparrowhawk Charm 12-27-05, 12:39 AM	In my group, I allow each character to start with 5 Feats(3 regular, 1 racial, 1 regional), and they gain a new feat every level. Races and classes that get bonus feats still get them(in the case of fighters, a whole lot more). Thus far I haven't had a problem, and we've been to epic levels a few times. Arnkel, that is pretty generous. I like it conceptually, though I wonder if the fighters lose something in the equation (the class is already somewhat lackluster) Friendofthedork, I like that addition to the SF feats. It makes sense that if you are focussing on a skill that it should be part of your repetoir at later level ups. Phoenix knight, your assessment of the rogue is spot on. Sae, you are right. Deciding what is minor versus major would be a major pain ;) and very time consuming (I have this vision of the regular group all sitting in some nursing home still debating the minorness of mobility while dust collects on the lucky attack dice). Maybe major/minor isn't really the answer. I liked the bonus feats at even level idea except that fighters already get that, so once again the fighter loses some of her meager appeal. I like the idea of regional feats and a couple more initial feats. My point is that your character develops along the way and there should be some feat measure of that on a level by level basis instead of once every three. Maybe a skill boosting feat every odd level (when there isn't another feat at that level) that's tied somehow to the actions of your character in the previous level. Recalling the actions of a previous session would be fun and the character would develop skills in line with the burgeoning personality. What do you think? Shadowhawk
Xeviat-DM 12-27-05, 01:12 AM	I forgot about the rogue's ability; so something else would need to be figured out. I stand by my acertion that they aren't powerful enough. Case in point: Run grants a +4 bonus to jump when you make a running start (situational, but generally this is the only time you make a jump check), in addition to increasing your run speed to x5, and allowing one to keep their Dex while running. The current magic items seem to imply that a feat is worth 5,000 gp (and a second tier feat is worth 20,000 gp). 5,000 gp would get you about a +7 bonus to a skill (4,900 would be a +7 skill item). A +2 skill item would cost a full 400 gp ... hardly a feat. On the other hand, Bracers of Archery (which mimic, but stack with, Weapon Focus) cost 5,000 gp. Is my logic sound?
Phoenix Knight 12-27-05, 10:31 AM	I forgot about the rogue's ability; so something else would need to be figured out. I stand by my acertion that they aren't powerful enough. Case in point: Run grants a +4 bonus to jump when you make a running start (situational, but generally this is the only time you make a jump check), in addition to increasing your run speed to x5, and allowing one to keep their Dex while running. The current magic items seem to imply that a feat is worth 5,000 gp (and a second tier feat is worth 20,000 gp). 5,000 gp would get you about a +7 bonus to a skill (4,900 would be a +7 skill item). A +2 skill item would cost a full 400 gp ... hardly a feat. On the other hand, Bracers of Archery (which mimic, but stack with, Weapon Focus) cost 5,000 gp. Is my logic sound? Yes, but unless the DCs are rewritten, SF would then become nearly game breaking. A +7 bonus is like being able to use a skill as though you were 7 levels higher (or 14 if CC). It sounds like the +3 and it now counts as a class skill is the best option so far.
Blaque 12-27-05, 02:13 PM	Having the Skill Focus feats, and the Stealthy, Alertness, and whatnot-style feats make the skills they boost class skills no matter what'd be quite nice I think. Especially for classes like fighters, where such a thing adds neat variety and options (Stealthy, now I'm a COMMANDO FIGHTER!!!) Stuff.
Jerks 12-27-05, 03:16 PM	Yep, granting PCs a way to customize their skills list a little more would go a long way towards opening up some builds. Right now, it almost criminal to buy cross-class skills. They cost twice as much, and you can only build them halve as high.
limetom 12-27-05, 03:58 PM	I play Iron Heroes as well as D&D... if you're really interested in an alternate take on skills and feats, its worth a look. Its d20, so it isn't that different. It has some really neat things, but if you really like casters, you're out of luck... its very low magic. But, it provides rules for meshing with standard D&D, so it might not be too bad for some. Check it. (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?iron-lore)
Tenzhi 12-28-05, 12:34 AM	There is nothing wrong with Dodge. It effectively increases your opponent's miss chance by 5% during your entire career. It scales perfectly. If it were opponents' instead of opponent's, I'd agree that Dodge was worthwhile.
