They won’t be. When R5e comes out next year all the backgrounds will have feats, they’ve already said as much. Then you won’t have to worry about things being balanced anymore.
R5e means One DnD? I haven't paid much attention to it since it's all subject to change and not set in stone yet, but from what I remember the background changes looked really good.
I think the plan is for the default to be that all backgrounds will be custom, and one facet of that will be a feat. The catch is at level 1 it can’t be a half feat, so no bonus ability score point at 1. Then, level 4+ feats will all include asi. And you can still just take 2 points as your feat.
I thought they stopped hating the half-feats behind a level cap with this last round of playtest content. Or was I misinformed?
I don’t remember that but now you’ve made me question it. Though allowing a level 1 half feat is, or at least could be, a pretty big power bump. Allowing you to start with an 18 somewhere.
Bah. If feats are (supposedly) balanced with half feats, then it shouldn’t really be a problem. Ne?
I think the level-gating is a tacit acknowledgment that they are not balanced.
They won’t be. When R5e comes out next year all the backgrounds will have feats, they’ve already said as much. Then you won’t have to worry about things being balanced anymore.
R5e means One DnD? I haven't paid much attention to it since it's all subject to change and not set in stone yet, but from what I remember the background changes looked really good.
I think the plan is for the default to be that all backgrounds will be custom, and one facet of that will be a feat. The catch is at level 1 it can’t be a half feat, so no bonus ability score point at 1. Then, level 4+ feats will all include asi. And you can still just take 2 points as your feat.
I thought they stopped hating the half-feats behind a level cap with this last round of playtest content. Or was I misinformed?
I don’t remember that but now you’ve made me question it. Though allowing a level 1 half feat is, or at least could be, a pretty big power bump. Allowing you to start with an 18 somewhere.
Bah. If feats are (supposedly) balanced with half feats, then it shouldn’t really be a problem. Ne?
I think the level-gating is a tacit acknowledgment that they are not balanced.
They won’t be. When R5e comes out next year all the backgrounds will have feats, they’ve already said as much. Then you won’t have to worry about things being balanced anymore.
R5e means One DnD? I haven't paid much attention to it since it's all subject to change and not set in stone yet, but from what I remember the background changes looked really good.
I think the plan is for the default to be that all backgrounds will be custom, and one facet of that will be a feat. The catch is at level 1 it can’t be a half feat, so no bonus ability score point at 1. Then, level 4+ feats will all include asi. And you can still just take 2 points as your feat.
I thought they stopped hating the half-feats behind a level cap with this last round of playtest content. Or was I misinformed?
I don’t remember that but now you’ve made me question it. Though allowing a level 1 half feat is, or at least could be, a pretty big power bump. Allowing you to start with an 18 somewhere.
Bah. If feats are (supposedly) balanced with half feats, then it shouldn’t really be a problem. Ne?
I think the level-gating is a tacit acknowledgment that they are not balanced.
Then they should fix that, not level gate them.
Level gating feats is a great way to make you feel like you are progressing, getting access to more powerful things you could not previously unlock makes it feel like you are not only growing in power, but growing in options. It also helps newer players by limiting their options early, both to lower complexity/power and in terms of number of options, while letting them have access to more options and complexity as they gain more knowledge of the game.
Realistically, they just need to fix CR and have CR reflect things like feats and and expected items by level—I do not believe the current system accurately covers those things, one of the many problems of CR. Right now, the full onus of balancing falls on players - which is fine for those of us experienced with balancing encounters against our players, but is a complete mess for less experienced DMs or encounters run directly out of Adventure modules.
Rebalancing CR in 5e is more about adjusting the hypothetical ideal amount of encounters per LR, imo. They went with 6-8 encounters in the DMG, which has proven to be an extremely optimistic expectation for how much combat DMs would try to work into a day. Thus the complaint that a lot of big monsters go down too fast in the face of a level appropriate party; it's technically a feature not a flaw since the idea was for that to be just one beat of several in the adventuring day, but seems to play out more as an anticlimax. I'd say they want to retarget their encounters per day range to something more like 3-6.
Granted, I'm also not sure exactly how well they can "balance" against the entire spectrum of feats and magic items, so I do think for better or worse the "just figure it out" factor will remain prevalent at least until they jump to an entirely new edition. Which doesn't mean they should work to mitigate that hassle of it some, just means we should manage our expectations on what a "fixed" CR system will look like.
