Only four feats?

So characters only get four feats?  That seems off on a lot of levels.  It makes me think that the characters will not be very different from one another even at higher levels.  Does anyone else agree?
Your major variation will be in your ability scores and skills, and while there will be less total combinations of abilities than in 3E or 4E, each of those differences should feel more meaningful.

Consider that prior to 3E there were zero feats, and prior to 2E there were no skills either. With just the options given in 5E, it's really more than enough to build sufficiently distinct characters.

The metagame is not the game.

5e feats seem way better than 3e.  They are rougly half way between 4e feats and 4e powers.  Isuspect that higher level feats will be more like paragon path/prestige class powers with the option to forego them and take normal feats instead.
And we've been told that feats are changing at some point. There will no longer be a universal progression for them. Instead, you gain feats at different rates depending on your class, and any time you would gain a feat you can instead increase an ability score by 1. This will also replace the current +1 to two ability scores every 4 levels thing, and feats will be made more powerful, allegedly to the point where the feat will be an appealing option next to the ability score increase.

Under this model, feats are optional at an individual level. Instead of a group having to decide to ban or allow feats, each player can take as many or as few feats as they want without worrying about it making them too much more or less powerful, because the feats will be equal to the +1. Again, allegedly. We won't know if they can really pull it off or not until we see the implementation.

No word yet on when we'll get to see and play test these changes, but that's what they said they are planning to do with feats eventually.
This will also replace the current +1 to two ability scores every 4 levels thing,

At least from the initial statement, there was nothing to indicate that abilities from feats would entirely replace those that came every four levels. It's entirely possible that the standard ability advancement would always be in place, which you could then supplement with feat points to let you cap faster.

The metagame is not the game.

I think it is safe to assume that something will be added after level 9...
I think it is safe to assume that something will be added after level 9...



duh, ya think?

This whole thread is based on some false assumptions. 
Its entire premise is faulty. As the number of feats per character increases to approach the number of available feats for that class, you'll see LESS variety between characters, not more.
If that's the case then playing without feats would make all characters the same.    


They've said that prestige classes are going to be done via feats now, so maybe that's what they're planning on filling the void after 9th level.
Mearls has said that everything in the game will be offered via feats.  

We won't really know until the next full playtest package.   




 


My character will always be different, even if his sheet looks identical to another one at the table.

ROLE-PLAYER EXTRAORDINAIRE
My character will always be different, even if his sheet looks identical to another one at the table.

ROLE-PLAYER EXTRAORDINAIRE



Thank you!
Its entire premise is faulty. As the number of feats per character increases to approach the number of available feats for that class, you'll see LESS variety between characters, not more.

That's only true once you pass the mark where characters get a number of feats greater than half of the number of feats available. Since we're not remotely close to that, I don't think anybody's too worried about it. The thread is called "Only four feats?", not "Why not thirty feats?"

Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
My character will always be different, even if his sheet looks identical to another one at the table.

ROLE-PLAYER EXTRAORDINAIRE



Thank you!



You're welcome!

*I begin to curtsey, though my nervousness takes over as I see a half-orc giving me the stink eye. My legs begin to wobble and I fall over, tumbling down the hillside. OH NO, I WENT OFF THE CLIFF. Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh.....*
Let's go retro!

Level 4 human fighter, exactly the same mechanically as any other level 4 human fighter other than ability scores (which unless rolled for, will likely be extremely similar)!

Huzzah 2e!

Down with that dirty "several different mechanical options with every class" stuff, it's too complicated.

Unless you're talking about magic-users!

Supporting an edition you like does not make you an edition warrior. Demanding that everybody else support your edition makes you an edition warrior.

Why do I like 13th Age? Because I like D&D: http://magbonch.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/first-impressions-13th-age/

AzoriusGuildmage- "I think that you simply spent so long playing it, especially in your formative years with the hobby, that you've long since rationalized or houseruled away its oddities, and set it in your mind as the standard for what is and isn't reasonable in an rpg."

Let's go retro!

Level 4 human fighter, exactly the same mechanically as any other level 4 human fighter other than ability scores (which unless rolled for, will likely be extremely similar)!

Huzzah 2e!

Down with that dirty "several different mechanical options with every class" stuff, it's too complicated.

Unless you're talking about magic-users!



Yea, I can only pray they don't go this route, or at least have it so it's not mandatory.

