Everyone Gets A Free Feat At 1st... Including V. Human

[Blackbando]

Title says pretty much all. I'm hosting a new campaign on Fridays, beginning at 1st level, and everyone is allowed a free feat at 1st level. However, Variant Humans are still keeping their free feat trait, meaning they get 2 at 1st level.

Thoughts on this? I'm not too worried about the balance (I'm aware of how crazy **** like PAM + GWM at 1st level can get), but I'm curious to the community's consensus on the matter.

[Goblin Slayer]

ain't that a pathfinder thing? the level one feat?

[nickl_2000]

Title says pretty much all. I'm hosting a new campaign on Fridays, beginning at 1st level, and everyone is allowed a free feat at 1st level. However, Variant Humans are still keeping their free feat trait, meaning they get 2 at 1st level.

Thoughts on this? I'm not too worried about the balance (I'm aware of how crazy **** like PAM + GWM at 1st level can get), but I'm curious to the community's consensus on the matter.

Yes it will make people a lot more powerful if you don't limit it, but I like the concept. My opinion, do it but limit the feats that are available. Remove the big ones (PAM, GWM, Sentinel, XBow Expert, SS, Elven Accuracy, Warcaster, and Lucky). This makes people take more flavour feats.


One the other hand you can allow it and adjust the monster encounters to make things harder on them

[Xihirli]

I tend to start games off by giving everyone a Feat and excluding variant human - humans get an extra skill.

But if you’re not worried about balance go for it. As long as no one steps on each other’s toes it could go well.

[strangebloke]

I do this.

I also give my players pretty good stats to start with.

It makes them strong, but also let's them get their character concept online more quickly and be less stressed about character optimisation.

If you start with gwm and 18 strength at level one you're more likely to Branch out a bit by level 4-8.

That's the idea, anyway.

[Spiritchaser]

I did this once. I liked how it let the paladin take observant and the UA perceptive feat to make her character good at what she wanted.

The warlock (hexblade, eventually a bladelock) used it to become powerful and inflict pain on those who opposed him... with GWM/PAM. The wizard (eventually a bladesinger) chose less optimally and felt a bit meh in comparison until level 5 when 3rd level wizard spells became relevant.

It required a bit of adjustment, the party WAS very strong, but nothing crazy.

[Theodoxus]

It's fine. I modded Zman's E10 rules, expanding them to full 20 levels, added a ton of new feats, split all feats into half feats and removed the ASI portion.

A big change I really liked was making multiclassing feat based. It lets you start out as dual-classed if you want to use your 1st level feat on it, but if you limit a second class to 6 levels, it keeps it from getting out of hand.

I've run 3 games now using these rules. Some players like the MC, others like to stock up on class modifying feats.

[CTurbo]

Wait so the variant human gets 2 feats to start then?

I do like starting with a free feat. A lot of the time, I let each character start with a free feat but we random roll it instead of letting the player choose. The player then incorporates it into their background. If it ends up being something that the character already has, or doesn't qualify for, they get to reroll. Like Fighter getting Weapon Master or Wizard getting Heavy Armor Mastery.

The players usually love it as they get something random but really helpful more times than not.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I like this idea a lot! I also like the idea of rolling randomly for the feats as mentioned above. You don't need to do that, but I think it's a fun concept. In general I think feats make the game much more fun. I've rarely played games without them, and I always encourage them when I DM. It makes the characters more interesting from my perspective, whether players use them to optimize or to have a more specific RP purpose. Good on you for not being afraid to experiment and try things that other people consider "broken." Game breaking is a relative concept anyway. You kind of control whether or not something is broken as the DM. You can always make enemies more lethal or give them some feats of their own, which in turn makes the party approach combat more tentatively and with more creative solutions.

[Lombra]

Maybe human's base one should be limited to a racial feat from xanathar's, but if your table isn't toxic there will be no problems.

