Quote from: Justin Alexander;515762:rolleyes:

Because of the following:

QuoteProvide Flat Bonus to Things Everyone Can Do: Acrobatic, Agile, Alertness, Animal Affinity, Athletic, Deceitful, Deft Hands, Diligent, Endurance, Great Fortitude, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization, Improved Initiative, Investigator, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Magical Aptitude, Mobility, Negotiator, Nimble Fingers, Persuasive, Point Blank Shot, Self-Sufficient, Skill Focus, Stealthy, Toughness, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization

Provide Complex Improvement to Things Everyone Can Do: Blind-Fight, Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Far Shot, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Critical, Improved Disarm, Improved Feint, Improved Grapple, Improved Overrun, Improved Shield Bash, Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Unarmed Strike, Mounted Archery, Mounted Combat, Precise Shot, Rapid Reload, Ride-By Attack, Run, Spirited Charge, Two-Weapon Fighting, Trample

Grant a Class Ability: Armor Proficiency (light/medium/heavy), Weapon Proficiency (exotic/martial/simple), Shield Proficiency, Stunning Fist, Tower Shield Proficiency

Provide Bonus to Class Ability: Augment Summoning, Combat Casting, Extra Turning, Greater Spell Focus, Greater Spell Penetration, Improved Counterspell, Improved Turning, Natural Spell, Spell Focus, Spell Mastery, Spell Penetration

Allow You To Do Something the Rules Normally Prohibit: Cleave, Diehard, Great Cleave, Improved Precise Shot, Quick Shot, Shot on the Run, Spring Attack, Weapon Finesse, Whirlwind Attack

They don't know what they're trying to do.  Feats should either be passive (my preference) or active abilities, not a mix of both.  Combining class features and weird bonuses into feats is a mess.

I never had a real problem with feats, but even with just the basic 3e PHB list, I haven't used probably 80% of them EVER. I see no reason for there to be thousands of the things.

You don't have to be an idiot to design bad feats. If you have feats that give a flat bonus to very common, very important, very measurable things like "hitting and doing damage with attacks," it's hard to design feats which equal their usefulness without being open to crazy optimizing synergies.

3e and 4e both ran off the rails with their feats.

Quote from: Halloween Jack;515823You don't have to be an idiot to design bad feats. If you have feats that give a flat bonus to very common, very important, very measurable things like "hitting and doing damage with attacks," it's hard to design feats which equal their usefulness without being open to crazy optimizing synergies.

3e and 4e both ran off the rails with their feats.

IMO there are a couple of things that made it idiot of design.
Multi-classing
Generic feats

You make 85% of the feats race and/or class specific, you make the generic feats just that, generic that cuts down down on optimization.
You make it far harder/more restrictive to multiclass.

Quote from: B.T.;515771Feats should either be passive (my preference) or active abilities, not a mix of both.

Why?

Do you feel the same way about class abilities?

Quote from: Sommerjon;515846IMO there are a couple of things that made it idiot of design.
Multi-classing
Generic feats

You make 85% of the feats race and/or class specific, you make the generic feats just that, generic that cuts down down on optimization.
You make it far harder/more restrictive to multiclass.

Usually imho race/class specific feats are bad. If its something specific to a class - make it a class feature; give classes more options as to what abilities they can take.
Feats should, I think, be an avenue to customize characters independent of their class. For example alot of the early Forgotten Realms feats were fairly flavourful and interesting - adding customization around regional background and interesting stuff. You had characters that were Educated and could pick up extra Knowledge skills as class skills, or who were "blooded" or had some efreet blood (Bloodline of Fire) and so on. I think these generally added more depth and interest to characters, although sadly they failed to be commonly taken against the backdrop of "+x to damage" feats.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;515885Why?

Do you feel the same way about class abilities?

Yes.  In general, I think class abilities should be active, things that you choose to use, while feats should be passive abilities.  (Alternatively, feats should be active and class features should be passive.  Pick one and then stick with it.)  I think it's bad practice to give active abilities to one character because he picked the right feats while another character lacks them because he decided on Toughness and Lightning Reflexes.

Quote from: B.T.;515941Yes.  In general, I think class abilities should be active, things that you choose to use, while feats should be passive abilities.  (Alternatively, feats should be active and class features should be passive.  Pick one and then stick with it.)  I think it's bad practice to give active abilities to one character because he picked the right feats while another character lacks them because he decided on Toughness and Lightning Reflexes.

Yes. But allow me to repeat myself: Why?

To provide a distinction between the two as a design guide.