I have no problem with level-gating per se. It allows you to put in really powerful feats that would kill any early encounter or challenge.
I do have concerns though. Mostly, it deprecates the existing feats. That causes two issues that jump to mind caused by the fact that lower level feats effectively become bad choices:
I already have issues that feats are not very high in diversity when accounting for power levels. Melees go for GWM, ranged go for Sharpshooter, etc. They'd have to make a lot of decent feats to avoid "At level 12, you take this feat or you suck" syndrome. I'm not convinced WotC would do that.
If you take a feat at L4, it's going to be wasted at L12. As result, people will end up just putting off getting feats and getting ASIs until the last moment. This is circumventable by allowing them to swap out feats, although there are no such rules at this time, to my knowledge.
I like the idea, but it would take some working to make it really work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I have no problem with level-gating per se. It allows you to put in really powerful feats that would kill any early encounter or challenge.
I do have concerns though. Mostly, it deprecates the existing feats. That causes two issues that jump to mind caused by the fact that lower level feats effectively become bad choices:
I already have issues that feats are not very high in diversity when accounting for power levels. Melees go for GWM, ranged go for Sharpshooter, etc. They'd have to make a lot of decent feats to avoid "At level 12, you take this feat or you suck" syndrome. I'm not convinced WotC would do that.
If you take a feat at L4, it's going to be wasted at L12. As result, people will end up just putting off getting feats and getting ASIs until the last moment. This is circumventable by allowing them to swap out feats, although there are no such rules at this time, to my knowledge.
I like the idea, but it would take some working to make it really work.
I’m not sure, but I think the only gate is 4. Basically there’s character creation feats (with no asi), and everything else (which are all 1/2 feats). I could be wrong of course. Might be they just haven’t released any higher level ones yet. And the creation feats are stuff like skilled and magic initiate, which are pretty solid choices even without the half feat. And keep in mind the newer versions of GWM/SS aren’t looking near as strong as they are now.
I'm awfully big on "growth" of a character, but also on a FEAT being level agnostic in and of itself. I would prefer for Feats to improve over time, across the board.
So that folks can pick up a feat at the start and have it become more potent over time.
But I also confess that I am really big on having characters improve over time, so that by the time they are 20th level they had to earn that that full level of power.
But I can also understand how games where those high levels are rare might not have that as something that works for them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I have no problem with level-gating per se. It allows you to put in really powerful feats that would kill any early encounter or challenge.
I do have concerns though. Mostly, it deprecates the existing feats. That causes two issues that jump to mind caused by the fact that lower level feats effectively become bad choices:
I already have issues that feats are not very high in diversity when accounting for power levels. Melees go for GWM, ranged go for Sharpshooter, etc. They'd have to make a lot of decent feats to avoid "At level 12, you take this feat or you suck" syndrome. I'm not convinced WotC would do that.
If you take a feat at L4, it's going to be wasted at L12. As result, people will end up just putting off getting feats and getting ASIs until the last moment. This is circumventable by allowing them to swap out feats, although there are no such rules at this time, to my knowledge.
I like the idea, but it would take some working to make it really work.
I’m not sure, but I think the only gate is 4. Basically there’s character creation feats (with no asi), and everything else (which are all 1/2 feats). I could be wrong of course. Might be they just haven’t released any higher level ones yet. And the creation feats are stuff like skilled and magic initiate, which are pretty solid choices even without the half feat. And keep in mind the newer versions of GWM/SS aren’t looking near as strong as they are now.
I was going to say something similar. All the background level 1 feats are curated (from playtest 1): Alert, Crafter, Healer, Lucky, Magic Initiate, Musician, Savage Attacker, Skilled, Tavern Brawler, Tough. So you have options to build up the theme of your character with maybe a feat you might otherwise skip for the “level agnostic” options. Then everything, up to the level 20 Epic Boon feats, become available at 4+.
Personally, I think 3.x was the least balanced of all the editions I've played. Even 1e was better balanced, although I sometimes question whether the people who made the changes that were supposed to add balance in 3.x actually understood how 1e was balanced. But that's a sidetrack.
Back on the whole background feats and power creep issue: first, it was inevitable. Every edition I've ever played over the last 40+ years has suffered from power creep due to additional splat books adding more and more options. It's the nature of the beast because power creep is an inherent aspect of adding new abilities that are cool enough to make someone buy another book.
