Tough's always a solid choice for a frontliner, especially since you're already getting a boost to your Con saves from your aura. Though if your Con score is an odd number, I'd go with Resilient(Con) instead if you haven't already taken Resilient for another stat. Sentinel is certainly a popular choice, and with good reason. Mobile's probably not your best choice. As a Paladin, you're probably not the one who wants to be zipping around the battlefield. You're more likely the one who plants themself so that your allies can stay in your aura. Lucky's never a BAD choice, but it's also not all that INTERESTING a choice, for my taste. For me personally, I'd give Inspiring Leader a hard look though. At those high levels, 20ish temporary HP per Short/Long Rest for every member of your party is nothing to sneeze at. If you take two Short Rests in a day, you're talking 60ish extra HP for each member of your party. That's quite a bit of Cure Wounds that won't need to be cast over the course of the day.
At level 16 "Tough" is a waste. Unless you can switch your first feat out and take Tough in its place and take your first feat at level 16, I wouldn't bother personally. Sentinel is good, great if you pair it with Polearm Master. Out of the ones you have listed, Lucky is the best by itself at 16.
At level 16 "Tough" is a waste. Unless you can switch your first feat out and take Tough in its place and take your first feat at level 16
Why do you say that?
"Your hit point maximum increases by an amount equal to twice your level when you gain this feat. Whenever you gain a level thereafter, your hit point maximum increases by an additional 2 hit points."
If you take tough at level 4 you get 8 extra HP and by level 16 have gained 24 more for a total or 32. If you take Tough at level 16 you gain 32 HP when you take the feat.
Taken at level 16 you don't get the benefit of having it at level 4 or 8. So you are getting the bonus hp twice instead of three or four times. The sooner you take the feat the more you get the benefits of having it, ya know?
Taken at level 16 you don't get the benefit of having it at level 4 or 8. So you are getting the bonus hp twice instead of three or four times. The sooner you take the feat the more you get the benefits of having it, ya know?
Getting it at level 4 gives you more HP between levels 4 and 15 but exactly the same at 16. Conversely getting tough at 4 means you don't benefit from whatever feat / ASI you took instead at 4.
I mean, sure. at 16 you'll always get 32 but if you take it at 4 you get 8 PLUS your con mod +2 every level AFTER that. So taking it earlier is just better than later. What I was suggesting is taking the feat the OP took at 4, swapping it for Tough and taking their current 4th level feat and taking it now at 16 so that they can gain more from having Tough in the first place. Taking Tough at 16 is not as good as taking it at 4.
I mean, sure. at 16 you'll always get 32 but if you take it at 4 you get 8 PLUS your con mod +2 every level AFTER that. So taking it earlier is just better than later. What I was suggesting is taking the feat the OP took at 4, swapping it for Tough and taking their current 4th level feat and taking it now at 16 so that they can gain more from having Tough in the first place. Taking Tough at 16 is not as good as taking it at 4.
The same is true of every feat, taking tough at 4 and (say) lucky at 16 means you have more HP between the levels of 4 and 15 but taking lucky first means you benefit from luck between levels 4 and 15 instead.
I mean, sure. at 16 you'll always get 32 but if you take it at 4 you get 8 PLUS your con mod +2 every level AFTER that. So taking it earlier is just better than later. What I was suggesting is taking the feat the OP took at 4, swapping it for Tough and taking their current 4th level feat and taking it now at 16 so that they can gain more from having Tough in the first place. Taking Tough at 16 is not as good as taking it at 4.
What are you talking about? If you have a character with a d10 hit die and 14 con (+2) then Tough increases you HP by 16% at level 1, and gains you +25% HP at every level beyond 1st. So it actually gets better the later you are in the game regardless of when you take it.
I mean, sure. at 16 you'll always get 32 but if you take it at 4 you get 8 PLUS your con mod +2 every level AFTER that. So taking it earlier is just better than later. What I was suggesting is taking the feat the OP took at 4, swapping it for Tough and taking their current 4th level feat and taking it now at 16 so that they can gain more from having Tough in the first place. Taking Tough at 16 is not as good as taking it at 4.
What are you talking about? If you have a character with a d10 hit die and 14 con (+2) then Tough increases you HP by 16% at level 1, and gains you +25% HP at every level beyond 1st. So it actually gets better the later you are in the game regardless of when you take it.
It doesn't get better the later you take it because you lose out on the extra HP you gain from having it sooner. It's not even a debate. That's just facts. You get more HP per level from having it sooner than you would taking it at 16. You can even check this out by making a level 20 character, taking it at 4 and making another level 20 of the same character and taking it at 16 and the one that took it sooner will have more HP than the one who took it later in leveling. Hell, use a human and take it at level 1 instead of 4 vs 16, the one that took it sooner will have more HP at 20 than the person who took it later.
