[Your View] Feat Slots

[wowj 9747]

Would you like a system that limits the amount of feats one may have to a certain limit, with a system similar to that magic slots, however with each additional feat slot taking up a magic slot. [ Meaning you could have 8 feats, but no magic, or one magic, and many feats! Limitless potential! ]

The idea behind this change would be that people would actually be held to an architype, rather than everyone being a jack-of-all-trades!

EVENT-TEAM SPONSORED.

[Lenny 1615]

i clicked no to be different

[Helmet 1454]

I like the idea of feat slots.
So long as it ACTUALLY lets players commit to a non-magic using existence, I have 0 issue with this. It also solves the problem of 10000 old elves that know every feat despite not using them or having it impact their character irply.

A question though is should certain FAs cost more to use than others? And where is the limit before you start dipping in your MAs begin?
I like Tawkin as much as the next guy, but it does basically makes you immortal so long as you don't irply die within 3 weeks 3 times, which is almost never happening.

[EDIT] Just because its a special case, I wanted to rant a little about Tawkin.

Spoiler

Tawkin can actually pull power and potential AWAY from the weirder but more interesting magics that extend your lives at a terrible cost. see: Necromancy, Automaton Crafting, Mysticism(?), Vampirism, etc.

In this setting if someone is looking purely to extend their lifespan, they wouldn't logically consider any of these darker alternatives to extend their lives because Tawkin not only cheats death, it also gives you 2 mutations that give you an edge in CRP and costs 0 magic slots. If they are looking to extend their lives or someone elses, it makes them look stupid for taking something like the Necromancy route, like taking the stairs instead of the elevator in a building with the only intention to go up some floors.
Tawkin Klones are just a direct upgrade from the base descendant anyways, nothing to really sugarcoat there.

If extending someones life is as easy as that, something thats normally quite difficult or costly to do compared to other methods, why bother committing to one of those more specific magics/fa/cas?

 

Edited January 15, 2025 by SlitheryC1

[NotEvilAtAll 10906]

2 minutes ago, SlitheryC1 said:

so long as it ACTUALLY lets players commit to a non-magic using existence, I have 0 issue with this.

i'm pretty sure most LOTCers are non-magic even with how things are currently

[xo31 3979]

8 bad faith feat stackers doesnt mean everyone has to suffer

 

go ahead cancel me

Another edit: id say just make more things incompatible. Void and alchemy incompatible or something or other bleheheheheheh

[Helmet 1454]

28 minutes ago, NotEvilAtAll said:

i'm pretty sure most LOTCers are non-magic even with how things are currently

True, buuuuut quite a few LOTCers that have magic also have alchemy or other feats that do not involve their own themes. And why wouldn't they? It's practically free potions/golems, after all.
Its more of a matter of stacking MAs and FAs together and becoming the irp intellectual equivalent to a swiss army knife, though to call this a "problem" from a neutral perspective is debatable. As someone who is very biased on this, I'm just not a fan lol

Edited January 15, 2025 by SlitheryC1

[AndrewTech 3329]

Honestly, I'm not necessarily opposed but I also don't really like the idea of regulating what someone can learn IRP. Magic slots are a little bit different because they encompass supernatural powers and are limited by physical constraints. But you can't exactly limit what someone can learn when there's no IRP reason other than "oh you fall out of practice if you don't use it enough," which is a bit of a dangerous slippery slope to go down.

 

Another concern of mine is that if we start limiting feat slots, then people are only going to want to learn the popular feats. If given the choice for instance, most people will always choose kloning over sorvian crafting. Thus, some less useful or niche feats may risk going extinct. So if it's going to be done, I'd up the free FA limit to 4 or 5 slots so there's a hard cap on stacking FAs but also to prevent some of these less used feats from simply not being pursued or diffused.

 

I'd also suggest the compromise of making certain feats exempt from the limit if they're purely knowledge based, are simply magic add-ons (like voidal eminence, artificery, etc), or are relatively minor. Maybe create a category to differentiate between "minor" and "major" feats?

