What if you had a feat every level?

[Talore]

Just a thought exercise I had, what if you were able to gain a feat every level instead of every 3? Do you think it could encourage more diversity of tactics/covering more roles, or would it give the higher tiers more power than the lower ones?

See if you can come up with some ideas or builds that utilize the abundance of feats!

Some ideas:

• Incantatrix and metamagic-reducing effects become horrific (well, more horrific)
• Melee types could specialize in multiple tactics, since things like Improved Trip/Feint/Grapple/etc. become easier to fit.
• 'Extra' feats become more friendly (and that DMM cleric got a lot scarier)
• Factotum + Moar Font of Inspiration...
• You'd get bonus points for style if you went Fighter 20. 31 feats anyone?
• Perhaps the more random suplementary feats would get used more often than once in a blue moon

In addition to the funny things that it could enable, I'd actually like to see if it could be a viable ruling, in a similar vein as Gestalt.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

I've seen this done before.  You can do some pretty cool things with incarnum, IIRC, and the dragonmark stuff becomes more worthwhile.

[Talore]

I've seen this done before.  You can do some pretty cool things with incarnum, IIRC, and the dragonmark stuff becomes more worthwhile.

Aye, didn't think of those. I suppose the Sorcerer bloodline feats could be viable as well. How did the feat progression help (or help destroy) inter-party balance?

[NiteCyper]

A related quote from the old The Wizards Community > Forum - d20 Character Optimization:

My last game allowed a virtually unlimited number of flaws. Most characters had around four or five. Mine had the most at seven. Party was an ubercharger / dungeoncrasher (me), a words of creation bard / sublime chord, a hyperbuffer archivist, a chaingun thrower rogue, and a fonts-o-freaking-inspiration factotum / chameleon.

I can't reference more of it, but the quoter praised the allowance.

If you [gain(ed)] a feat [at] every level, you would gain power. I do think that it encourages more covering more roles. I do think that it would give the higher tiers more power than the lower ones. It is a viable (but not necessarily good) ruling, like beginning with 5050000 XP (lvl. 100).

[the_shadowmind]

To make it work, a complete ban on the Tier 1's and Tier 2's would have to go with it. With just the normal number of feats or even 0 feats they are powerful, with 20 feats... .
It would many of the below Tier 3 more playable.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Well, you can't buy spells with feats (most of the time).

[Nunkuruji]

The Abberant/Draconic/Fey/etc Heritage chains get a little more fun.

[snakeman830]

The Abberant/Draconic/Fey/etc Heritage chains get a little more fun used.

FTFY

[BruceLeeroy]

Well, you can't buy spells with feats (most of the time).

Extra Spell and Domain Spontaneity come to mind. I'm sure there are others. Also it would make qualifying for PrCs a lot easier. Things like that Storm cleric class would get played.

[Unbeliever]

Well, you can't buy spells with feats (most of the time).

...
Also it would make qualifying for PrCs a lot easier. Things like that Storm cleric class would get played.

It's stuff like this -- allowing people to straddle more roles and making usually suboptimal, and therefore rarely seen, stuff more viable -- that makes some bonus feats attractive to me.  I think 1/level might be a bit much for me, if only b/c I'm set in my ways, but the general principle has appeal.

[KellKheraptis]

All gish would suddenly dip both Thralls and Bladesinger, since now they can waste the 2-3 extra feats per class.  Might lead to some impressive BAB/CL numbers, though it's hard to beat the Mystic Ranger of Doom >.>

Speaking of which, said Mystic Ranger would suddenly have the capability to play GOD on steroids, given that they'd have more combat ability, metamagic equal to the average incantatrix, and Node spellcasting (since now they have room) to power it.

