I have to say that I don't really see why people being less likely to take a feat at level 4 is a problem in itself? It seems like the real problem is that there aren't enough good feats to entice players. I'm mostly neutral to the subject, leaning towards being in favor of it, but to me if giving a free feat at level one means there aren't attractive feats down the line, then the problem is with feats, not when you get them.
I don't think I've ever taken a feat in the game, mostly because I don't think I understand the game well enough to know the value of feats. It never seems worth it in exchange for the stat increases. If I got a free one at level one, then I'd at least take one feat, as opposed to none like I usually do.
Like I said, a minor feat that maybe provides a slight situational bonus or even a bonus and a flaw at the same time is fine. However, what I don't want to see is a free feat like Weapon Master. It completely offsets the balance, allowing classes that are not martial classes to start with martial weapons. You could have a druid with Greatswords and Longswords and such, making them much tougher than they should be at lower levels. You could have a wizard able to use a shield.
Feats you can get at level 4 are supposed to show character growth and maturity. It shows that after a bit of experience and training, your character was able to train themselves how to use 4 new weapons (Weapon Mastery) or a shield, or better armor, or whatever. Provide characters with a starter feat, if not limiting to very minor feats, would again leave characters with even less room to grow than the game already has. All you have left is ASI because the maybe 1 feat you might consider taking at level 4 you can get at level 1.
Yes. New feats and better feats are MUCH needed in BG3. They should really entice players to take them as opposed to an ASI.