Well sure. But Tough vs Lucky, Lucky gives you Lucky no matter what level you are at. Something like, Tough gives you more benefits the sooner you take it. Lucky never changes its benefits no matter the level you take it while taking Tough sooner gives you more from having taken it. Alert with always be Alert, Resilient will never change. Skilled will always remain the same but the sooner you take something like Tough, the more you get out of it.
Say a character has 100 HP at level 20. Ok? Before any feats or anything. 100 HP.
Now, that same character takes Tough at level 4. That gives us 8 HP plus an additional +2 HP for each level after, that's 32 HP. Total: 140 HP.
But behold the magic. The same character takes Tough at level 16. That's 32 HP, plus an additional +2 HP for each level after that, that's 8 HP. Total: 140 HP.
It makes zero difference when you take the feat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I mean, sure. at 16 you'll always get 32 but if you take it at 4 you get 8 PLUS your con mod +2 every level AFTER that. So taking it earlier is just better than later. What I was suggesting is taking the feat the OP took at 4, swapping it for Tough and taking their current 4th level feat and taking it now at 16 so that they can gain more from having Tough in the first place. Taking Tough at 16 is not as good as taking it at 4.
What are you talking about? If you have a character with a d10 hit die and 14 con (+2) then Tough increases you HP by 16% at level 1, and gains you +25% HP at every level beyond 1st. So it actually gets better the later you are in the game regardless of when you take it.
It doesn't get better the later you take it because you lose out on the extra HP you gain from having it sooner. It's not even a debate. That's just facts. You get more HP per level from having it sooner than you would taking it at 16. You can even check this out by making a level 20 character, taking it at 4 and making another level 20 of the same character and taking it at 16 and the one that took it sooner will have more HP than the one who took it later in leveling. Hell, use a human and take it at level 1 instead of 4 vs 16, the one that took it sooner will have more HP at 20 than the person who took it later.
You're not making sense. There's no compound interest element of Tough. Assuming you're doing the Fixed HP gain at level up instead of rolling, your HP at Level 16 will be the same whether you took Tough at Level 16 or Level 4.
Here's the text of the feat: "Your hit point maximum increases by an amount equal to twice your level when you gain this feat. Whenever you gain a level thereafter, your hit point maximum increases by an additional 2 hit points."
Let's say you have a Level 1 Paladin with a Con score of 16. They'll start off with 10+3 HP at Level 1, and they'll gain 6+3 HP each level after. To keep the math simple, let's assume they never boost their Con score. If they never take tough, their HP progression will be 13,22,31,40,49,58,67,76,85,94,103,112,121,130,139,148,157,166,175,184.
Now, if they take Tough at Level 4, they'll have the same 13,33,31. But at Level 4 they'll get the 40, plus an additional 2 per existing level, so 48. And every level up after they'll get 6+3+2 HP. So now their HP progression will be 13,22,31,48,59,70,81,92,103,114,125,136,147,158,169,180,191,202,213,224.
Let's say they instead choose Tough at Level 16. So their HP progression would be the same as the first set, but when they hit Level 16 they'll get the 148, plus the feat gives them 2 for each existing level, which means 32 HP. What does that give them total? The SAME 180 HP as they would have if they'd taken Tough at Level 4. And going forward, they'll get the same 6+3+2 HP at new levels, giving them the same 191,202,213,224 for their last levels.
Yes, taking Tough early means benefiting from it for more levels, but the benefit at any ONE level is the same whether you've just taken Tough or if you've had it the whole time. It's the same thing as what happens when your Con modifier increases, only it's by 2 HP instead of 1.
Go ahead, check my math. Make a Level 1 Paladin on D&D Beyond with a Con score of 16 after racial bonuses, and make sure it stays 16 as they level up. Choose Fixed HP leveling. Check their HP at Level 20, taking the Tough feat at different points in their progression.
Thanks for all responses. This has now turned into a tough discussion 😂. So I’m going to take inspiring leader for one of the options. For the other one (if I live that long), which is better tough or sentinel? With sentinel, I don’t find that enemy creatures really run away causing opportunity attacks that often.
With sentinel, I don’t find that enemy creatures really run away causing opportunity attacks that often.
Very DM dependent.
If creatures are intelligent, and not just beasts I generally try to make them escape when it becomes hopeless. The way Action economy works in dnd 5e, once one side starts loosing it starts spiraling down fast. That bandit that just half his party get ripped apart, and his leader go down has got to be asking himself why they are still there. But some DMs like to keep the fight going, and make the enemies desperate to inflict damage (and it isn't hard to come up with in game reasons for that).
But, I found sentinel useful for stopping that fast attacker sprinting past you to your back line. But again DM dependent if they play enemies with a sense of tactics or just attack those closest to them.
Edit: as mentioned above some of the coolness of sentinel comes when pared with Pole Arm Mastery as you can smack them as they come into you and stop them short.