BlingTheElf 12-28-05, 05:27 AM	Ack. This is poor statistical analysis, and it bugs me. A +1 AC bonus is hardly ever a 5% change in miss chance. An example would be AC 20 vs. attack bonus of +9. The attacker has a 50% miss chance. Increasing the AC to 21 makes him have a 55% miss chance - an increase of 10%. This is fine statistical analysis. There are two different ways to measure it: relative to all attacks or relative to just missed attacks. I did one, you did the other. I like the "make them class skills" suggestion but the effects on PrC qualification should be considered.
FriendoftheDork 12-28-05, 08:34 AM	I like the "make them class skills" suggestion but the effects on PrC qualification should be considered. A problem with PrC more than the skill focus. I hardly use PrCs at all, but all you got to do is to add more requirements apart from skill ranks, such as BAB or spell level. Still most PrC already do not depend on skill ranks alone. It's good that you think further than many and consider the effects of house rules and optional rules taken together... alot of broken results stem from designers and developers failing to do so.
Jerks 12-28-05, 09:20 AM	If you are worried about prestige class and feat qualifications, you could design the new and improved Skill Focus along the same lines as the Able Learner feat from Complete Adventurer. So instead of Skill Focus making the skill a class skill, allow a person taking Skill Focus and other skill boosting feat to purchase a cross-classed skill at 1 skill point per rank. This would still cap the skill at (lvl+3)/2, but give a tangible benefit for someone attempting to buying cross-classed skills. If this were done I know that I'd be more tempted to get something like Alertness.
Luega 12-28-05, 10:50 AM	That's a good idea, Jerks. While reading this thread I wondered why no one had brought that up. Heroes of Battle has a couple of feats like that too (Able Learner is Races of Destiny though). They allow certain skills to be bought at the same cost as class skills without actually making them class skills (i.e. they cost 1 skill point per rank). What I would suggest is to ditch the SF feat and just change the +2/+2 feats a little. Alertness (for example) jadd jadda jadda Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on all Listen and Spot checks. Additionally, Listen and Spot ranks costs 1 skill point, even if these skills are cross-class for you. The maximum number of ranks you can purchase in a cross-class skill remains the same. Maybe even lower the skill bonus to +1/+1 to retain some balance.
Jerks 12-28-05, 01:02 PM	Yep, you caught me. Races of Destiny. I like the +1/+1 and 1 skill point/rank ideal. This give s a slight and immediate bonus and also gives the player the opportunity to save as many skill points as they pump into the respective skills. About the only change I'd make then, is to reword the text on Familiars to say that they give a unnamed +2 bonus to Spot & Listen when nearby (instead of actually giving the wizard Alertness).
Sosthenes 12-28-05, 02:21 PM	If I'm not mistaken there was a "Chaotic" feat in a recent Dragon which gave you two skills as permanent class skills and +1 in each. Pretty neat and no real reason to keep the chaotic aspect if you don't want to...
Sparrowhawk Charm 12-28-05, 03:15 PM	Yes, but unless the DCs are rewritten, SF would then become nearly game breaking. A +7 bonus is like being able to use a skill as though you were 7 levels higher (or 14 if CC). It sounds like the +3 and it now counts as a class skill is the best option so far. I agree. +3 and a class skill is reasonable and continues to benefit character development at higher levels. It opens up builds and that might be a concern to look at. What about the number of feats? Is there any reasonable answer to that i.e. free Regional feat, Bonus feat every prime numbered level (1,2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19)? I'm cooling off of the minor/major feat idea due to the requred time investment in deciding such a thing and the pandora's box of arguments to follow. What do you think? Shadowhawk
Phoenix Knight 12-28-05, 04:14 PM	I think, that the way Iron Heroes does it appeals to me: 2 feats at first level 1 feat every even level I should note, there are more feats, really to choose from in that game (sort of). The feat trees are complex, but that's not really related to your question. As a DM, I also sometimes give players "Quest feats" as rewards for specific activities. To avoid favortism, make sure everyone gets the same number (no one should have 2, before someone else has 1). Since the feats are based on activities, they are chosen by the DM, and usually what I think you call "minor." I gave Diligent to a character that spent weeks studying a book to decode and hidden code. While he did that, another character did lots of jogging, so I gave her Athletic. I would probably only ever give out "low-power" feats this way, though, such as Skill Focus, Skill Affinity (Alertness, Stealthy, etc.), or other feats that players might want but usually wouldn't spend a feat on. Never a purely combat feat.
