The spending of resources is important. I was playing off of a written adventure, and the players had limited options for buying light sources or getting money for them. That said I have to admit... Sharpshooter and observant are undeniably two feats that change the scope of a game no matter how ready you are for them. So I'll admit a variant human can be just as powerful with the right player at the wheel... But it still throws things off to give players the primary benefit of the most popular player race on top of whatever racial features they would get from a different race.
We play with free feat at lvl 1 and allow variant human. The caveat is that the free feat generally comes from the ones we consider less powerful. Chef, actor, skill expert, martial adept etc
They are still good, it helps to spice up builds some but its not GWM/SS/Polearm master/Sentinel etc
I give my players a choice of a feat at level 1. My only restriction is that it cannot be a 'learned' combat feat. I treat it as the thing in them inherently that sets them apart as a hero. For instance you cannot take things like GWM, armor proficiencies, war caster or spell sniper. However things like Magic initiate or Fey touched works just fine as these are part of why you may have a tendency to pursue a certain path. I do this in hopes people may take some of those racial traits like Fade Away for gnomes or take interesting half feats such as observant that may get pushed off for feats that are seen as more powerful.
Can't be that "op" if some races already get it (IE: variant human, custom lineage etc)
That is instead of other racial traits though as a sacrifice. VH loses 3 AS points - which is harsher than sacrificing the standard ASI in numerical terms (although due to dump stats, it's not that harsh).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Can't be that "op" if some races already get it (IE: variant human, custom lineage etc)
That is instead of other racial traits though as a sacrifice. VH loses 3 AS points - which is harsher than sacrificing the standard ASI in numerical terms (although due to dump stats, it's not that harsh).
VHuman also gets a skill proficiency. Regular humans getting nothing skill-wise is enough to drop them way down on my list of races to play, regardless of the 6 +1s.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
In my group we have moved away from the normal races, because they are broken, some are REALLY powerfull compared to others (halfelf, +2,+1,+1, darkvision, immune to magic sleep, 2 extra skills, 3 extra languages. Compared to humans, +1 to all)
Now the choice of race is just the skin, all races have the same stats, and we have the same points to buy stats from. 75 points to buy stats max 15 in a stat. +2 and +1 (or +1, +1 and +1) stat increase Humanoid Medium or small 30 feet movement 1 feat Variant trait: Choose 1 Darkvision (60 or 120 with sunlight Sensitivity) Swimming speed and breathing underwater (Darkvision while submerged in water) Powerful built 3 points to use on, skills, tool, weapon and armor proficiency. Natural attack: choose 1. ● Horns (1d8) ● Tail (1d6 reach) ● Claws (1d4 climbing speed) ● Breath weapon (15 feet cone, con for casting and chromatic choice)
For my camapaign (set in a homebrew world) I switched all the feats to special abilities and assigned them 'pre-requisities'and let players have upto 5 at character creation to represent special abilities or things they picked up during their formative years and backgrounds and then allowed them to pick up new abilities as they advanced in character level.
If anyone is interested in it (shameless self promotion incoming...) you can download '5e homebrew edition players handbook' from dms guild/drivethru rpg for free or I'll post a link here to a google drive doc if anyone whats to have a look at it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
* Need a character idea? Search for "Rob76's Unused" in the Story and Lore section.
I think having a human variant doesn't impact whether you should give them feats, the human variant will still have one more than everyone else. If you only allow a shallow amount of feats in your game, or are going to prescribe a specific feat maybe have a conversation with your players.
Whether it is OP or not is up to you, as you're the DM; I would just make certain monsters at the beginning have one or more additional traits to balance it out. Later CRs the monsters have the fact some characters may have feats taken into account.
I do this in every campaign. It'll up the power level of the PC's overall, but it's nice for them to have ASI flexibility at 4 and my players love having the extra +1 bonuses to round up a modifier score at character creation.
As far as the discussion surrounding Variant Humans, any Variant Humans would have 2 Feats at level 1. While strong, this has never proven to be an issue in the past, as I've only had one variant human in each of my games.
I do this in every campaign. It'll up the power level of the PC's overall, but it's nice for them to have ASI flexibility at 4 and my players love having the extra +1 bonuses to round up a modifier score at character creation.
As far as the discussion surrounding Variant Humans, any Variant Humans would have 2 Feats at level 1. While strong, this has never proven to be an issue in the past, as I've only had one variant human in each of my games.
I kind of actually like this idea of restricting it to Half Feats for Non-Variant Humans (not saying that was what you were meaning), and maybe non-combat feats as well, so feats without combat in their tag on DDB. And leave VHumans as is, with the full range of choices.
If your aim to increase variety I suggest to talk to your players and soft ban strong feats like Lucky, SS, PAM and GWM.
Your players will be stronger on average, but if everyone is, you can adjust the encounters.
In general talk to your players and tell them exactly what game you enjoy playing/dming.