As for feats themselves, I give all characters additional feats because it solves what I see as one of the biggest issues with 5e: Forced optimization. The way the game is set up by default you pretty much have to take two ASI's to boost your prime to 20, and then that one must-have feat. Adding more feats into the mix allows for greater customization and more individual characters. At least that's how it works for me.
I don't mind backgrounds with feats as long as they continue to be heavily tied into a specific setting, and expected to be banned by the DM unless you are specifically playing a campaign in that particular setting. Seems like a waste of WotC resources to keep making content that will be banned by 90%+ of groups, but I have no idea how much time is really wasted, maybe the feats are easy to come up with
Also I can't believe all the people claiming that Variant Human (and Custom Lineage) are balanced. They are objectively FAR better than any other race, and will always be picked by anyone who is power gaming. Thankfully most people aren't hardcore power gamers so other races do get played, but that only happens because people prioritize fun over in-game power. It still sucks that these races exist and we have to choose between boring overpowered race vs fun weak races.
Considering I have see damn near every race outperform variant human and custom lineage in every campaign I have been in, I would say yeah they are pretty balanced. And you would be surprised most groups DONT ban Feats, and or the Backgrounds that give them. Id have to find it again, but the last official percentages I saw from them was around 70% of the player base (reported player base anyways) USES feats. Plus Feats being tied to backgrounds have been a huge request, especially since 5e is LITERALLY the only TTRPG that doesn't have some cool Feat like ability for level 1 or starting power characters. And honestly these "Campaign Specific" Feats really aren't, you can easily adapt them to fit ANY World or campaign.
I feel that by offering backgrounds with feats tied into them, the game is now unbalanced without going back to the original backgrounds and adding a feat to each one.
This is evident in my current game. The Deck of Many things background has been taken by a variant human. This player has two additional feats compared to the rest of us schlubs creating a vast power difference between players.
To prevent this, I have placed the following sanctions on my games. No backgrounds with feats or all backgrounds have a feat. Team's choice at session zero. I remind them that whatever choices are made, the bad guys have those too.
I am concerned that WotC is heading down a dark path. We've all seen the variant human groups. Now we will see nothing but variant human with feat backgrounds and nothing more. Sad state of affairs.
If you’re using the backgrounds that come with a feat those books have an option for players who didn’t take a background with a feat to select a feat. So it’s not unbalanced or sending the game down some “dark path”.
and Variant Human is balanced around having a feat at 1st level.
So, in other words, to maintain internal balance, players and DM's are forced to adapt the new PC build mechanisms.
The game hasn't become unbalanced at all? The feats they offer with the backgrounds are generally very specific, and story driven. And honestly in my experience are about the same power, and in some cases weaker than older backgrounds. Granted there are exceptions, but there were always "Good Backgrounds" and "Useless Backgrounds". Thing is backgrounds are a passive constant just thing you have, while these feats have generally been "Oh hey, you can do this thing like twice day, 6 times at level 20."
And if you have looked at any of the book that give Backgrounds with feats, they all say to allow players to take Tough, Skilled, and third option for those who don't take the story Backgrounds. I have YET to see a character with a Feat from their Background be OP or too powerful compared to anyone else. Same with anyone playing Variant Human or Custom Lineage, both of which regulate the "Power" of having a Feat, by making the race kinda suck otherwise.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not getting cut into bloody littles slices, That's the key to a sound plan."
I don't mind backgrounds with feats as long as they continue to be heavily tied into a specific setting, and expected to be banned by the DM unless you are specifically playing a campaign in that particular setting. Seems like a waste of WotC resources to keep making content that will be banned by 90%+ of groups, but I have no idea how much time is really wasted, maybe the feats are easy to come up with
Also I can't believe all the people claiming that Variant Human (and Custom Lineage) are balanced. They are objectively FAR better than any other race, and will always be picked by anyone who is power gaming. Thankfully most people aren't hardcore power gamers so other races do get played, but that only happens because people prioritize fun over in-game power. It still sucks that these races exist and we have to choose between boring overpowered race vs fun weak races.
Considering I have see damn near every race outperform variant human and custom lineage in every campaign I have been in, I would say yeah they are pretty balanced. And you would be surprised most groups DONT ban Feats, and or the Backgrounds that give them. Id have to find it again, but the last official percentages I saw from them was around 70% of the player base (reported player base anyways) USES feats. Plus Feats being tied to backgrounds have been a huge request, especially since 5e is LITERALLY the only TTRPG that doesn't have some cool Feat like ability for level 1 or starting power characters. And honestly these "Campaign Specific" Feats really aren't, you can easily adapt them to fit ANY World or campaign.