MageDance 12-30-05, 12:40 PM	Hmm... what I have done to the Dodge feat that works really nice, is having it work like the Swashbuckler's Dodge ability from Complete Warrior; that is, you can take the feat more than once and you can divide the bonuses as you see fit among your oppponents. Another thing that I'm thinking on implementing is eliminating all those feats that gives a +2 bonus on 2 skills and having a general one, Talented (still working on that name though), in which you'd choose 2 somewhat related skills and get a +2 bonus on each one, by "somewhat related" I mean 2 skills that have something to with each other (following the same line of the original feats).. like.. Athletic (+2 Swim / +2 Climb, or maybe Jump), ya got the meaning... Hmmmm.. this Able Learner feat, never heard of it (I only have the core books and the Complete series) but it sounds really nice.. I think I'll do this, give +2/+2 (doesnt it look like Magic the Gathering??) and letting you buy ranks on a 1:1 rate (though not a class skill). Happy new year!
Phoenix Knight 12-30-05, 03:33 PM	Able Learner is from Races of Destiny. Your proposal for the +2/+2 feats is used in Iron Heroes in a feat they call Skill Affinity. You can take the feat multiple times, but the same skill cannot be boosted more than once.
Lina_Inverse 12-31-05, 12:33 AM	I think, that the way Iron Heroes does it appeals to me: 2 feats at first level 1 feat every even level I should note, there are more feats, really to choose from in that game (sort of). The feat trees are complex, but that's not really related to your question. As a DM, I also sometimes give players "Quest feats" as rewards for specific activities. To avoid favortism, make sure everyone gets the same number (no one should have 2, before someone else has 1). Since the feats are based on activities, they are chosen by the DM, and usually what I think you call "minor." I gave Diligent to a character that spent weeks studying a book to decode and hidden code. While he did that, another character did lots of jogging, so I gave her Athletic. I would probably only ever give out "low-power" feats this way, though, such as Skill Focus, Skill Affinity (Alertness, Stealthy, etc.), or other feats that players might want but usually wouldn't spend a feat on. Never a purely combat feat. Fighters are feat platforms, your makeing fighters weaker by giveing other players more feats. Additionally, quest feats are clear DM favoritism, which is one of the 3 worst things you can do.
MageDance 12-31-05, 12:54 AM	Skill Affinity sounds nice, maybe I'll call it that... But I was wondering, instead of having it letting you buy skill ranks in a cross-class skill at a 1:1 rate but having the rank limit (that is: Max Rank = 1/2(Level+3)), I was thinking on doing the opposite way, that is, it'd let you buy ranks in a cross-class skill at the normal 2:1 rate but would remove the rank limit (of course, keeping the Max Rank = Level+3) essentially, saying: "You can be as good as the other guy, but you'll have to try harder". What do you guys think about this? For me it seems better. For all of you who play Iron Heroes, how is the magic system in this? No need for a complex answer needing another thread, just a little bit, I just wanna have an idea.
Tyler Do'Urden 12-31-05, 01:18 AM	...My idea is this. Create a distinction of Minor and Major feats... What do you think? Two words: Feat Points. Instead of getting a bonus feat every three levels, you get 10 feat points every level and the default feat cost is 30 points. You get 40 feat points at 1st level and 10 feat points each additional level. Fighters gain 45 bonus feat points at 1st level and 15 bonus feat points each additional level. Psychic Warriors gain 50 bonus feat points at 1st level and 10 bonus feat points each additional level. Psions gain 36 bonus feat points at 1st level and 6 bonus feat points each additional level. Wizards gain Summon Familiar and Scribe Scroll free at 1st level and 6 bonus feat points at every level. Any feat you feel is worth less, reduce the cost accordingly. Also, someone not too long ago linked to a ruleset for purchasing additional feats with XP, but I haven't found it since. Perhaps your Google-fu is the better.
