Another piece of D&D data: a majority of D&D characters don't use feats. Many players love the customization possible with feats, but a larger group of players is happy to make characters without feats. Feats are, therefore, not a driving force behind many players' choices. #DnD https://t.co/G8nX6t5jj3 — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 1, 2018

I'm curious if you think this is because players aren't interested in/don't think about feats or if they see an ability score increase as too valuable to pass up? — Andrew C (@sky713) March 1, 2018

Really? Wow. I find feats a better customization than a boat-load of subclasses, and my players love them. I would have thought that to be more common. — Greg Brown (@PaddlerPoet) March 1, 2018

On the other hand, I was initially very skeptical of feats and it took some play to persuade me. Now I love the feats and the variety they bring. I'm glad you're enjoying them! Feats are a handy tool for certain character concepts. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 1, 2018

Are you saying the majority of the people playing DnD are playing for fun story creation and roleplaying and not for min-maxing, strategizing, and rule-picking? I am indeed! — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 1, 2018

I think it’s pretty obvious that you’re misreading your data. You should open this stuff up to a public API. Feats are rarely chosen because a) Characters generally don’t get to level 4, a) Variant human is a minority race choice, and c) ASIs are often mechanically more valuable I'm fascinated to find out how you think I'm reading the data, given the fact that, in the tweet you're responding to, I give no explanation for why I think feats aren't chosen by a majority of players. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 1, 2018

You’re using the data to support the general argument that players don’t like mechanical complexity as an expression of power. The tweet sounded a lot like “We have data indicating that players don’t like feats as a game mechanic.” – All I want is to challenge that assessment. I pointed out that a majority of characters don’t use feats, yet many players love feats. I’ll repeat: many players love feats. They’re a fun part of the game, and they’re here to stay. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 1, 2018

D&D is a large tent, with room for players & play styles of many sorts. Yesterday I shared the data that characters who use feats are in the minority. A key takeaway: different players like different things. And feats will continue to be a fun option for those who like them. #DnD https://t.co/DFowAe7d2o — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 2, 2018

With all due respect… I did read that earlier and even made another comment in response to your original post conceding the fact. It doesn’t change that the implied conclusion that feats aren’t popular because race/class/subclass/background provide sufficient options is flawed My conclusion is that there's room for characters with feats and there's room for characters without them, and we'll continue to make room for both types of characters. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 2, 2018

I appreciate that(really). However, my intent was to ask you to entertain the notion that feats seem *relatively* unpopular for the same reason non-complimentary attribute race/class combos are seemingly unpopular. I’m giving this one up though. Apologies for pestering. I have considered many possible reasons for why feats are used in some cases and why they’re not used in others. I haven’t gotten into any of those reasons on Twitter, but it would be a fun thing to chat about on our podcast or at a convention. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 2, 2018

“Well MY group always uses…”

“ALL the players I know use…” People really don’t like finding out they’re not typical. Typical or not, there's room for them in the D&D tent! — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 2, 2018

I like feats a lot as a core element of D&D, but often don’t take them because the way they’re implemented in 5e, so other interpretations of the data are possible. My interpretation is this: different players like different things, and we’ll continue to support play styles of various sorts. — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 2, 2018