I feel that by offering backgrounds with feats tied into them, the game is now unbalanced without going back to the original backgrounds and adding a feat to each one.
This is evident in my current game. The Deck of Many things background has been taken by a variant human. This player has two additional feats compared to the rest of us schlubs creating a vast power difference between players.
To prevent this, I have placed the following sanctions on my games. No backgrounds with feats or all backgrounds have a feat. Team's choice at session zero. I remind them that whatever choices are made, the bad guys have those too.
I am concerned that WotC is heading down a dark path. We've all seen the variant human groups. Now we will see nothing but variant human with feat backgrounds and nothing more. Sad state of affairs.
If you’re using the backgrounds that come with a feat those books have an option for players who didn’t take a background with a feat to select a feat. So it’s not unbalanced or sending the game down some “dark path”.
and Variant Human is balanced around having a feat at 1st level.
So, in other words, to maintain internal balance, players and DM's are forced to adapt the new PC build mechanisms.
The game hasn't become unbalanced at all? The feats they offer with the backgrounds are generally very specific, and story driven. And honestly in my experience are about the same power, and in some cases weaker than older backgrounds. Granted there are exceptions, but there were always "Good Backgrounds" and "Useless Backgrounds". Thing is backgrounds are a passive constant just thing you have, while these feats have generally been "Oh hey, you can do this thing like twice day, 6 times at level 20."
And if you have looked at any of the book that give Backgrounds with feats, they all say to allow players to take Tough, Skilled, and third option for those who don't take the story Backgrounds. I have YET to see a character with a Feat from their Background be OP or too powerful compared to anyone else. Same with anyone playing Variant Human or Custom Lineage, both of which regulate the "Power" of having a Feat, by making the race kinda suck otherwise.
starter feats are lock to settings, their part of a world with a distinct flavor like dragon lance, if you're not in those campaigns you should think before adding these feats
starter feats are lock to settings, their part of a world with a distinct flavor like dragon lance, if you're not in those campaigns you should think before adding these feats
Not in a few months. Once the new version of the PHB comes out then every background will I’ll include a feat or an option of feats.
I'm excited about the starting feat - not just because of the mechanical benefits or the increased player power, but because starting feats are much better ways to differentiate and flesh out low-level characters than 2014 backgrounds ever were. With starting feats I can redo my Mountain Dwarf wizard mageknight who stomps around in half-plate by taking Moderately Armored, or I can grab Lucky on my Halfling and have the most uncanny trickster his hometown has ever seen, or I can be a washed up prizefighter with Tavern Brawler who swore an Oath to recapture his past Glory on the battlefield. And every new level 1 feat they design will mean more and more concepts and ideas for my future characters. I honestly, truly, can't wait.
I admit I thought the background features setup had a lot of interesting ideas to it, but their actual occurrence in a campaign tends to vary wildly based on the DM. Background feats are definitely a more consistent option, and it'll be interesting to see what arrangements I come up with once its all finalized.
I admit I thought the background features setup had a lot of interesting ideas to it, but their actual occurrence in a campaign tends to vary wildly based on the DM.
And dependent upon the player.
I'll be honest, I think I'd like to divorce feats from ASIs, or at least have feat-only choices at times. Feats are what make characters flavourful, but often the best choice is an ASI. Having a feat-only Background is a good step towards that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I admit I thought the background features setup had a lot of interesting ideas to it, but their actual occurrence in a campaign tends to vary wildly based on the DM.
And dependent upon the player.
I'll be honest, I think I'd like to divorce feats from ASIs, or at least have feat-only choices at times. Feats are what make characters flavourful, but often the best choice is an ASI. Having a feat-only Background is a good step towards that.
This is the change I was most hoping for in 2024–this is how 4e did things and was a major reason why 4e excelled at letting players really build the unique character they wanted to play.
I also think a divorce of feats and ASI is particularly important given the introduction of feat trees. Feat trees really need greater access to feats to function - otherwise, you are kind of shoehorned into picking feats from that tree during your limited feat options, so, even if the feat system provides more viable options, your viable choices paradoxically decrease.