FriendoftheDork 12-31-05, 08:57 AM	Not sure if I like retaining cross-class cap, too limiting and not worth the feat. I mean if a fighter can't max out his spot and listen he won't be able to spot and listen any better than any other fighter that puts his skill points there, it only allows him to becoming LESS focused as he don't use that many skill point on it. Which defeats the purpose. The other variant sounds better, removing the cross-class cap. However it still makes the feat slightly useless for the low-skill point classes. Just make sure PrCs are not dependent on skill ranks alone and you should be fine.
Luega 12-31-05, 09:06 AM	Well, the cross-class 1:1 variant actually makes it more usefull to low skill point classes like the fighter. It gives you a small boost in the skill, and saves up skill points for other skills (when I play fighters, I often have only a few skills that are actually class-skills, instead focusing on things like Hide/Move Silently or Bluff/Diplomacy and so on). The 1:1 variant is not really worth the feat for high skill points classes as they already have a huge class list to begin with. The reason I don't really like the "2:1 cross-class/increase max rank limit" is that it makes it too easy to create FTR/ASN and the like. It messes with the PrC requirements. That said, it is the one that makes the most sense.
Xeviat-DM 12-31-05, 09:37 AM	The idea's growing on me; it's an idea I suggested before in the past, but somehow entirely forgot about it. It would make me take skill focus again; though I think skill focus may need to be a little beefier still when compared to Awareness and the like; +3 vs. +2/+2 doesn't quite seem even: you're getting two class skills instead of one, and +2/+2 would cost 1,000 gp while +3 costs 900 gp. I know they're close, but one is getting two class skills and the other is getting one.
MageDance 12-31-05, 12:36 PM	Hmm... maybe making a combination of both Feats. Skill Affinity gives +2/+2 and removes the cap, Skill Focus gives a +3 on one skill and lets you buy ranks at a 1:1 rate. Sounds allright, doesnt it? Or do it the opposite way, Skill Focus removes the cap and Affinity gives you the 1:1 rate (this last one seems more logical in my point of view, that is, Affinity means you are more Talented in the skill, it's easier for you to train; and Focus, makes you actually better, you've focused on this training and thus can be better than you normally could). Oh yeah, now I see what you guys mean about the prestige classes, it could mess with the pre-requisites, but in my game I dont use prestige classes, hehe... But even if you do, I guess it's allright if it makes it easier to meet the pre-requisites, you're spending a feat for it.
Phoenix Knight 12-31-05, 01:36 PM	Fighters are feat platforms, your makeing fighters weaker by giveing other players more feats. This is a good point, that I see often in this kind of debate. However, I don't have fighters in my campaign. I run Iron Heroes which has different classes. There is a similar class, the Man-At-Arms, that does get a bonus feat every odd level. However, with 6+ skill points, wild card feats, and all good feat mastery ratings, this is hardly the only advantage of his class. In fact, two of the four players play a Man-At-Arms. Wild card feats are feats that can be changed daily, adding great versatility. Mastery ratings are available to all classes, but the Man-At-Arms can have high-level feats in all categories, whereas most other classes get good ratings in only one or two categories. As far as the fighter goes, I think that the problem is emblematic of a poorly designed class. His only real benefit is bonus feats, and he pays highly for it with no other class features, and very poor skill points and skill selection. I typically see fighter as worthwhile to dip in a for few bonus feats and perhaps specialization (that fact that D&D limits specialization to the class that is thematically supposed to be the most versatile also does not make since, but that's another topic). A fighter would still get twice as many feats as another character. He only loses what little edge he had if there are too few feats for additional feats to matter. I have had few characters in which I didn't want more feats, whether playing fighters or not. Iron Heroes further expands feat options, by allowing up to 10 levels of most feats, all of which are well worth feat selection. There are 10 levels of TWF, 10 levels of Power Attack, 10 Weapon Finesse, 7 Weapon Focus levels, and so on. It is an extraordinarily flexible system that allows for incredible customization of characters - probably my favorite d20 expansion product to date (in part because it solves the game balance issues in a D&D game where magic is rare). Additionally, quest feats are clear DM favoritism, which is one of the 3 worst things you can do. What are the other two? Just curious. Regardless, I must respectfully disagree that what I described qualifies as actual favortism. Had I not said that all characters receive the same number of feats, and that those feats are balanced with each other, then you might have made me rethink my idea. However, we are not talking about one character getting Diligent and another getting Spring Attack. We're talking about everyone getting a Skill Affinity feat. Then later, after a grueling battle, perhaps everyone gains Toughness. Or whatever. Small rewards like that, if given rarely, have little effect on game balance, but can improve the quality of the game, adding a fresh feel. Whether a DM gives out a minor magical item that glows when oozes are near, or a free Skill Focus (Craft (basketweaving)) feat to all the characters that go to arts and crafts training, you can add a little enjoyment. The players have loved it, and it does give a way for players to get those underused feats, which seemed to be the question at hand. If everyone at the table is happy, that's really the goal anyway, isn't it? To have fun?
