I've been toying around with the idea for a feat that could be taken at first level that negates a race's -2 to X stat. Essentially you'd be trading a starting feat so that a Gnome or Halfling would be exceptionally strong for their race, Dwarf more amiable, and elf hardier. Do you think this would be an ok trade off for loosing your 1st level feat?
Include, "Special: Must be taken at first level," and I'd say it's great. In fact, I can't believe I didn't think of it myself.
I've been toying around with the idea for a feat that could be taken at first level that negates a race's -2 to X stat. Essentially you'd be trading a starting feat so that a Gnome or Halfling would be exceptionally strong for their race, Dwarf more amiable, and elf hardier. Do you think this would be an ok trade off for loosing your 1st level feat?
Well, example feats that do something similiar....
STR
Weapon Focus: Gives you a +1 to hit with one Weapon only.
INT, WIS, CHA
Spell Focus: Gives you a +1 to saves with one school of magic.
CON
Toughness: Gives you a +1 to HP
Great Fortitude: +2 on fortitude saves
WIS
Iron WIll: +2 on will saves
DEX
Lighting Reflexes: +2 on Reflex Saves
.
So in general I would have to say no, it seems that a minumum of 1 Feat and 1 trait are needed just to replace CON. The others need 2 feats or more.
But thats just comparing to current feats.
Heck a +1 CR is adding +4 to all stats. So ehh..its up to you however if you were playing in your game you got to ask, would this be a must have feat?
would you support the addition of a feat that could only be taken by a human, half elf or half orc at 1st level that gave them an additional +2 to any stat (other than their first stat increase)?
If it could only be taken at first level it would delay the effectiveness of many builds. Most classes are pretty feat starved, so with the exception of the fighter, they're going to suffer.
So, it would be a trade-off. I could see many players picking it up with their characters (mostly to break the mold of their race/class), but still many others would elect not to take it.
Include, "Special: Must be taken at first level," and I'd say it's great. In fact, I can't believe I didn't think of it myself.
That would be there. I'm also tempted to put it out there for Humans and Half Elves and Orcs, with the stipulation that you must choose to go either physcal or mental, which ever was the opposite of the stat you chose for as a racial bonus. This way every onr could, in theory get 2 +2s, one mental and one physical, and no penalties.
Thanks.
Well, example feats that do something similiar....STR
Weapon Focus: Gives you a +1 to hit with one Weapon only.INT, WIS, CHA
Spell Focus: Gives you a +1 to saves with one school of magic.CON
Toughness: Gives you a +1 to HP
Great Fortitude: +2 on fortitude savesWIS
Iron WIll: +2 on will savesDEX
Lighting Reflexes: +2 on Reflex Saves
.So in general I would have to say no, it seems that a minumum of 1 Feat and 1 trait are needed just to replace CON. The others need 2 feats or more.
But thats just comparing to current feats.
Heck a +1 CR is adding +4 to all stats. So ehh..its up to you however if you were playing in your game you got to ask, would this be a must have feat?
I think it would be more there to help a player go for a suboptimal choice and still make it effective. For Instance a Dwarven Bard isn't exactly the best choice, but if you feel like going for it you can at least get rid of the penalty to Cha. As a Dwarven Fighter, you probably won't need it.
would you support the addition of a feat that could only be taken by a human, half elf or half orc at 1st level that gave them an additional +2 to any stat (other than their first stat increase)?
I'm sort of torn here because I want the feat to be more about negating a penalty to play a class you might not normally take with certain races then optimizing your stats. Sure it costs a Feat at 1st level but there is a big difference between go from -2 to 0 than going from 0 to +2, especially when you get to choose both. That being said I would feel bad that those races couldn't have 2 +2s and no penalty, when the others could. I would at least follow the stipulation I posted above about one being Physical and one being mental.
I'm not sure, on that Race building Guide I have heard that the Races are all worth 2 1/2 feats. So with that logic it might work. If you could dig up a copy of the play test It should be able to answer your question solid like
|
Back in 2005 I created Unique Feats for an NPC to offer to another DM's Campaign development but he decided he didn't want to go that way.
The Landseer kept a Blinkdog pack and had a a collection of feats oriented toward Blinkdogs. One allowed him to travel with his hounds when they dimension-doored, the other allowed him to see through the eyes of the pack.
Testing it I submitted to that DM a Short Story based on a test of the Feats and character...Basically he sent the pack to slaughter some knights who had crossed a border into his lands to raid, and then dimension-doored straight into the bedroom of the Baron who sent them and left a sack full of heads on his bed before dimension-dooring away.
The Feats were for a Barbarian Kurgan like culture for those who took 'Master of Hounds' as a Character Development path.
it seems to me it is more powerful than a feat, it would be better if you could play a dwarven bard by exchanging a bonus to an ability to negate the penalty, maybe as a trait ?
dwarf +2 con or wis
elf +2 int or dex
halfling +2 dex or cha
gnome +2 con or cha (I think)
human, half-orc and half-elf don't have a negative and have free choice of their bonus ability anyways.
Maybe you don't feel it should cost them a trait even, though I think it is a fair trade, it is a relatively minor boon.
it seems to me it is more powerful than a feat, it would be better if you could play a dwarven bard by exchanging a bonus to an ability to negate the penalty, maybe as a trait ?
dwarf +2 con or wis
elf +2 int or dex
halfling +2 dex or cha
gnome +2 con or cha (I think)human, half-orc and half-elf don't have a negative and have free choice of their bonus ability anyways.
Maybe you don't feel it should cost them a trait even, though I think it is a fair trade, it is a relatively minor boon.
That is another good idea, but the question would be if people would take it. I'm not sure using a Feat to lose a +2 to get rid of a -2 would be enough for players to want to take it. Say you want to play an Elf Barbarian, would you take a Feat that allowed you to dump one of your +2s to get so you don't take a hit in a stat that is kind of important to Barbarians rather than just play a Half Elf, not lose your 1st level Feat, Gain a Skill Focus Feat, and still get +2 to Dex, Int, or even Con?