Thank you, I will consider what you said about sentinel and maybe talk a bit more to my dm about it. With the pole arm mastery, my character uses a shield so I can’t use glaive or halberd. However, I would be able to use a quarterstaff or spear. My current weapon is a war hammer which I’m using in 1 hand so it is 1d8. I know 1d6 + the 1d4 will do more damage but I’m not sure it will be worth it when I could use a different feat instead.
The thing with all the discussion about toughness at L4 or L16 is that the vast majority of time at L4 you aren’t taking a feat - you’re picking up ASIs. So you are probably picking up either strength or charisma at L4 and just living with what ever Con you have. You aren’t likely to have a free feat/ASI until L16 & L19. Taking inspiring leader at L16 helps the whole party for 4 more levels so that is a good place for it. Taking tough at L19 ads 38 HP to what should be around 152 so that is a 25% ncrease in survivability to get you to retirement at L20 not too shabby.
Do you have access to Tasha's? If so, take a look, there's some good feats for final touches there as well; Crusher/Piercer/Slasher add a little extra kick to your weapon, and Fey/Shadow Touched gives you a few free casts if you want to slip an extra spell or two in while saving your slots for smiting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I’m a Dragonborn paladin For my lvl 16 and lvl 19 feats which 2 of these would you suggest:
Tough, Inspiring Leader, Sentinel, Lucky, or Mobile.
I’ll be grateful for any suggestions. Thank you =)
Edit: I have decided I will do inspiring leader for lvl 16, but for lvl 19 sentinel or tough? - or maybe lucky?
Sentinel and Tough
Thanks
Tough's always a solid choice for a frontliner, especially since you're already getting a boost to your Con saves from your aura. Though if your Con score is an odd number, I'd go with Resilient(Con) instead if you haven't already taken Resilient for another stat. Sentinel is certainly a popular choice, and with good reason. Mobile's probably not your best choice. As a Paladin, you're probably not the one who wants to be zipping around the battlefield. You're more likely the one who plants themself so that your allies can stay in your aura. Lucky's never a BAD choice, but it's also not all that INTERESTING a choice, for my taste. For me personally, I'd give Inspiring Leader a hard look though. At those high levels, 20ish temporary HP per Short/Long Rest for every member of your party is nothing to sneeze at. If you take two Short Rests in a day, you're talking 60ish extra HP for each member of your party. That's quite a bit of Cure Wounds that won't need to be cast over the course of the day.
At level 16 "Tough" is a waste. Unless you can switch your first feat out and take Tough in its place and take your first feat at level 16, I wouldn't bother personally. Sentinel is good, great if you pair it with Polearm Master. Out of the ones you have listed, Lucky is the best by itself at 16.
Why do you say that?
"Your hit point maximum increases by an amount equal to twice your level when you gain this feat. Whenever you gain a level thereafter, your hit point maximum increases by an additional 2 hit points."
If you take tough at level 4 you get 8 extra HP and by level 16 have gained 24 more for a total or 32. If you take Tough at level 16 you gain 32 HP when you take the feat.
Taken at level 16 you don't get the benefit of having it at level 4 or 8. So you are getting the bonus hp twice instead of three or four times. The sooner you take the feat the more you get the benefits of having it, ya know?
Getting it at level 4 gives you more HP between levels 4 and 15 but exactly the same at 16. Conversely getting tough at 4 means you don't benefit from whatever feat / ASI you took instead at 4.
I mean, sure. at 16 you'll always get 32 but if you take it at 4 you get 8 PLUS your con mod +2 every level AFTER that. So taking it earlier is just better than later. What I was suggesting is taking the feat the OP took at 4, swapping it for Tough and taking their current 4th level feat and taking it now at 16 so that they can gain more from having Tough in the first place. Taking Tough at 16 is not as good as taking it at 4.
The same is true of every feat, taking tough at 4 and (say) lucky at 16 means you have more HP between the levels of 4 and 15 but taking lucky first means you benefit from luck between levels 4 and 15 instead.
What are you talking about? If you have a character with a d10 hit die and 14 con (+2) then Tough increases you HP by 16% at level 1, and gains you +25% HP at every level beyond 1st. So it actually gets better the later you are in the game regardless of when you take it.
It doesn't get better the later you take it because you lose out on the extra HP you gain from having it sooner. It's not even a debate. That's just facts. You get more HP per level from having it sooner than you would taking it at 16. You can even check this out by making a level 20 character, taking it at 4 and making another level 20 of the same character and taking it at 16 and the one that took it sooner will have more HP than the one who took it later in leveling. Hell, use a human and take it at level 1 instead of 4 vs 16, the one that took it sooner will have more HP at 20 than the person who took it later.
Well sure. But Tough vs Lucky, Lucky gives you Lucky no matter what level you are at. Something like, Tough gives you more benefits the sooner you take it. Lucky never changes its benefits no matter the level you take it while taking Tough sooner gives you more from having taken it. