Starting CHA 20 and Inspiring Leader at 4th (2024)

So just eat the "loss" of a boost that apparently isn't moving the needle for your ability mod either way so it fits your image. This isn't some unique penalty to rolling high for stats. If I've got a level 10 Rogue who started his DEX at 17 and INT at 10 at creation, took Piercer and a straight DEX boost, and now wants to take Poisoner I either need to need to give up the ASI boost or take suboptimal performance from the feat. Presumably, the feat was designed as it was with the express intent of keeping certain classes from finding it useful- Barbarians, heavy weapon users in general, etc. 5e was specifically designed for more pronounced bounded performance, which includes setting ceilings that can be reached well before endgame. I can pretty much guarantee that you're not going to notice the loss of the +1 because you're already at 20.

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

So just eat the "loss" of a boost that apparently isn't moving the needle for your ability mod either way so it fits your image.

 That’s what I’ll end up doing if I’ll decide to go for this feat at level 4. Sadly, the DM won’t let me increase WIS and use CHA for inspiring.

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Quote from MyDudeicus >>

For what its worth I agree with your complaint. You should not need to use the stat you increased in the feats ability. Sure give the option to increase wisdom, but let the player use either wisdom or charisma when calculating the benefit. Same for fey touched or whatever decouple the stat choice from what stat is used. This can kick in for almost any build just later down the line. Using point buy and start with a 17 charisma, you are capped at 3 charisma based feats, then you need to have your telekinetic or whatever use +1 to int or something and now your push effect is using a weaker stat for you. 

And no it is not an oversight it is an intentional design choice. A bad one imo but a intentional one. 

 

Then why have set stat increases for any feat? Just give a general +1 you can put anywhere and completely decouple it from whatever the feat actually does. Take Spell Sniper and get a +1 on STR. Take Crusher and boost your WIS. Go wild

(For the record, I think that's a bad idea, but it's the logical endpoint of what you're suggesting)

That is not the logical endpoint. Stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning. it does not have to be how you use it. if you pick con for the chef feat you aren't cooking with con. There are no finesse weapons that work with polearm mastery and yet you can increase dex. Dex but not charisma is a option because in the process of learning how to use a polearm you might increase strength and coordination so strength and dex are the stats that it improves. 

So in the case of inspiring leader you may gain insight into the hearts of others and therefore increase your wisdom, but you should still be able to inspire others with your natural charisma. 

Quote from MyDudeicus >>

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Quote from MyDudeicus >>

For what its worth I agree with your complaint. You should not need to use the stat you increased in the feats ability. Sure give the option to increase wisdom, but let the player use either wisdom or charisma when calculating the benefit. Same for fey touched or whatever decouple the stat choice from what stat is used. This can kick in for almost any build just later down the line. Using point buy and start with a 17 charisma, you are capped at 3 charisma based feats, then you need to have your telekinetic or whatever use +1 to int or something and now your push effect is using a weaker stat for you. 

And no it is not an oversight it is an intentional design choice. A bad one imo but a intentional one. 

 

Then why have set stat increases for any feat? Just give a general +1 you can put anywhere and completely decouple it from whatever the feat actually does. Take Spell Sniper and get a +1 on STR. Take Crusher and boost your WIS. Go wild

(For the record, I think that's a bad idea, but it's the logical endpoint of what you're suggesting)

 

That is not the logical endpoint. Stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning. it does not have to be how you use it. if you pick con for the chef feat you aren't cooking with con. There are no finesse weapons that work with polearm mastery and yet you can increase dex. Dex but not charisma is a option because in the process of learning how to use a polearm you might increase strength and coordination so strength and dex are the stats that it improves. 

 

So in the case of inspiring leader you may gain insight into the hearts of others and therefore increase your wisdom, but you should still be able to inspire others with your natural charisma. 

Cooking has nothing to do with bodily health? Huh, you learn something new every day. And I'm sure that quarterstaff specialists will be surprised to discover that DEX isn't a key stat for their fighting style

If "stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning", then they're thematically appropriate for the entire feat, not just part of it. If you are an Inspiring Leader because of your keen understanding of what motivates people, then WIS should be the stat that determines how effective all the feat's features are, not CHA

Quote from AntonSirius >>

If "stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning", then they're thematically appropriate for the entire feat, not just part of it. If you are an Inspiring Leader because of your keen understanding of what motivates people, then WIS should be the stat that determines how effective all the feat's features are, not CHA

That doesn't follow. You may improve an ability while studying something and still be more adept at doing this a different way. Locking Inspiring Leadership into Wisdom or Charisma based on the attribute you chose means that you can't gain insight into others (increase Wisdom) without them losing the ability to recognize your force of personality (Charisma) and vice versa. It's RAW, but it's stupid.