Lina_Inverse 12-31-05, 02:00 PM	This is a good point, that I see often in this kind of debate. However, I don't have fighters in my campaign. I run Iron Heroes which has different classes. There is a similar class, the Man-At-Arms, that does get a bonus feat every odd level. However, with 6+ skill points, wild card feats, and all good feat mastery ratings, this is hardly the only advantage of his class. In fact, two of the four players play a Man-At-Arms. Wild card feats are feats that can be changed daily, adding great versatility. Mastery ratings are available to all classes, but the Man-At-Arms can have high-level feats in all categories, whereas most other classes get good ratings in only one or two categories. As far as the fighter goes, I think that the problem is emblematic of a poorly designed class. His only real benefit is bonus feats, and he pays highly for it with no other class features, and very poor skill points and skill selection. I typically see fighter as worthwhile to dip in a for few bonus feats and perhaps specialization (that fact that D&D limits specialization to the class that is thematically supposed to be the most versatile also does not make since, but that's another topic). A fighter would still get twice as many feats as another character. He only loses what little edge he had if there are too few feats for additional feats to matter. I have had few characters in which I didn't want more feats, whether playing fighters or not. Iron Heroes further expands feat options, by allowing up to 10 levels of most feats, all of which are well worth feat selection. There are 10 levels of TWF, 10 levels of Power Attack, 10 Weapon Finesse, 7 Weapon Focus levels, and so on. It is an extraordinarily flexible system that allows for incredible customization of characters - probably my favorite d20 expansion product to date (in part because it solves the game balance issues in a D&D game where magic is rare). However, this is a D&D board. You should be disscussing D&D, thus if you mention the iron heroes feat system id assume you mean to -apply it to D&D-. Which just wouldnt work. What are the other two? Just curious. Railroading and NPCs who upstage PCs. Regardless, I must respectfully disagree that what I described qualifies as actual favortism. Had I not said that all characters receive the same number of feats, and that those feats are balanced with each other, then you might have made me rethink my idea. However, we are not talking about one character getting Diligent and another getting Spring Attack. We're talking about everyone getting a Skill Affinity feat. Then later, after a grueling battle, perhaps everyone gains Toughness. Or whatever. I missed all PCs getting the same amount, my bad. Thats good then :P
FriendoftheDork 01-01-06, 05:48 PM	Well, the cross-class 1:1 variant actually makes it more usefull to low skill point classes like the fighter. It gives you a small boost in the skill, and saves up skill points for other skills (when I play fighters, I often have only a few skills that are actually class-skills, instead focusing on things like Hide/Move Silently or Bluff/Diplomacy and so on). The 1:1 variant is not really worth the feat for high skill points classes as they already have a huge class list to begin with. The reason I don't really like the "2:1 cross-class/increase max rank limit" is that it makes it too easy to create FTR/ASN and the like. It messes with the PrC requirements. That said, it is the one that makes the most sense. Well you can always change Asn prerequisites, for example adding 1d6 sneak attack as a prerequsite for example. It would make it harder to become ranger/asn though. In any case even if you do nothing no class can take the PrC until 5th level. With the Stealthy feat an no cap, or class skill you can take it as a 5th level fighter, and gain a class that is really not that much better than Rogue. The fighter will still lose BAB, hps and above all, fighter feats. I don't really think that it's so unbalanced. But of course any optional material (such as PrCs) must be checked with your house rules to make sure they don't unbalance them. As for Stealthy, Alterness etc. vs skill focus, my take is that while Altertness gives you two class skills instead of one, you don't get the skill bonus as well, while Skill focus gives you both a class skill AND the whooping +3 bonus, which is significant at low to mid levels. That said I'm not trying defend my house rule just because, in fact I would be much obliged if you could point out any flaws/unbalancing factors as I have not playtested them yet.