[MephitBlue]

Our DM did a variation of this in one of the games I play in. He didn't give everyone a free feat at level 1, but he did allow us to take both an ASI and a feat at level 4 and 8.

he runs a horror based campaign that has a lot of close to deadly battles, so while the free feats make us more powerful, he also hits us with real powerful enemies as well. Three of our characters would be ex-characters if it wasn't for Revivify and Greater Restoration.

[Blackbando]

Wait so the variant human gets 2 feats to start then?

Yes. I mostly wanted to see people's thoughts on that part in specific, compared to the free feat at 1st in general, but it is still nice to see how the community feels about the subject as a whole.

[GlenSmash!]

I do this.

I also give my players pretty good stats to start with.

It makes them strong, but also let's them get their character concept online more quickly and be less stressed about character optimisation.

If you start with gwm and 18 strength at level one you're more likely to Branch out a bit by level 4-8.

That's the idea, anyway.

I like it, but I also let my players gain feats over downtime. If your prepared to handle the extra power it's not that big a deal. Oh I'm also stingy on magic items so that keeps some things in check.

Maybe human's base one should be limited to a racial feat from xanathar's, but if your table isn't toxic there will be no problems.

A free racial feat would be pretty flavorful.

[Sariel Vailo]

If i could take a feat at one it would be prodigy i want to be a good performer and this helps.

[CTurbo]

Yes. I mostly wanted to see people's thoughts on that part in specific, compared to the free feat at 1st in general, but it is still nice to see how the community feels about the subject as a whole.

2 feats to start is pushing it IMO. I think if I was going to allow every race to start with a free feat, Variant Human wouldn't exist.

[RazDelacroix]

I am one of those DMs who will do this at the table. Usually when I know the players well-ish.

[MrWesson22]

I made my players use standard array but gave them a free racial feat from Xanathar's or UA skill feat. For non-phb races, I found homebrew racial feats that were balanced evenly with the others. They seem to like it.

[McSkrag]

I like this idea.

I think this would help players who are new to D&D feel more invested in their characters since they will be a bit more powerful.

Personally, I would ask players to justify the feat in their character's backstory and limit the available feats for non-variant humans so I don't have a whole table of Lucky Magic Initiates.

[CTurbo]

I guess 2 feats aren't too bad if one of them has to be a skill feat.

I like home brewing ways to make characters more interesting/powerful. Most players seem to prefer this too.

Last campaign I let every player start level 1 with an uncommon magic item as well as a free random feat.

[Jerrykhor]

My table does this too. 1 player used it to for GMW+Fel handed (v.human), 1 PAM, 1 Warcaster, 1 half feat (+1 Strength) can't remember which one. Myself, i took Actor and Dual Wielder.

I like feats, so even when I DM, i let my players take a free feat.

[sambojin]

A nice way of doing this is just making that free feat be Magical Initiate. It gives plenty of options to flavour a character, but it doesn't end up too powerful.

Let them refluff the spell and cantrips as non-magical if you'd like, or into something that fits their character better description-wise. But it still gives a nice 1/day ability/spell and some on-call cantrip goodness, without turning them all into combat monsters or initiative devils or concentration behemoths too early. It also solves the double feated v.human problem.

Still plenty of options and versatility, but not nearly what's available from any of the "Big Feats". Can give a character more flavour, more sustain on resources, or just another dimension of "what they can do", and tends to stop people feeling that they *must* multiclass for their character concept or to have enough fun options on the more simplistic character sub/classes.

[sambojin]

It also sort of strengthens different character types as well. Bless *is* your extra anti-armour rage for the day as a Barb, and a group battlecry one at that. Goodberry *is* you healing and providing for the poor as a Cleric (with no overhealing problems). Shield and some cantrips (or Hex) *is* your knightly resolve or mystical knowledge as a Pally or EK. Longstrider *is* a Monk's long-term burst of ki-speed. Guidance or Find Familiar *is* your incredible skillset or advantage generator for a Rogue.

So it works to round out characters, or to enhance them, without it getting silly.