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Quote from MyDudeicus >>

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Quote from MyDudeicus >>

For what its worth I agree with your complaint. You should not need to use the stat you increased in the feats ability. Sure give the option to increase wisdom, but let the player use either wisdom or charisma when calculating the benefit. Same for fey touched or whatever decouple the stat choice from what stat is used. This can kick in for almost any build just later down the line. Using point buy and start with a 17 charisma, you are capped at 3 charisma based feats, then you need to have your telekinetic or whatever use +1 to int or something and now your push effect is using a weaker stat for you. 

And no it is not an oversight it is an intentional design choice. A bad one imo but a intentional one. 

 

Then why have set stat increases for any feat? Just give a general +1 you can put anywhere and completely decouple it from whatever the feat actually does. Take Spell Sniper and get a +1 on STR. Take Crusher and boost your WIS. Go wild

(For the record, I think that's a bad idea, but it's the logical endpoint of what you're suggesting)

 

That is not the logical endpoint. Stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning. it does not have to be how you use it. if you pick con for the chef feat you aren't cooking with con. There are no finesse weapons that work with polearm mastery and yet you can increase dex. Dex but not charisma is a option because in the process of learning how to use a polearm you might increase strength and coordination so strength and dex are the stats that it improves. 

 

So in the case of inspiring leader you may gain insight into the hearts of others and therefore increase your wisdom, but you should still be able to inspire others with your natural charisma. 

 

Cooking has nothing to do with bodily health? Huh, you learn something new every day. And I'm sure that quarterstaff specialists will be surprised to discover that DEX isn't a key stat for their fighting style

If "stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning", then they're thematically appropriate for the entire feat, not just part of it. If you are an Inspiring Leader because of your keen understanding of what motivates people, then WIS should be the stat that determines how effective all the feat's features are, not CHA

Um what. I never said cooking had nothing to do with bodily health I am saying when you make a cooking roll you wont be using con as the stat to determine success. And yes someone with a quarterstaff who trains hard might improve Dex because Dex is a key feature in their fighting style, but since it is not a finesse weapon they will not be using dexterity to determine success unless they are a monk. 

And no.  I might improve in one area based on training but still recognize a better method. 

Then you have a couple of choices:

Ask the DM to allow you to pull a mulligan and move one of the added attributes to get to 20 back to 19, move elsewhere then add the feat, adding the plus 1 so you are back to 20.

Or 

Just remove one of the added attributes, lose it and then add the feat under CHA.

Quote from SmiteMakesRight_3_5 >>

Quote from AntonSirius >>

If "stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning", then they're thematically appropriate for the entire feat, not just part of it. If you are an Inspiring Leader because of your keen understanding of what motivates people, then WIS should be the stat that determines how effective all the feat's features are, not CHA

That doesn't follow. You may improve an ability while studying something and still be more adept at doing this a different way. 

You're not "studying" anything. Feats aren't book learning

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Quote from SmiteMakesRight_3_5 >>

Quote from AntonSirius >>

If "stat increases are what is thematically appropriate for the feat based on what you are learning", then they're thematically appropriate for the entire feat, not just part of it. If you are an Inspiring Leader because of your keen understanding of what motivates people, then WIS should be the stat that determines how effective all the feat's features are, not CHA

That doesn't follow. You may improve an ability while studying something and still be more adept at doing this a different way. 

You're not "studying" anything. Feats aren't book learning

Technically, all feats are "book learning" as they represent learned talents and are published in books.

Jokes aside, studying is not restricted to books. Studying Martial Arts may involve some books, but it is generally physical activity and observation. Feats represent acquired skills or abilities, sometimes from physical activity, sometimes from books, and sometimes from other sources. Some Feats don't involve learning at all. For example, Fey-touched says that the abilities are from exposure to the Feywild and the Dragonmark feats represent manifestations of a bloodline. However, it's pretty hard to argue that Magic Initiate (Wizard) or Keen Mind, are not derived from "book learning".

Regardless of how you are studying a subject or acquiring an ability, restricting the attributes improved is an overly narrow take. I studied martial arts for a bit during college and the kiah actually lead to me being less quiet and shy. If I were to represent that as a feat, I might look for something like Tavern Brawler or Grappler and if I increase an ability score, it would be Charisma. I wouldn't punch with Charisma. I wouldn't reduce falling damage with Charisma. By the same token, someone may have improved Wisdom from the meditation that was part of that training. Certainly, Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution would be easiest to link to time spent studying martial arts, but for me, that wasn't the biggest change.