Luega 01-02-06, 04:33 AM	Well you can always change Asn prerequisites, for example adding 1d6 sneak attack as a prerequsite for example. It would make it harder to become ranger/asn though. In any case even if you do nothing no class can take the PrC until 5th level. With the Stealthy feat an no cap, or class skill you can take it as a 5th level fighter, and gain a class that is really not that much better than Rogue. The fighter will still lose BAB, hps and above all, fighter feats. I don't really think that it's so unbalanced. But of course any optional material (such as PrCs) must be checked with your house rules to make sure they don't unbalance them.You make a good point. It actually makes class "shoehorning" less of an issue. After all, why couldn't a fighter become an assassin? It's true that it is a less than optimal choice for her, though no less interesting. And after having paid a feat to do so (a feat that's not part of the prerequisites no less), she should be able to do so. She have dedicated herself to the art, right? And it's true that it's not that big a problem. In fact, I now fail to see a problem at all (though some of my more ingenious players could soon prove me wrong).
Xeviat-DM 01-02-06, 04:36 AM	Well, I guess I'm the only one who thinks that PrCs wouldn't be affected by this. Yes, there are skill requirements for PrCs; if a sorcerer wants to spend one of their 7 feats to get the knowledge skills they need to take a wizard PrC, then by all means do it.
Nyaricus 01-02-06, 04:55 AM	IMO, if the OP wants his charatcers to have more feats, simply give them more and count them as being a bit tougher for CR ratings (not too bad though, but they might be able to take on something thats +3 CR higher then them at mid-to high levels. The thing with CRs is that they are a guideline and you can give your players fighters within 1-2 CRs either way and expect a reletively standard fight. Of course this depends on player/DM styles, but i won't get into that 'P a Regional Feat and a normal feat at level one would be good, and then giving another feat at every even level would be, IMHO, they way to go of it. Just a few thoughts.
Ruhl-Than Sage 01-04-06, 01:45 AM	After reading through the thread I have to say. Great idea on the added class skills aspect to skill focus and the Alterness, etc. feats. As another idea for making skill focus more attractive, it could be the prerequisite for the following feat. Skill Mastery Your long dedication to the perfection of a skill allows you to preform consistantly even under strenous conditions. Prerequisites: Skill Focus (any), 5 or more ranks in the Skill Benefit: Choose a skill for which you have skill focus and 5 or more ranks. You can take 10 on this skill even if stress or distraction would normally prevent you from doing so. Other feats could also build off of specific skill focuses. For instance skill focus (survival) and track could be the prerequisites for a feat that granted you the fast tracker ability granted by some PrC. Similarly you could quick stealth feat (one that halves you penalty for movement in relation to hide an d move silently checks) could have the Prerequisites of Stealthy and Lightning Reflexes, or Skill Focus (Hide) and Skill Focus (Move Silently),or even Stealthy and Run maybe. Anyway the idea is to make them more attractive through making them Prerequisites not just for PrCs, but also for other feats that they might want.
LemmingLord 01-04-06, 02:20 PM	I find that the best way to avoid the need for amazing combat feats is just not to take them. If you have a good DM, it won't matter if you don't optimize your feats. I love skill focus. I've taken it for my Political Paladin, focussing on Diplomacy. I've taken it for my Locksmith Rogue, focussing on Open Lock. There are players in the group who are combat oriented (they're called fighters); I'll save the combat oriented feats for them.