 

 

[Metamancy 1766]

i like this idea

[Karina 1882]

yes

[wowj 9747]

3 minutes ago, AndrewTech said:

Another concern of mine is that if we start limiting feat slots, then people are only going to want to learn the popular feats. If given the choice for instance, most people will always choosing kloning over sorvian crafting. Thus, some less useful or niche feats may risk going extinct. So if it's going to be done, I'd up the FA limit to 4 or 5 slots so there's a hard cap on stacking FAs but also to prevent some of these less used feats from simply not being pursued or diffused.

The number [3] I listed was mostly just a placeholder number, this isn't an ST sponsored thing or whatever I just wanted peoples thoughts on it cause I think feat limits is an actually good idea, yeah people choosing tawkin over sorvian for example would be an issue, but tawkin in of itself is another problem, tawkin lost its entire personality, its meant to be.. EVIL! 

There are groups out there that do like these niche FAs such as Sorvians, there was an entire cult of personality in Norland early map that hated the Pale-Beast

[Holyland 3650]

Mentioned this to Wowj in a Discord just before this, but as a prospective idea, you could divide feats into various "categories" or "archetypes" that might be taken upon yourself. The categories I thought up are listed below.

 

Spoiler

Tawkin, Animii and Smoggers as alchemy-related

Scion, Veilwatching, Voidstalking, Eminence and Artificery as voidal, as well as Atronach

Golemancy and Sorvian as construction - should be open, not have an archetype [?]

other stuff is solely magic-related, like druids with sycophants and singing trees, or harsupex with shamanism - think these can be mixed in and not be related to any one archetype

Outliers are arcane displacement, vivification and corc, which I don't think should occupy a feat slot.

The idea with this is that MAYBE, if you were to take one of these archetypes upon yourself, you would be solely restricted to that - for instance, you'd only be able to do alchemy-related feats if you locked into that archetype, making someone like a Voidal Scion locked out of Further Alchemy, and vice versa. 

 

This is just an interesting idea, and I like the idea of still being able to be open to use up to 8 feat slots at the cost of not being able to use any magic. It prevents loading yourself up with a load of different opposing archetypes and schools of thought through that, and being able to make literally anything on the server on one character. 

 

I like the idea of actually having punishment and slight restrictions on what can be done, as it only further contributes to the building of an aesthetic and a character. An alchemist is an alchemist. A sorcerer is a sorcerer. I don't expect one person to be able to roleplay both to the absolute maximum, as the two things don't necessarily meld super well together. This not only encourages socialisation, meaning that people will reach out to others for aid instead of being able to make everything themselves, but also encourages the growth of communities. That means more roleplay. That's a good thing.

[Security_ 2287]

Feat slots would be fine, though I think it should have a bit of naunce. Should someone not be allowed to have Herald of Azdromoth [FA] if they have Alchemy [FA], Tawkin [FA], and Animii [FA]? I think there are quite a few feats that all differ greatly, while I'd like to see a limit I don't think it can be applied to everything.

[megavoltar 1634]

Two feat slots, one for each foot, as god intended when he made us all.  

[NightcastorKitty 2780]

As one that does apps regularly, I'm not entirely opposed to such a thought. But the issue is the massive upon massive undertaking of completely overhauling it and going through each person to sort all the apps out. Not even mentioning now going through to even maintaining and making sure someone isn't over the limit. To me, its little gain for the huge amount of work required to redo everything. 

[SethWolf 2340]

I will never  vote for less options to play the game how I want to play it. The ones I've seen people recently people jump on are the ones with combat summons and this is an issue with the feat itself, not feats in general. There are plenty of feats (Corcitura, Conduits of Enlightenment, Feat Herald) that hardly even give you anything to begin with, and it would make no sense to suddenly put up barriers to them because of a system that demands people slide their characters into DnD archetypes rather than just roleplaying their character how they'd like to roleplay them.