This can apply to any feat. Perhaps you really honed your sense of smell while advancing your cooking knowledge, so you increased Wisdom. Maybe you advanced Constitution to represent a healthier personal diet you prepare yourself. However, you could also advance Charisma due to experience running a kitchen, Strength because mixing and kneading are hard, manual work. Maybe your approach is more analytical and you decide to advance Intelligence.

Logically, removing the restriction on the attribute makes sense.

RAW, it's there. RAW does not make sense. And that's okay because RAW doesn't need to make sense. If someone wants to house rule away the restriction, great. If not, that's fine too.

If you want to continue this discussion, I am not sure what would be a better location, perhaps Homebrew & House Rules, but I think it's off topic here.

I guess this would be the point where "DnD is not a(n) [insert specific Feat] simulator" into the conversation. I imagine the restriction are there as much for balance reasons as they are for conceit reasons.

If you know you're going to want to take Inspiring Leader and use your CHA for it, then don't start with 20 in CHA. Put that +1 in WIS at the start and you are right back where you want to be.

Quote from sabin76 >>

I guess this would be the point where "DnD is not a(n) [insert specific Feat] simulator" into the conversation. I imagine the restriction are there as much for balance reasons as they are for conceit reasons.

If you know you're going to want to take Inspiring Leader and use your CHA for it, then don't start with 20 in CHA. Put that +1 in WIS at the start and you are right back where you want to be.

I don't know that it adds any balance, but not being a simulation applies to both sides of the conversation. The table should do what they consider fun, whether that's the keep it as is or unlocking the restriction.

I feel that in this case, like the spellcasting feats, the intention was that you are advancing and utilizing your strongest attribute and there isn't necessarily an intent to limit you from using the attribute. I think it is more of a product of the design pattern than of a deliberate decision. 

Quote from SmiteMakesRight_3_5 >>

The table should do what they consider fun, whether that's the keep it as is or unlocking the restriction.

Belated as it is, this conversation has been well beyond "What do the rules say?"

Probably time to move it to homebrew or DM discussion?

Quote from sabin76 >>

I guess this would be the point where "DnD is not a(n) [insert specific Feat] simulator" into the conversation. I imagine the restriction are there as much for balance reasons as they are for conceit reasons.

If you know you're going to want to take Inspiring Leader and use your CHA for it, then don't start with 20 in CHA. Put that +1 in WIS at the start and you are right back where you want to be.

 No. That would lose a +1 (from +5 to +4) for three levels. In a campaign that will clearly have advancement slower than what's suggested in the DMG. As such, I kept CHA at 20 and will forfeit a +1 if/when I'll decide for Inspiring Leader.

I still think this isn't right but it is what it is. Note also that, in my opinion, a character starting at 20 in CHA wouldn't even have the option to do it, strictly following RAW.

***Increase your Wisdom or Charisma score by 1, to a maximum of 20.**"

Since you cannot increase CHA, you would/should be forced to increase WIS. And then you would be unable to grant temporary hit points through CHA. 

The increase isn’t a requirement, it’s an effect. Ergo, it has no bearing on your ability to take the feat, it just fails to cause an increase if you’ve hit the ceiling already.

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues>>

The increase isn’t a requirement, it’s an effect. Ergo, it has no bearing on your ability to take the feat, it just fails to cause an increase if you’ve hit the ceiling already.

***The chosen creatures each gain Temporary Hit Points equal to your character level plus the modifier of the ability you increased with this feat.***

If you already have CHA 20 you cannot increase it. So, even by your interpretation, you would be forced to pick WIS and use it, if you want to grant temporary hit points.

Otherwise you would grant temp HPs equal to your level, as no ability was increased through the feat. 

Quote from gorman42 >>

I still think this isn't right but it is what it is. Note also that, in my opinion, a character starting at 20 in CHA wouldn't even have the option to do it, strictly following RAW.

***Increase your Wisdom or Charisma score by 1, to a maximum of 20.**"

Since you cannot increase CHA, you would/should be forced to increase WIS. And then you would be unable to grant temporary hit points through CHA. 

You can still take the feat and choose CHA. The stat just won't increase above 20. If you have a full bucket of water, you aren't prevented from pouring more water into it. It just can't get any fuller

By your interpretation, someone with a CHA of 20 would never be able to take the Actor feat at all. The prerequisite for taking it doesn't say "must have a CHA between 13 and 19", though. It just says 13+

Quote from gorman42 >>

Quote from sabin76 >>

I guess this would be the point where "DnD is not a(n) [insert specific Feat] simulator" into the conversation. I imagine the restriction are there as much for balance reasons as they are for conceit reasons.

If you know you're going to want to take Inspiring Leader and use your CHA for it, then don't start with 20 in CHA. Put that +1 in WIS at the start and you are right back where you want to be.

