Replacing Feats?

[Supplement Four]

Is there a method whereby a character can change out feats? Where he stops using previously picked feats but replaces them with new ones?

I'm just curious. This happens in real life. I was decent at roller skating once, when I was in 6th grade. But, if I put on a pair of skates today, I doubt I'd get far without falling.

So, can a character exchange out his feat choices anywhere in the process of gaming? Would this cost him to do so? XP? Or, would it be free? Or, maybe it's just impossible to do so?

Thoughts?

 

[strategos14]

i've never heard of a rule for that. i think a group could do it as long as everyone agreed on a fair system. one with restrictions so it wouldn't get abused. like xp loss as you said

 

[Supplement Four]

like xp loss as you said

I'm thinking of allowing it, but the cost would be the loss of a character level. Steep cost, but a great gain, too.

That would certainly keep it from being abused. :wink:

 

[Malcadon]

I think remember seeing that in Unearthed Arcana - a book of houserules for v.3.5 D&D, but I'm not sure. This page has the rules from that book - under Variant Rules. If not, just have the player loose some EXP.

 

[Supplement Four]

I asked the same question on another forum. Evidently, in the 3.5 PHB II, there is a rule to change feats.

The quick and dirty of it, I was told, was to allow a player to change one feat every time he levels up. This way, it's fair and balanced, and the character really has to work at it.

So, going from one feat chain to another would be impossible unless it was spread out over a character's career.

I like it.

One could say that the change is allowed every time the character earns a feat instead of a level.

 

[VincentDarlage]

I simply allow it whenever a player asks to do that and if I can't remember him or her (strangely, I have more female players than male ones lately) ever using the feat recently... or if the feat didn't work the way the player thought it did when the player took the feat.

It's a game, and if a feat isn't being used to make the game more fun for the player, then the feat needs replacing for a feat that is more fun. I don't get pedantic about it.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Well Vincent, you're taking the words out of my mouth.

In practice, we've had feats exchanged in situations as:
- the player noticed that he never used or benefits from a previously chosen feat;
- the player has a new idea how to develop his character, but that requires a different feat, for which it would be too late to take now.

Theoretically, if you have that kind of players, you might need to establish safeguards against abuse. Such as taking a feat early that's really good during low levels, and when it's exceeded its usefulness switch it out against one that's good later.
(In D&D, Great Cleave is such an example. In Conan, Great Cleave can remain useful due to the Massive Damage rule.)

For example, in D&D I once created a Cleric for what was supposed to be a one-shot, and I thought What the hell and took Improved Overrun. Then a whole campaign developed from it, and after a while I felt I.O. wasn't really that useful for me, and switched it against Extra Turning. Which iirc was a prereq for the Radiant Servant PrC, about which I had learned only after a few sessions. So that was in fact a combination of both scenarios I described above.

 

[Spectator]

call me an A$$hole, but I have to say that I am of the "caveat Emptor" persuasion.
I really feel that the progression of feats is a calculated risk. Very much what the "real world" is like. just because I don't drink my carrot juice and eat my vitamin A early in life and don't score "Eyes of the cat" at 1st level, I am somewhat leery to give someone that feat at 5th level.

If you and I spend our education in computers, and all of a sudden decide to turn to medicine in our late 30s, I'm not sure why it should be so easy to acquire as when we were younger and had more capacity (feats) to learn it.

If everyone starts chenging their feats, I fear what C-hoof mentioned: Feats which are cool at low levels, being switcched out for more relevant feats at higher levels.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Clovenhoof]

It's also a question of how well the player knows the system. If they are a newbie (to the system, setting or even class), they can't possibly know all the workings and synergies, and are sometimes also misled by cool-sounding feat names - as Vincent also has mentioned. In such a case (although I usually offer assistance when someone makes a new char) I am more than happy to allow switching out a poor feat choice. The player's desire to do so is also a good sign that he's involved in the game, and that should be supported.

If on the other hand the player is a veteran, he normally should know better - and it must be suspected that he does, and is trying to switch out a feat that's past it's Best Before date, and has planned to do so all along.

Then again, it's another story if an experienced player took a feat that he considered effective in previous games, but then realizes it is for some reason a poor choice in the current setting / campaign.

And another reason, if the feat has its place and normally would be useful -- if the GM applied all rules with equal consequence. For instance, in the last Conan D20 game where I was a player, the GM never bothered about vision modifiers and illumination penalties, so my Eyes of the Cat feat was useless. I don't remember if I switched it out eventually, though.

 

[VincentDarlage]

call me an A$$hole, but I have to say that I am of the "caveat Emptor" persuasion.

If you and I spend our education in computers, and all of a sudden decide to turn to medicine in our late 30s, I'm not sure why it should be so easy to acquire as when we were younger and had more capacity (feats) to learn it.

Well, to me it is just a game, not a simulation of real life. If something seems fun, why not try it?

If everyone starts chenging their feats, I fear what C-hoof mentioned: Feats which are cool at low levels, being switcched out for more relevant feats at higher levels.

I've never had that happen... not even once... since feats were introduced in DnD 3.0. The few players who have taken advantage of my offer are usually embarrassed or sheepish about asking. It doesn't happen often, and it is almost always newbies. I am all about keeping the newbies entertained and coming to the games and having fun. So what if a never-used or misunderstood feat gets swapped out?

Usually what happens is that the newbie complains to one or more of the more experienced players about the feat, and the experienced ones just tell them to ask me if they can change it. No one in the group minds.

 

[Supplement Four]

call me an A$$hole, but I have to say that I am of the "caveat Emptor" persuasion.
I really feel that the progression of feats is a calculated risk. Very much what the "real world" is like. just because I don't drink my carrot juice and eat my vitamin A early in life and don't score "Eyes of the cat" at 1st level, I am somewhat leery to give someone that feat at 5th level.

Back in the day, I'd side with you. Now, I'm a little more relaxed, but not as easy as Vincent (although I see his point).

I'd say I'm in the middle. I'm going to make an option for Feat retraining, but I'm not going to make it easy. I think the once per level, or once per earned Feat, is a good choice. That way, there won't be any radical character rebuilds. A player can work towards a rebuild, but it will take him the life of his character to completely rebuild.

Which means: Initial choice is still very important, but not 100% written in stone.

It's more like, written in wood.