[Davrix]

This is a bad idea on the idea that any human is going to have a huge leap still on other players. By lv 4 they can focus purly on status bumps sense they will probably have gotten the 2 feats they would of wanted. Leaving a power gap between them and players that still might want another feat at this point for a build.

In short its up to you but I hate the human variant rule for this specific reason. It gives them a leg up over any other class and for many builds it becomes a mandatory choice thus removing the idea of playing another race.

My solution has always been to award everyone one or two feats based on the setting I'm running. For example in a new game I start in a few months everyone will be getting toughness and Magic initiate at lv 1 because the world is highly saturated in magical energy and life is dangerous so a more hearty folk have arisen in this world each one having slight magical gifts imbued into them by the worlds magic.

[2D6GREATAXE]

My group does this.

Free feat at level 4, it makes spending that first ASI make you feel a little more special.

We don't over abuse the GWM, PAM, in our group so its not an issue.

I've just designed a Dark ELF Hex blade who taken prodigy and silver tonged at level 4.


:)

[sambojin]

I actually like the feat + ASI at 4th lvl idea. Sounds like a great way for characters to really come into their own, nice and early, especially on top of the 3rd lvl archetype choice.


But if you're going to do it at 1st, just give them Magical Initiate. And maybe limit the Minor Illusion cantrip, because otherwise you'll be rolling to check for them way too often (even if it is a very cool cantrip, having 4-5 copies of it in a party gets silly).

There's still tonnes of options with MI, some of them quite powerful, or really good for how a player envisions their character. But it caps the can of worms available with one easy sentence. "You all get MI for free, so go wild."

No-one complains about free magic, and it allows the less powerful races to still be pretty awesome for stuff as well. It's the perfect playing field leveller. No-one can complain that they feel too weak or useless either, because they've always got at least some niche use available in a party from the word go, if they want it.

[Blackbando]

But if you're going to do it at 1st, just give them Magical Initiate. And maybe limit the Minor Illusion cantrip, because otherwise you'll be rolling to check for them way too often (even if it is a very cool cantrip, having 4-5 copies of it in a party gets silly).

I like this idea, and will be sure to implement it in my next campaign that's high magic. Although, the Minor Illusion problem I cannot sympathize with; I don't actually see it used a lot in my games, even with casters. And they're players that actually enjoy roleplaying, too, so it isn't just combat munchkins that see fun illusions as pointless.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I do this in my games under the condition that Vhuman's additional feat must be Resilient Con (or their choice if their class is already proficient in con saves). My players like it, one of the players took the idea into the game he's DMing that I'm playing in and I like it. It's worth noting that out of the 10 characters made using this method so far, mine is the only Vhuman in the bunch.

I came up with the idea before Xanathar's was printed, I would probably change it now to also allow Prodigy as their free feat.

It's obviously a bit above the curve as far as power levels go, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

[Phoenix042]

I tend to start games off by giving everyone a Feat and excluding variant human - humans get an extra skill.

But if you’re not worried about balance go for it. As long as no one steps on each other’s toes it could go well.

This is exactly what I've decided to do from now on.

I try to build characters by first imagining a concept, then picking features, race, class, etc to fit. I'm sick of V. Human being the best pick for everything, but everyone at my tables likes choosing a feat at 1st, so we just do it that way. Everyone gets a feat, no V. Human allowed, and humans get a bonus skill because, I mean, come on.

[ProsecutorGodot]

This is exactly what I've decided to do from now on.

I try to build characters by first imagining a concept, then picking features, race, class, etc to fit. I'm sick of V. Human being the best pick for everything, but everyone at my tables likes choosing a feat at 1st, so we just do it that way. Everyone gets a feat, no V. Human allowed, and humans get a bonus skill because, I mean, come on.

Vhuman will never be the best pick for a CHA based class, that honor goes to Half-Elf.

[Temperjoke]

I wouldn't mind doing this now that there are racial feats, given that they can tie in nicely with a character's origins/past, but I'd be more hesitant to open this to all feats. It'd be really easy for people to powergame a little much and create problems.