Sean K Reynolds: Feat Point System: Does it work?(DND, 3.5E)

[Leress]

So can you spend feat points whenever you have them, and save them up?

Feat Points
Each time a character gains a feat, she instead gets 10 feat points which she can use to purchase feats. Characters must still meet all prerequisites as normal. Unspent feat points carry over from level to level, but a character can only purchase feats with feat points at the times in her adventuring career when she could normally select a feat, even if she has extra feat points left over (for example, a character with 6 feat points left over from character level 3 could not spend them until level 6--the next level at which she gains a feat) .

They carry over, but it just needless accounting that makes casters even more powerful.

Feat Point Debt
At 1st level, and 1st level only, a character is allowed to overspend her feat points by selecting one or more feats with a cost of 11 or more feat points. The extra cost of these feats is carried over until the next time she gains feat points of the appropriate type. She can go into "feat point debt" up to 3 points. Feat point debt is tracked separately by type of feat point (typeless, fighter, wizard, etc.) .The feat point debt system allows characters using it to maintain parity with characters who don't (characters using the standard rules could sometimes end up with several strong feats at 1st level, penalizing the feat-point character) .

This is hilarious.

[fectin]

I think it makes more sense if your entire adventuring career is below level 3. Everything seems to make sense then.

[RobbyPants]

I suppose. Below level 3, most casters won't see much use out of core metamagic feats.

[Aharon]

Yes, and the Saving Throw Boosters and even Weapon Focus become marginally useful. I thought he must have had this in mind, at first - but he doesn't say so and makes rules for how you gain feats at later levels. So he apparently thinks his point system makes sense from lvl 1 to 20.

[Josh_Kablack]

I kinda see SKR's general idea here, but it's abundantly clear that he never showed this to anyone outside his own game group (who seemingly only plays modules, mostly at the low levels)


My starting build under these assumptions would be something akin to:

Human Diviner.

Level 1: Light Armor Prof + Shield Prof +Toughness+Tower Shield Proficiency (1 point of feat debt)
Spells: Feather Fall, True Strike, + noncombat stuff like Mount, Comprehend Languages, Identify, etc

Level 3: Still Spell and do you really even care from here? You've got mithral chain shirt by now, so in combat either you risk the 10% ASF with the shield slung or you're burning 2nd level slots on stilled Color Sprays with the shield readied.

[fectin]

Toughness is great if you're a first level wizard forever, and if you can only use metamagic on cantrips, it's a lot less good. Not that I advocate this, it just makes more sense then.

Actually though, this sort of approach could really make feat chains more reasonable. Just scale the costs way down, especially for prereqs. Heck, at 1-2 points, even toughness might be okay.

[RobbyPants]

I noticed he had a link to his message boards to discuss the point costs, but it seems to redirect me to something else entirely.

[hogarth]

I noticed he had a link to his message boards to discuss the point costs, but it seems to redirect me to something else entirely.

I think he shut down the message boards on his web site years ago. There used to be lots more stuff on that site.

[RelentlessImp]

...This makes me want to core my own brain like an apple. What the hell.

It's this one that stood out to me -

1. Something that gives you an extra attack better than an equivalent feat that doesn't.Two-Weapon Fighting is better than Weapon Focus because TWF gives you one more opportunity to use Weapon Focus (and Power Attack, and Weapon Specialization, and Cleave, and Improved Critical, and Improved Disarm...) .

- that makes me think Sean K Reynolds has officially left the realm of sanity and went howling into the darkness to join his proto-brethren in their primordial stew.

[RobbyPants]

I suppose he's right if you want to eat an additional penalty to hit or blow a feat on Oversized TWF.

[Maxus]

Anyway, update how this goes Ikeren. If the DM has any questions/issues about what the Den sees wrong with this feat point system, we'll gladly answer them.

Whether he likes the answers is entirely up to him, of course.

[Prak]

whether he likes the form of the message is another thing, too...

[Ikeren]

Uh, I just carefully summarized the arguments politely for his benefit. I'm pretty sure he's not using it, or if he's using it, there will be massive revisions. To the tune of making caster stuff 10-12 points, and melee stuff 6-10 points, rather than the other way around.

[TheFlatline]

Yeah the list generally seemed like a way to buff the sh*t out of spell casters.

[Prak]

To be fair, the concept is interesting. I loved when a friend used some BESMd20 stuff with D&D and I could pick up feats with character points off level, for some concepts, buying extra feats is a very good thing.

On the other hand, most feats could just as easily be picked up by allowing characters to pay someone to give them special training. If someone really wants Weapon Focus, they should be able to go to a combat trainer, or an off duty guard, or whatever, hand him 50-100g, and get the feat at the end of a training montage that covers about a week.

[Leress]

On the other hand, most feats could just as easily be picked up by allowing characters to pay someone to give them special training. If someone really wants Weapon Focus, they should be able to go to a combat trainer, or an off duty guard, or whatever, hand him 50-100g, and get the feat at the end of a training montage that covers about a week.

That really just shows how shitty the feat is. It shouldn't even be a feat if it is that easy to obtain.

[Prak]

It was an easy example. Two Weapon Fighting should be attainable through paying a teacher too. It's a lot better, so it'd cost more, but I'm saying you should be able to obtain pretty much any of the feats by handing someone some money and spending some down time. Even heritage feats, like Devil's Aura, you should be able to go to some dude dressed in black and red, hand him 150g, and he'll bath you in virgin and infant blood every day for a week, or whatever, and at the end, you're creepy because of a palpable feeling of hell around your person.

[TheWorid]

That's the kind of in-universe logic that makes perfect sense, but is tricky for a game because allowing characters to pick up any amount of character upgrades just by paying for them is easily broken. That's why levels and character points exist. I'm not saying I don't like the idea, just that I'm not sure how to make it work in a multiplayer RPG.

I suppose it can work with a wealth by level system, but why would you want to use wealth by level?

[hogarth]

It was an easy example. Two Weapon Fighting should be attainable through paying a teacher too. It's a lot better, so it'd cost more, but I'm saying you should be able to obtain pretty much any of the feats by handing someone some money and spending some down time.

I would call that training period "taking a level of fighter", though. That's probably not what you're looking for.

[Prak]

That's the kind of in-universe logic that makes perfect sense, but is tricky for a game because allowing characters to pick up any amount of character upgrades just by paying for them is easily broken. That's why levels and character points exist. I'm not saying I don't like the idea, just that I'm not sure how to make it work in a multiplayer RPG.

I suppose it can work with a wealth by level system, but why would you want to use wealth by level?

In D&D, at least non-tome D&D, wealth is part of character power. In a game where that's not necessarily true, maybe there's only a small number of feats you can do that with.

Though with FC1 and spellcasting prices, you can essentially do it anyway.