Today DnD Next published a new Blog article. It is titled "Avoiding Choice Traps". Just the other day I mouthed off "Leave me my choices" and you can imagine I might have been slightly irritated reading the title of that DnD Next Blog. Reading through the post in its entirety including the attached vote options this irritation receded slightly, but not completely.
How can it be that the bonus a RP Feat grants you is not worth as much as a bonus granted by a combat Feat? Are +X to a skill inherently worse than +X to attack, damage or defense? No, of course not! The problem, in my opinion, lies somewhere else entirely. If a roleplay bonus is not worth the same as a combat bonus it is because the modules / adventures / etc. focus on combat entirely too much.
In a writers guide for another company I just recently read something along the following lines: Your adventure has to feature indoor and outdoor exploration, social interaction and combat in roughly an equal measure, to allow all possible character builds to shine. This is of course only a rough translation, but I think it makes a point. The point being that WotC's adventures have been, for a very long time, quite bad at providing spot light moments outside of combat. Or maybe I have been playing the wrong adventures, but I have little hope that is the case.
Of course, if 75% (or more, that is really only a random number of the top of my head) of any given module will focus on combat, any RP feature, power, or whatever else will not be worth as much as a combat centered alternative. So of course I want separate feats addressing RP, exploration and combat. Roughly in equal measure if you can. What you need to change is the adventure design philosophy to make them all worth your time. If you manage to succeed there, there will be no choice trap.