Feats as a human racial trait

[Jack Daniel]

Coming over to 5e after playing lots of Basic, I find that I really like the feel of a sharp distinction drawn between humans and demi-humans. In Basic D&D, the humans get job-type classes (fighter, magic-user, thief...) and the demi-humans get race-type classes (elf, dwarf, halfling...). That wouldn't be a very elegant rule to implement in 5e, but how about this alternative: only humans can take feats?

This almost instantly makes humans the most attractive choice of a race, without really unbalancing things. It represents the humans' adaptability and drive, while the demi-humans remain balanced by increasing raw ability scores (and in fantasy literature, that's usually their shtick: elves are inherently more agile and perceptive, dwarves are inherently tougher, &c.). It also happens to line up rather well with the half-elf's special shtick being "ignore multiclass ability requirements".

For a certain style/genre of fantasy, I think this could work out very well. What do you think?

 

[Li Shenron]

I am sure a lot of players would protest against it, but I wouldn't have any problem with this HR.

Or maybe one issue: feat and feat chains are one way in 5e to represent the benefits of being part of a group with secret knowledge (e.g. you can turn several 3e prestige classes into one 5e feat or a feat chain). Thus if you have some groups in your campaign settings that are supposed to be open to any race (e.g. the Harpers or the Zhentarim in FR), by allowing only humans to take feats you may be restricting your own design space. Or you're going to have to make a list of exceptions.