 No. That would lose a +1 (from +5 to +4) for three levels. In a campaign that will clearly have advancement slower than what's suggested in the DMG. As such, I kept CHA at 20 and will forfeit a +1 if/when I'll decide for Inspiring Leader. 

This is still +1 above what is expected for levels 1-3 and on par with levels 4-7 if you don't take a half feat.

To put this into perspective, you are ahead of the curve and complaining about being less ahead. You will be giving out 1 more temporary hit point than the game expects for a long time.

Quote from gorman42 >>

Quote from sabin76 >>

I guess this would be the point where "DnD is not a(n) [insert specific Feat] simulator" into the conversation. I imagine the restriction are there as much for balance reasons as they are for conceit reasons.

If you know you're going to want to take Inspiring Leader and use your CHA for it, then don't start with 20 in CHA. Put that +1 in WIS at the start and you are right back where you want to be.

 No. That would lose a +1 (from +5 to +4) for three levels. In a campaign that will clearly have advancement slower than what's suggested in the DMG. As such, I kept CHA at 20 and will forfeit a +1 if/when I'll decide for Inspiring Leader.

I still think this isn't right but it is what it is. Note also that, in my opinion, a character starting at 20 in CHA wouldn't even have the option to do it, strictly following RAW.

***Increase your Wisdom or Charisma score by 1, to a maximum of 20.**"

Since you cannot increase CHA, you would/should be forced to increase WIS. And then you would be unable to grant temporary hit points through CHA. 

 

In addition to what Smite said (note that it's 1 more than expected when you don't start with 20, as the highest you can start with using the standard array or point buy is 17 after background ability score boosts), you'd also have (potentially, depending on your starting WIS) +1 to any WIS checks and saves in that same 1-3 level range.

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

Quote from gorman42>>

Everyone's mileage may vary in this regard but I remain convinced this is an oversight in the design of the game.

 I don't think it's an oversight, all the feats are usually designed to tie with the ability score they increase, especially when a selection is made;

Inspiring Leader

Fey-Touched

Poisoner

Ritual Caster

Shadow-Touched 

Telekinetic

Telepathic

Re-read them all. They all share the same problem. The rules clearly state that the governing ability has to be the ability increased by the feat. Since you cannot increase an ability above 20, if you have 20, you cannot use your 20 ability with the feat. As far as RAW are concerned I don't think any doubt can exist in this regard.
Note that this doesn't mean I think this is RAI, but I simply think that the designers did not think this through.

A Fey-Touched Sorcerer all of a sudden casting with their Intelligence? What happened to "Sorcerers don't learn magic; the raw, roiling power of magic is part of them"? It does not make sense, because it's an oversight. Again, IMO (but I think the points in favor are increasing, not diminishing).

Quote from AntonSirius >> 

You can still take the feat and choose CHA. The stat just won't increase above 20. If you have a full bucket of water, you aren't prevented from pouring more water into it. It just can't get any fuller

By your interpretation, someone with a CHA of 20 would never be able to take the Actor feat at all. The prerequisite for taking it doesn't say "must have a CHA between 13 and 19", though. It just says 13+

 
If the ability doesn't increase, the rules explicitly state that you won't be able to use an ability on top of your level. The ability has to increase.

equal to your character level plus the modifier of the ability you increased with this feat

Actor, by the way, doesn't share this problem, as nowhere it uses that wording.

Quote from SmiteMakesRight_3_5 >>

This is still +1 above what is expected for levels 1-3 and on par with levels 4-7 if you don't take a half feat.

To put this into perspective, you are ahead of the curve and complaining about being less ahead. You will be giving out 1 more temporary hit point than the game expects for a long time. 

I am not complaining, I'm pointing out an inconsistency in the rules. I have already started playing with this character, kept the 20 in CHA and I'll see what will happen when I reach, if I reach level 4. I'll probably bring this to the attention of the whole table and see what they think of it.

I find it kind of curious, though, that you treat rolling attributes as a house rule or something. It's the second option provided in the rules, before point buy.

When rolling 4d6 six times, keeping each time the highest result, there's 9.34% chance of rolling at least an 18. It means almost one every ten characters will have a starting 18. It's not one in a million, far from it. The game "expects" nothing, unless it ignores the second option provided to generate abilities.

What the game does is not providing clear guidance on a case that potentially involves one every nine players playing it.

Quote from gorman42 >>

If the ability doesn't increase, the rules explicitly state that you won't be able to use an ability on top of your level. The ability has to increase.

equal to your character level plus the modifier of the ability you increased with this feat

 

You did increase it. It was just already full, and couldn't get boosted past 20

When your "RAW" interpretation results in something that absolutely no one would play at their table, it's reasonable to question your own interpretation rather than telling everyone else they are wrong