>>43354239Well, for me at least, part of the appeal of Pathfinder over other systems is the variety of character options to choose from. It's unfortunate that so many of those options are awful, but I like the idea of it. If I were going to create a new list of feats for the game, I'd probably start by picking out the existing feats that are good enough (or close to good enough and then tweaking them until they are good enough), and then take the other feats and see what can be condensed into better feats. After that, I'd throw away the other feats altogether. But, if that left me with a list of few feats, then I think the game would lose some of its appeal. So I'd want to add some genuinely new feats so that there are again more things to choose from. I think there should at least be enough feats that people feel like they have to choose between what they want.
>>43354284I'm not saying I won't pull some feat ideas from what other people have thought up before. In fact, not only would I probably do that, but I imagine that at some point I'd come asking for suggestions of new ideas for feats.
On a related note, what do you guys think of things like the Damnation feats, where there are small sets of feat that all get stronger the more feats of that set that you have? My players like the idea a lot, so chances are I'd try to have several different categories of feats like that (with themes other than "evil spellcaster" obviously) but do you think that'd be a bad approach? I think I can see that turning into something where people feel a sort of begrudging obligation to "complete the set" because those feats would become much better options than just grabbing a single feat from a different category.
Also also, I've heard lots of people talk about Fantasy Craft before, should I take a page from there book in regards to feat design?
>>43354467Reducing the size of feat trees/chains is one major goal, yes. So is trimming away some of the generic +X feats.
