Quote Originally Posted by Eldan View Post
Someone mentioned that feats should be numerical and passive things, and class powers new abilities.

I couldn't disagree more. Feats that are "+2 to damage" or "+3 to a skill" bore me. It's just bigger numbers, it's not anything new.

To me, the difference is that class abilities are only open to one class, while feats are open to everyone. Which means that a lot of things that are feats in D&D should really be class powers: if only fighters or people with turn undead or arcane casters can take a certain feat, make it a class power, not a feat.

A good feat, to me, should give a new ability that is open to every class, and not too tightly linked to an archetype. That's all.
1) Why does a feat need to be something new? Why can't it be something that makes you better at what you do? It's nothing new is not a valid argument in of itself unless that is all you get when you levelup. As long as you are getting class features and powers, it isn't.

2) You assume powers are available to only one class. I'd much rather spells be like they are in 3.5, where there is a lot of overlap between classes. Not a 100% overlap, but some.

3) Coming up with dozens or hundreds of unique non-passive abilities that aren't keyed to a specific class or archtype is ridiculously hard. Just try to come up with a list, see how far you get.