[emaNsdrawkcaB]

If you don't mind limiting your race (not much of a limit, they're awesome) and alignment you can easily get a ton of feats; some limited, but a ton nonetheless. This is what a Dragonwrought Wyrm of War (Sovereign Archetype) Kobold serving an Elder Evil with two flaws looks like:

[spoiler]1 - Feat, Feat, Feat, Elder Evil Feat
2 -
3 - Feat
4 - Fighter Feat
5 - Elder Evil Feat
6 - Feat
7 -
8 - Fighter Feat
9 - Feat
10 - Elder Evil Feat
11 -
12 - Fighter Feat, Feat
13 -
14 -
15 - Elder Evil Feat, Feat
16 - Fighter Feat
17 -
18 - Feat
19 -
20 - Elder Evil Feat, Fighter Feat[/spoiler]

Same dude, but instead, VoP:

[spoiler]1 - Feat, Feat, Feat, Exalted Feat
2 - Exalted Feat
3 - Feat
4 - Fighter Feat,  Exalted Feat
5 -
6 - Feat, Exalted Feat
7 -
8 - Fighter Feat, Exalted Feat
9 - Feat
10 - Exalted Feat
11 -
12 - Fighter Feat, Feat,  Exalted Feat
13 -
14 - Exalted Feat
15 - Feat
16 - Fighter Feat, Exalted Feat
17 -
18 - Feat, Exalted Feat
19 -
20 - Fighter Feat, Exalted Feat[/spoiler]

[kurashu]

My last game I allowed a feat every level and in the one I'm running now I'm allowing a feat every odd level. I find that it allows the players more versatility and they don't feel so conflicted between feats because there's just a wait of a level at most. I think it's a good idea, especially if the players aren't actively trying to be a Tier 0 Character.

[jameswilliamogle]

No point in playing a Fighter, ever.

[KellKheraptis]

No point in playing a Fighter, ever.

Warblade 20 with EWP (Any, kitty litter initially if you want), WF (kitty litter), GWF (kitty litter), WSpec (kitty litter), GWSpec (kitty litter), Melee Weapon Mastery, Ranged Weapon Mastery, the three type specific feats, and Weapon Supremacy, just to say : "Be a weapon MASTER! in one EASY HOUR!  Hurry now, while supplies last!  

[LordBlades]

IMHO, giving players more feats would maily mean 2 things:

1. Some weaker (prestige) classes will see more play. More feats means more options, and easier to qualify for some things.
2. Some already strong builds, that currently are limited in what they can do only by number of available feats, will become much more stronger (e.g Incantatrix or DMM cleric).

[RobbyPants]

A lot of obscure feats might see more use too.  There are a lot of them that are kinda nice once in a blue moon, but ultimately fall behind in priority to the more immediately useful feats.  If nothing else, some of the weaker metamagic feats would probably see more play.  People might dabble more in exotic weapons.  Uber chargeres would likely have Combat Brute and Elusive Target in addition to Shock Trooper.

I think it could be a fun exercise, but I agree that getting rid of the top classes might be necessary, or at least, don't give them the boost.

[ninjarabbit]

I think the 'hybrid' classes like the bard, ranger, paladin, hexblade, and duskblade would probably get the most benefit. It makes it easier for those classes to expand on what they can do rather than just focusing on one or two things like those classes normally do.


The tier 1s are still tier 1s and the fighters and monks are still fighters and monks.

[Prime32]

IMHO, giving players more feats would maily mean 2 things:

1. Some weaker (prestige) classes will see more play. More feats means more options, and easier to qualify for some things.
2. Some already strong builds, that currently are limited in what they can do only by number of available feats, will become much more stronger (e.g Incantatrix or DMM cleric).

Alternately, I'd remove a lot of the prereqs from PrCs which aren't vital to the class (ie. by "vital" I mean they modify the ability from the prereq without advancing it, like Master of Many Forms - a non-spellcaster dipping a +1 spellcasting class would gain casting as if he took a level in wizard or sorcerer). Something like test-based prerequisites.

Because some people want to play an assassin without having to plan their build from lv1.

[Maat_Mons]

Weapon aptitude has this restriction:

However, you can't change the weapon choices in such a way that you no longer meet the prerequisite for some other feat you possess. 

This makes having both melee weapon mastery and ranged weapon mastery problematic.  It also makes having crushing strike, driving attack, and slashing flurry problematic.  Taking any of these feats makes a warblade less a master of all weapons than he was before.