If you want more flavor I can highly advice to build the characters together with the player, that way you know exactly what you are up to and have an overview with the party.
For a campaign that's on pause, my group's upcoming DM whom we're familiar with is allowing us to have a mechanical rewrite of our characters, which will allow some ability score and skill changes, as well as a free level one feat. It's hard to say which member of my group is more ecstatic. Our poor Paladin has an impossibly low hit rate, so they may be pleased to get something that may aid in that. Our Fighter might want to become more or less like a Perception bot ("security camera" is a term our former DM used). I'm the only player left to qualify for the most overjoyed because I can't figure out the remaining unmentioned two, but I'd like a feat for RP value. I can't deny they have mechanical uses, but I feel they're a great way to demonstrate training, heritage or some other background without having to cram the round peg of flavour into the square hole of 5E class design.
I'm a player whose heavily emotionally invested in their character, so naturally I'm going to be bias towards the feat being 'just right'. But I must ask the OP: what about feats is overpowered? What is the context for this concern? It's one thing to talk about specific feats such as the controversial Lucky, but the DM can decide not to allow that particular feat in their game. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
I'll provide some context for my group. We're in the Lost Mine of Phandelver and in over half of our combat encounters at least one player has fallen unconscious (which is good for me; Cleric of the Grave, and all), typically the Paladin. This isn't because of poor tactical decisions; we're quick to cover our flanks, avoid taking risks, and learn from our mistakes. We're simply rolling poorly during combat, which takes up so little of the campaign time. Feats might well provide bonuses to our dice rolls, or make require our DM to roll a bit higher, but they're not going to make us invincible. We're second level tier one nobodies, and ultimately, we're at the DM's mercy.
If feats make players overpowered, the Dungeon Master can change that before the round is over. It'd be preferable to do that before the first session, mind.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
So basically you nerfed humans and made everyone else over-powered.
Crappy house rule. Yes people want feats. That is why they take human. No, +1 in all stats is not acceptable, no one takes that version, everyone takes the variant that gives the feat.
My group plays with 3 feats, 2 of which are supposed to be "racial" (Elven Accuracy, Dragon Hide, etc). The minmaxer in me tends to choose races that do not have such feats so that I can choose others.
I agree that it helps balance smaller parties like mine, but I could see it causing trouble with larger parties with more minmaxers.
ALSO EVERY DM SEEMS TO GIVE OUT FREE BONUS ACTIONS BUT
i believe giving all a free bonus action is actually far more broken than intended.
You wot?
Are you playing with DMs who think it's an *extra* action?
I have never seen or even heard of any DM doing this ever.
I had a GM who did that, but he was a guy who didn't actually read the rulebooks or monster stat blocks and thought I was cheating when I used a reaction in combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The spending of resources is important. I was playing off of a written adventure, and the players had limited options for buying light sources or getting money for them. That said I have to admit... Sharpshooter and observant are undeniably two feats that change the scope of a game no matter how ready you are for them. So I'll admit a variant human can be just as powerful with the right player at the wheel... But it still throws things off to give players the primary benefit of the most popular player race on top of whatever racial features they would get from a different race.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Can't be that "op" if some races already get it (IE: variant human, custom lineage etc)
We play with free feat at lvl 1 and allow variant human. The caveat is that the free feat generally comes from the ones we consider less powerful. Chef, actor, skill expert, martial adept etc
They are still good, it helps to spice up builds some but its not GWM/SS/Polearm master/Sentinel etc
I give my players a choice of a feat at level 1. My only restriction is that it cannot be a 'learned' combat feat. I treat it as the thing in them inherently that sets them apart as a hero. For instance you cannot take things like GWM, armor proficiencies, war caster or spell sniper. However things like Magic initiate or Fey touched works just fine as these are part of why you may have a tendency to pursue a certain path. I do this in hopes people may take some of those racial traits like Fade Away for gnomes or take interesting half feats such as observant that may get pushed off for feats that are seen as more powerful.
That is instead of other racial traits though as a sacrifice. VH loses 3 AS points - which is harsher than sacrificing the standard ASI in numerical terms (although due to dump stats, it's not that harsh).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
VHuman also gets a skill proficiency. Regular humans getting nothing skill-wise is enough to drop them way down on my list of races to play, regardless of the 6 +1s.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
In my group we have moved away from the normal races, because they are broken, some are REALLY powerfull compared to others (halfelf, +2,+1,+1, darkvision, immune to magic sleep, 2 extra skills, 3 extra languages. Compared to humans, +1 to all)
Now the choice of race is just the skin, all races have the same stats, and we have the same points to buy stats from.
75 points to buy stats max 15 in a stat.
+2 and +1 (or +1, +1 and +1) stat increase
Humanoid Medium or small
30 feet movement
1 feat
Variant trait: Choose 1
Darkvision (60 or 120 with sunlight Sensitivity)
Swimming speed and breathing underwater (Darkvision while submerged in water)
Powerful built
3 points to use on, skills, tool, weapon and armor proficiency.