I am still holding out some hope that Wizards might just go ahead and do this - either as the default rule, or as an official optional rule (with Beyond support). While it might be weird to see such a large and fundamental change implemented without playtesting, this is the exact kind of change that should not be left up to players. After all, we all know that the “making people superheroes who trivialize combat” argument is already popular online, mostly pushed by bad/lazy/incompetent DMs who forget/ignore they can always increase encounter difficulty. Given the long-standing success of this bad, but pervasive argument, I doubt such a change would get over 80% of support, even if it would make the game better. Something that would be good for the game, but could get lambasted by a loud, known, and vocal minority and thus not meet the threshold for inclusion is exactly the type of update Wizards should not shop to the masses first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have to agree but they could possibly add feats that are bound to specific classes or races
I also have the ability to manifest my thoughts in ways that cut people. I call this power words. -Tasha
I play 3.5E…sometimes.
Come swim over to the Bloody Barnacle! The Bloody Barnacle against the world!
They/them
My avatar is stuck in Archeon help would be ideal.
Silhouette of determination! Thanks drum!
They already have.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think the level-gating is a tacit acknowledgment that they are not balanced.
Then they should fix that, not level gate them.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Level gating feats is a great way to make you feel like you are progressing, getting access to more powerful things you could not previously unlock makes it feel like you are not only growing in power, but growing in options. It also helps newer players by limiting their options early, both to lower complexity/power and in terms of number of options, while letting them have access to more options and complexity as they gain more knowledge of the game.
Realistically, they just need to fix CR and have CR reflect things like feats and and expected items by level—I do not believe the current system accurately covers those things, one of the many problems of CR. Right now, the full onus of balancing falls on players - which is fine for those of us experienced with balancing encounters against our players, but is a complete mess for less experienced DMs or encounters run directly out of Adventure modules.
Rebalancing CR in 5e is more about adjusting the hypothetical ideal amount of encounters per LR, imo. They went with 6-8 encounters in the DMG, which has proven to be an extremely optimistic expectation for how much combat DMs would try to work into a day. Thus the complaint that a lot of big monsters go down too fast in the face of a level appropriate party; it's technically a feature not a flaw since the idea was for that to be just one beat of several in the adventuring day, but seems to play out more as an anticlimax. I'd say they want to retarget their encounters per day range to something more like 3-6.
Granted, I'm also not sure exactly how well they can "balance" against the entire spectrum of feats and magic items, so I do think for better or worse the "just figure it out" factor will remain prevalent at least until they jump to an entirely new edition. Which doesn't mean they should work to mitigate that hassle of it some, just means we should manage our expectations on what a "fixed" CR system will look like.
I have no problem with level-gating per se. It allows you to put in really powerful feats that would kill any early encounter or challenge.
I do have concerns though. Mostly, it deprecates the existing feats. That causes two issues that jump to mind caused by the fact that lower level feats effectively become bad choices:
I like the idea, but it would take some working to make it really work.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I liked it better when feats were considered level agnostic. 🤷♂️
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I’m not sure, but I think the only gate is 4. Basically there’s character creation feats (with no asi), and everything else (which are all 1/2 feats). I could be wrong of course. Might be they just haven’t released any higher level ones yet. And the creation feats are stuff like skilled and magic initiate, which are pretty solid choices even without the half feat.
And keep in mind the newer versions of GWM/SS aren’t looking near as strong as they are now.
I'm awfully big on "growth" of a character, but also on a FEAT being level agnostic in and of itself. I would prefer for Feats to improve over time, across the board.
So that folks can pick up a feat at the start and have it become more potent over time.
But I also confess that I am really big on having characters improve over time, so that by the time they are 20th level they had to earn that that full level of power.
But I can also understand how games where those high levels are rare might not have that as something that works for them.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I was going to say something similar. All the background level 1 feats are curated (from playtest 1): Alert, Crafter, Healer, Lucky, Magic Initiate, Musician, Savage Attacker, Skilled, Tavern Brawler, Tough. So you have options to build up the theme of your character with maybe a feat you might otherwise skip for the “level agnostic” options. Then everything, up to the level 20 Epic Boon feats, become available at 4+.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Personally, I think 3.x was the least balanced of all the editions I've played. Even 1e was better balanced, although I sometimes question whether the people who made the changes that were supposed to add balance in 3.x actually understood how 1e was balanced. But that's a sidetrack.
Back on the whole background feats and power creep issue: first, it was inevitable. Every edition I've ever played over the last 40+ years has suffered from power creep due to additional splat books adding more and more options. It's the nature of the beast because power creep is an inherent aspect of adding new abilities that are cool enough to make someone buy another book.
