This is probably a bad idea, but has anyone run / played in a game where you got a feat for every HD?

[Reksew_Trebla]

It's not really to make things easier or harder, I just like creating things, but simply crafting encounters doesn't always scratch that itch, you know, and while I could just change their original feats (assuming they are generic enemies and not a specific character), the feats given already are often pretty reasonable choices, so I don't actually end up changing them that often.

In theory, this should make the game harder for the PCs, since monsters usually have HD>CR (once you get high enough CR), whereas PCs are essentially HD=Level=CR, so the monsters would get more feats out of this, but let's be real, not even expert players, just players familiar enough with the game, can easily break the game in the right circumstances, so this would let them make stronger PCs without having to worry about making things completely unfair for the GM. Hell, with the level of extra customization, I could see a Fighter getting really capable, despite usually being seen as the weak link of martials.

Anyways, has anyone done this before?

[Melkiador]

I've never done it, but I don't think it would be incredibly game breaking. Almost every build wants for more feats. It does cheapen fighter bonus feats a bit, but even with fighter builds I have wanted for more feats.

If applying to NPCs too, it should be fairly balanced, but unless you are choosing super basic feats, that's a lot of extra work on the game master to give the monsters a powerful selection of new feats.

[Dasrak]

Honestly it sounds like less of a power boost than gestalt, and gestalt is a pretty popular and functional ruleset.

[Bjørn Røyrvik]

It's not game-breaking.

My personal preference is to reduce the number of feats, usually through consolidation of feat trees. That's a lot more work, however.

[Sysryke]

We do this in my home game. Everyone has the option to build a gestalt character. If you choose to build a standard mono-class character, you get a bonus feat every single level. Normal level requirements still apply to which feats you can take. It does make some martial builds ridiculous, but as you pointed out, it's not that hard to break things if somebody wants to anyway. Honestly, the only really broken characters we have, I haven't checked the math on as closely as I might like. There may be more than feat combo shenanigans happening there.

[Reksew_Trebla]

Thank you all for the input. I'm putting this on the list of things I'm going to try in a later game I run.

Again, thank you all for the input. I thought I was being dumb, cause a lot of my ideas end up being such, so I'm glad to see that wasn't the case this time.

[TxSam88]

I've always felt that spellcasters need more feats.

Elemental Spell is the example I am going to use. Wizards get 10 Feat slots total, Elemental spell takes one, he chooses a single element, with that feat he can now change his fireball etc, to that single element. If he wants to change it to another element, he has to buy the feat again. Not to mention the spells take a higher spell slot.

Or, he can just pick the Admixture school and do it for free at 1st level.

Now why does it take 4 feats (and higher spell slots) to match a level 1 class ability?

it seems to me that they originally considered some of the feats way more potent than they actually are, so to balance this - simply give them for feats

[Mudfoot]

Some types of character (a typical paladin or stock wizard) need very few feats. Others (switch-hitter archer, TWF) need many more. So increasing feats makes a lot of new builds practical, though you may find some weird exploits coming online as well.

[Azothath]

Mudfoot wrote:

Some types of character (a typical paladin or stock wizard) need very few feats. Others (switch-hitter archer, TWF) need many more. So increasing feats makes a lot of new builds practical, though you may find some weird exploits coming online as well.

you might review the iconic wizard Ezren or the published NPC wizards... your 'stock wizard' seems highly impractical and mischaracterized.

As to allowing feats at a rate of 100% rather than 50%, it seems a bit too much for PC classes as the rate was upped in PF1 as it is. Now the NPC classes at 66%, hmmm...
Adding two feats from a specific group to a class (like metamagic or combat feats at 4th and 8th) would open a lot of options and avoid dipping issues.
Again, I feel 1 day of free 'bankable' Retraining gained with each level helps address the front loaded nature of the game.

[Waterhammer]

If a person had the time and energy to do it, rewriting the poor feats to make them good would be the way to go. I like the idea of feat trees, but if you have to take feats that are useless, it drains the fun away.

[Dasrak]

Azothath wrote:

you might review the iconic wizard Ezren or the published NPC wizards... your 'stock wizard' seems highly impractical and mischaracterized.

There are a lot of spell lines that are feat hungry. Summoning, blasting, and especially any kind of polymorph requires a lot of build considerations. A lot of the published NPC Wizards like to fill their spell preparations with blasting or summoning spells, but without taking the feats that make those spells good. Ezren is particularly bad, and is mechanically one of the most confused iconics with his spell selection and build just being completely mismatched.

But you can absolutely build highly effective Wizards that require zero feat support, and you do it by focusing on spells that are really good without feat support. Stuff like Grease, Create Pit, or Haste are always solid spell selections, and there are more than enough spells to fill a Wizard's spellbook with that don't require feats to be good. I think this is what is being referred to as a "stock" Wizard, that just focuses on using spells that are highly effective and require no feat support to be very good.

[DM_aka_Dudemeister]

I have my players choose a general/racial feat at even levels so they can't stack combat feats out the wazoo, and lead to more build diversity.

[glass]

Yes! One of my regular groups only has two players and a GM, and one of the modifications we make to compensate for having only two PCs is to give (slightly more than) one feat per level. Also gestalt and fairly generous ability scores.