Natural attack: choose 1. ● Horns (1d8) ● Tail (1d6 reach) ● Claws (1d4 climbing speed) ● Breath weapon (15 feet cone, con for casting and chromatic choice)
For my camapaign (set in a homebrew world) I switched all the feats to special abilities and assigned them 'pre-requisities'and let players have upto 5 at character creation to represent special abilities or things they picked up during their formative years and backgrounds and then allowed them to pick up new abilities as they advanced in character level.
If anyone is interested in it (shameless self promotion incoming...) you can download '5e homebrew edition players handbook' from dms guild/drivethru rpg for free or I'll post a link here to a google drive doc if anyone whats to have a look at it.
I think having a human variant doesn't impact whether you should give them feats, the human variant will still have one more than everyone else. If you only allow a shallow amount of feats in your game, or are going to prescribe a specific feat maybe have a conversation with your players.
Whether it is OP or not is up to you, as you're the DM; I would just make certain monsters at the beginning have one or more additional traits to balance it out. Later CRs the monsters have the fact some characters may have feats taken into account.
I do this in every campaign. It'll up the power level of the PC's overall, but it's nice for them to have ASI flexibility at 4 and my players love having the extra +1 bonuses to round up a modifier score at character creation.
As far as the discussion surrounding Variant Humans, any Variant Humans would have 2 Feats at level 1. While strong, this has never proven to be an issue in the past, as I've only had one variant human in each of my games.
Aye, doesn't step on the variant human's toes and also benefits everyone else.
If I did this, I'd be in the camp that limits the free feat to those with less mechanical (or very situational) impact. Actor, Healer, Skulker, etc.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I don’t think it’s OP. Theros and VRGtR have both made it essentially an option under RAW.
I kind of actually like this idea of restricting it to Half Feats for Non-Variant Humans (not saying that was what you were meaning), and maybe non-combat feats as well, so feats without combat in their tag on DDB. And leave VHumans as is, with the full range of choices.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
If your aim to increase variety I suggest to talk to your players and soft ban strong feats like Lucky, SS, PAM and GWM.
Your players will be stronger on average, but if everyone is, you can adjust the encounters.
In general talk to your players and tell them exactly what game you enjoy playing/dming.
If you want more flavor I can highly advice to build the characters together with the player, that way you know exactly what you are up to and have an overview with the party.
For a campaign that's on pause, my group's upcoming DM whom we're familiar with is allowing us to have a mechanical rewrite of our characters, which will allow some ability score and skill changes, as well as a free level one feat. It's hard to say which member of my group is more ecstatic. Our poor Paladin has an impossibly low hit rate, so they may be pleased to get something that may aid in that. Our Fighter might want to become more or less like a Perception bot ("security camera" is a term our former DM used). I'm the only player left to qualify for the most overjoyed because I can't figure out the remaining unmentioned two, but I'd like a feat for RP value. I can't deny they have mechanical uses, but I feel they're a great way to demonstrate training, heritage or some other background without having to cram the round peg of flavour into the square hole of 5E class design.
I'm a player whose heavily emotionally invested in their character, so naturally I'm going to be bias towards the feat being 'just right'. But I must ask the OP: what about feats is overpowered? What is the context for this concern? It's one thing to talk about specific feats such as the controversial Lucky, but the DM can decide not to allow that particular feat in their game. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
I'll provide some context for my group. We're in the Lost Mine of Phandelver and in over half of our combat encounters at least one player has fallen unconscious (which is good for me; Cleric of the Grave, and all), typically the Paladin. This isn't because of poor tactical decisions; we're quick to cover our flanks, avoid taking risks, and learn from our mistakes. We're simply rolling poorly during combat, which takes up so little of the campaign time. Feats might well provide bonuses to our dice rolls, or make require our DM to roll a bit higher, but they're not going to make us invincible. We're second level tier one nobodies, and ultimately, we're at the DM's mercy.
If feats make players overpowered, the Dungeon Master can change that before the round is over. It'd be preferable to do that before the first session, mind.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
So basically you nerfed humans and made everyone else over-powered.
Crappy house rule. Yes people want feats. That is why they take human. No, +1 in all stats is not acceptable, no one takes that version, everyone takes the variant that gives the feat.
My group plays with 3 feats, 2 of which are supposed to be "racial" (Elven Accuracy, Dragon Hide, etc). The minmaxer in me tends to choose races that do not have such feats so that I can choose others.
I agree that it helps balance smaller parties like mine, but I could see it causing trouble with larger parties with more minmaxers.
You wot?
Are you playing with DMs who think it's an *extra* action?
I have never seen or even heard of any DM doing this ever.
I had a GM who did that, but he was a guy who didn't actually read the rulebooks or monster stat blocks and thought I was cheating when I used a reaction in combat.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.