As for feats themselves, I give all characters additional feats because it solves what I see as one of the biggest issues with 5e: Forced optimization. The way the game is set up by default you pretty much have to take two ASI's to boost your prime to 20, and then that one must-have feat. Adding more feats into the mix allows for greater customization and more individual characters. At least that's how it works for me.
Considering I have see damn near every race outperform variant human and custom lineage in every campaign I have been in, I would say yeah they are pretty balanced. And you would be surprised most groups DONT ban Feats, and or the Backgrounds that give them. Id have to find it again, but the last official percentages I saw from them was around 70% of the player base (reported player base anyways) USES feats. Plus Feats being tied to backgrounds have been a huge request, especially since 5e is LITERALLY the only TTRPG that doesn't have some cool Feat like ability for level 1 or starting power characters. And honestly these "Campaign Specific" Feats really aren't, you can easily adapt them to fit ANY World or campaign.
The game hasn't become unbalanced at all? The feats they offer with the backgrounds are generally very specific, and story driven. And honestly in my experience are about the same power, and in some cases weaker than older backgrounds. Granted there are exceptions, but there were always "Good Backgrounds" and "Useless Backgrounds". Thing is backgrounds are a passive constant just thing you have, while these feats have generally been "Oh hey, you can do this thing like twice day, 6 times at level 20."
And if you have looked at any of the book that give Backgrounds with feats, they all say to allow players to take Tough, Skilled, and third option for those who don't take the story Backgrounds. I have YET to see a character with a Feat from their Background be OP or too powerful compared to anyone else. Same with anyone playing Variant Human or Custom Lineage, both of which regulate the "Power" of having a Feat, by making the race kinda suck otherwise.
"Not getting cut into bloody littles slices, That's the key to a sound plan."
Totally agree with this.
starter feats are lock to settings, their part of a world with a distinct flavor like dragon lance, if you're not in those campaigns you should think before adding these feats
My Brews:
Race: Tropical Dwaves Spells: Summon Spirits Rites of Mummification
Monster: Osprey Feat: Skill Mastery–Animal Handler (Provides DCs for training animals applicable to those with and without this feat)
Not in a few months. Once the new version of the PHB comes out then every background will I’ll include a feat or an option of feats.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm excited about the starting feat - not just because of the mechanical benefits or the increased player power, but because starting feats are much better ways to differentiate and flesh out low-level characters than 2014 backgrounds ever were. With starting feats I can redo my Mountain Dwarf wizard mageknight who stomps around in half-plate by taking Moderately Armored, or I can grab Lucky on my Halfling and have the most uncanny trickster his hometown has ever seen, or I can be a washed up prizefighter with Tavern Brawler who swore an Oath to recapture his past Glory on the battlefield. And every new level 1 feat they design will mean more and more concepts and ideas for my future characters. I honestly, truly, can't wait.
I admit I thought the background features setup had a lot of interesting ideas to it, but their actual occurrence in a campaign tends to vary wildly based on the DM. Background feats are definitely a more consistent option, and it'll be interesting to see what arrangements I come up with once its all finalized.
And dependent upon the player.
I'll be honest, I think I'd like to divorce feats from ASIs, or at least have feat-only choices at times. Feats are what make characters flavourful, but often the best choice is an ASI. Having a feat-only Background is a good step towards that.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
This is the change I was most hoping for in 2024–this is how 4e did things and was a major reason why 4e excelled at letting players really build the unique character they wanted to play.
I also think a divorce of feats and ASI is particularly important given the introduction of feat trees. Feat trees really need greater access to feats to function - otherwise, you are kind of shoehorned into picking feats from that tree during your limited feat options, so, even if the feat system provides more viable options, your viable choices paradoxically decrease.
I am still holding out some hope that Wizards might just go ahead and do this - either as the default rule, or as an official optional rule (with Beyond support). While it might be weird to see such a large and fundamental change implemented without playtesting, this is the exact kind of change that should not be left up to players. After all, we all know that the “making people superheroes who trivialize combat” argument is already popular online, mostly pushed by bad/lazy/incompetent DMs who forget/ignore they can always increase encounter difficulty. Given the long-standing success of this bad, but pervasive argument, I doubt such a change would get over 80% of support, even if it would make the game better. Something that would be good for the game, but could get lambasted by a loud, known, and vocal minority and thus not meet the threshold for inclusion is exactly the type of update Wizards should not shop to the masses first.