Ashanti 01-13-06, 06:59 AM	High all, long time lurker, just adding a view on my groups campaign: Each PC gets a General Feat at every level. We use the Netbook of feats (it's wonderfull if you use common sense). Because you can only choose General Feats you don't get Barbarians and Rangers with bags of Fighter feats. If you want an non General Feat you must save up 3 feats for the price of one: so if your barabarian wants power attack he must wait till he has 3 General feats (at levels 3, 6, 9, etc) this has the side effect of allowing this house rule to be applied after creation. If you have any bonus feats you may choose these from the appropriate group (such as Fighter Feats). This means that all characters get a lot of flavour feats that they may not normally want to take. It also means that Fighters get the lion's share of Fighter feats because a Barabarian is sacrificing the utility of 3 General Feats for one Fighter Feat where as the Fighter still gets bags of Bounus Fighter Feats at the appropriate level. Loosing the utility of 3 Feats to get a non General Feat is the same power level as RAW. This means that if a Cleric wants Divine Feats or Metamagic Feats it's quite a loss of overall utility. In our view, if PC's want to uber specialise thats fine, but it's at quite a cost. It also give a PC more choice, she can use the classes RAW by saving her feats up or have a more versitile spread of feats. This also give the Fighter a much needed boast as the Fighter Feats are more likely to stay within the remit of Fighters. Is Weapon Focus worth 3 General Feats? We think not. I have to say that my group normally does not optimise characters in general so this house rule may have more breakability than we know. It does let us have more feats which is cool. What do you think?
Ruhl-Than Sage 01-14-06, 07:22 PM	I think fighter feats are general feats. So I'm not sure what your talking about. You must have made up new lists and recategorized stuff.
Ashanti 01-16-06, 08:26 AM	Yeah you are right, we use the net book of feats and only feats called "General" (not "Fighter, General" or "Stealth, General" or similar) can be picked. To be honest we never use splat books so all our feats are from this document. Its great, always being up dated as well.
The Grand Mystic 01-16-06, 06:54 PM	I think quest-related feats could be warranted as long as they're semi-small things and no one player has more than another. There should obviously be some or even a lot of work involved to counterbalance this, of course. I remember in a campaign I played in we were going to fight a really big naval battle next month (it was armada vs. armada - think Britain vs. Spain) and us poor players had almost no experience with ships or seas alike. We decided as a group to spend the month in exercises and training for the battle to come. Before we shipped out to battle, because of all the extensive training our DM decided to give us a free feat that had to do with ships, sailing, seas and the like, such as Skill Focus (Swim, Profession (Sailor), Knowledge (the seas), Use Rope, etc.), Athletic, and a few others. These small feats can really be of big help in the right moments (one player fell overboard when the ship we were rammed got attacked and would have drowned had she not been given extra ranks from the Skill Focus: Swim she chose earlier).
Hodo 01-17-06, 12:24 PM	In my campaign, I'm limiting the maximum ranks one can have in any skill as being equal to their character level. I've also bumped up skill focus feats bonuses from +2, to +4. So if anyone wants to really specialize in a particular skill (like concentrate, disable device, or perform) it would be in their best interests to buy a feat. I've also slightly expanded the fighter's class skills and skill points, to encourage them to spend points more of their extra feats on them.
Xeviat-DM 01-21-06, 04:03 PM	There is currently a precident among feats for granting bonuses. A feat either grants a +2 bonus to all checks (saving throw feats for example), or it grants a +4 bonus to more limited checks (the improved X combat feats grant +4 and a special ability, improved initiative grants +4, and there are feats which grant +4 to limited saves). Skills are definately a limited variety of ability checks. A feat which granted you a +2 bonus to all strength based ability and skill checks would be fine, so a feat which grants a +4 bonus to a skill, and maybe grants a special ability, seems fine as well. I'd be warry of quest feats, just as I'm weary of systems which allow you to train and increase your skill points outside of the level system.