I do think they are changing feats and providing more options for 1st thru 20th level so that there is more variation from character to character (mechanically speaking). Time will tell.
Let's go retro!

Level 4 human fighter, exactly the same mechanically as any other level 4 human fighter other than ability scores (which unless rolled for, will likely be extremely similar)!

Huzzah 2e!

Down with that dirty "several different mechanical options with every class" stuff, it's too complicated.

Unless you're talking about magic-users!

If I can have 18 00 strength I am totally in.  Next needs to take a look at the stats and saves from 2e and make them interesting again.  Innocent
i wont use feats in my games so there can be 21,000 or 4 and its all the same to me.
i wont use feats in my games so there can be 21,000 or 4 and its all the same to me.

Which is great. Assuming 5e is even worth playing to me, I'd like it if there was actual customization and uniqueness to characters beyond "this one has blonde hair, blue eyes and likes smurfs, this one has black hair and brown eyes and likes trolls".

Supporting an edition you like does not make you an edition warrior. Demanding that everybody else support your edition makes you an edition warrior.

Why do I like 13th Age? Because I like D&D: http://magbonch.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/first-impressions-13th-age/

AzoriusGuildmage- "I think that you simply spent so long playing it, especially in your formative years with the hobby, that you've long since rationalized or houseruled away its oddities, and set it in your mind as the standard for what is and isn't reasonable in an rpg."

I'd like it if there was actual customization and uniqueness to characters beyond "this one has blonde hair,blue eyes and likes smurfs,this one has black hair and brown eyes and likes trolls".

We call that part you're objecting to "role-playing."
5e feats seem way better than 3e.



  You mean aside from the majority of them which are slight variants on 3E feats?  Like "Interposing Shield", which is great at level 1, but becomes total garbage at higher levels when monsters get multi-attack?  Or "Climb Sheer Surfaces", which doesn't actually let you climb sheer surfaces?  Or "Charge" which is just the old charge action, but now you have to spend a feat on it.  Yeah, great feats they got there.

@mikemearls don't quite understand the difference

I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down. - Eric Cartman

Enough chitchat!  Time is candy! - Pinky Pie

I'd like it if there was actual customization and uniqueness to characters beyond "this one has blonde hair,blue eyes and likes smurfs,this one has black hair and brown eyes and likes trolls".

We call that part you're objecting to "role-playing."

Which is nothing I would pay WotC for. I pay them for the mechanics to make each fighter different from the next instead of having them being 99% equal on the sheets and only  different through roleplaying.

Which is nothing I would pay WotC for. I pay them for the mechanics to make each fighter different from the next...

If you think it's mechanics that differentiate two characters...then yeah, my point stands. This new edition can't come fast enough. People seem to have forgotten what an Rpg is.
Which is nothing I would pay WotC for. I pay them for the mechanics to make each fighter different from the next...

If you think it's mechanics that differentiate two characters...then yeah, my point stands. This new edition can't come fast enough. People seem to have forgotten what an Rpg is.



Mechanics -can- help differentiate between characters, even by themselves.  So can roleplay.  For evidence of the former, consider that you've accepted since the 70's that wizards have a spell progression and warriors do not.  Mechanics that differentiate them.

Likewise, roleplay makes for a staggering amount of customization.  We both already know this.  Just having the exact same set of mechanics doesn't make any two characters alike unless one chooses for them to be alike.

However, seeing that customization is informed by -both- mechanics -and- roleplaying, offering ideas and options for both is a no-brainer.  Why use one axis when two is superior? 

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."

You are correct (and cooler headed than I) anjelika. I was objecting to the perceived opinion that characters are only, or even primarily, distinguished mechanically. The former has not *quite* been forwarded, though the latter is perilously close to comments on this thread and elsewhere. I don't want to lose sight of what distinguishes this game from everything that went before it, and from the CRPGs which followed. That's where the brand went astray.
You are correct (and cooler headed than I) anjelika. I was objecting to the perceived opinion that characters are only, or even primarily, distinguished mechanically. The former has not *quite* been forwarded, though the latter is perilously close to comments on this thread and elsewhere. I don't want to lose sight of what distinguishes this game from everything that went before it, and from the CRPGs which followed. That's where the brand went astray.

Apparently you misunderstood me.

I don't need rules to roleplay. I do need rules to allow for adjudication and the mechanical die rolling aspect of the game (the one that differentiates the RPGs from the RP/improvised acting sessions).

I would like that second half to allow for fighters that use shields and swords; spears; bows and arrows; large two handed axes; pure pugalism.

I'd like for that allowance to be mechanical, not a figment, literally, of my imagination.

Supporting an edition you like does not make you an edition warrior. Demanding that everybody else support your edition makes you an edition warrior.

Why do I like 13th Age? Because I like D&D: http://magbonch.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/first-impressions-13th-age/

AzoriusGuildmage- "I think that you simply spent so long playing it, especially in your formative years with the hobby, that you've long since rationalized or houseruled away its oddities, and set it in your mind as the standard for what is and isn't reasonable in an rpg."

5ths feats are considered experimental because some of those feats will be made into class features for some characters. Also, feats scale poorly because 5th scales very poorly. The only thing you can do is to retrain often.
5e feats seem way better than 3e.



  You mean aside from the majority of them which are slight variants on 3E feats?  Like "Interposing Shield", which is great at level 1, but becomes total garbage at higher levels when monsters get multi-attack?  Or "Climb Sheer Surfaces", which doesn't actually let you climb sheer surfaces?  Or "Charge" which is just the old charge action, but now you have to spend a feat on it.  Yeah, great feats they got there.

Interposing Shield doesn't become "total garbage" at higher levels. If you're blocking a monster attack, it's doing its job. Monsters at higher levels deal more damage...it's harder to block all the damage.

That said, the Fighter in our group has the feat that gives him an extra reaction. I ruled that he can use that extra reaction for anything that uses a reaction...not just to make AoO. It seems to work just fine.

Likewise, the Monk in our group has Climb Sheer Surfaces. I treat this as the Monk having a Climb speed.

Yes, I had to house rule the feats to make them work for our game...but the fact that the feats are more useful than the numerical bonuses of old is what makes them way better. They can always tweak the effectiveness of the feats at higher levels later on. Our group loves that the new feat selection gives your character options instead of static bonuses.

Please introduce yourself to the new D&D 5e forums in this very friendly thread started by Pukunui!

 

Make 5e Saving Throws better using Ramzour's Six Ability Save System!

 

Lost Mine of Phandelver: || Problems and Ideas with the adventure ||  Finding the Ghost of Neverwinter Wood ||

Giving classes iconic abilities that don't break the game: Ramzour's Class Defining Ability system.

Rules for a simple non-XP based leveling up system, using the Proficiency Bonus

 

So characters only get four feats?  That seems off on a lot of levels.  It makes me think that the characters will not be very different from one another even at higher levels.  Does anyone else agree?

Back to the OP's initial question....

I think the main reason why you only see 4 Feats is because a lot of the character customization will come from within the class itself. In previous editions (4e excepting), each class was essentially identical. There weren't any ways to customize your class, so they added things like kits and feats and skills, etc etc.

But that customization has moved within the class now. Let's use the Fighter as an example. By taking different Fighter options you can easily become a Tank or an Archer or a Slayer or even a pseudo-Warlord. You can do the same customization with the other classes.

Brief Aside: Currently the Wizard customization options are a little underwhelming...and the Barbarian customization is non-existant. I expect we'll see more robust options in future packets.

Anyway, by moving those things into the class, your characters now have all the tools they need to be a Fighter or a Rogue or a Paladin from the class itself. You are now free to spend your feats on things to augment your character as you see fit. You can choose feats that increase your character mechanically...or go totally off-the-wall and chose odd combinations for unique characters. Why not give the Barbarian the Arcane Dabbler feat? Or the Rogue the Magical Rejuvenation feat?

Either way, your base character is already good as a member of his class without feats.

Please introduce yourself to the new D&D 5e forums in this very friendly thread started by Pukunui!

 

Make 5e Saving Throws better using Ramzour's Six Ability Save System!

 

Lost Mine of Phandelver: || Problems and Ideas with the adventure ||  Finding the Ghost of Neverwinter Wood ||

Giving classes iconic abilities that don't break the game: Ramzour's Class Defining Ability system.

Rules for a simple non-XP based leveling up system, using the Proficiency Bonus

 

It looks like Feats are completely optional (which pleases me), and you get a base 6, or an Ability Score increase if not interested.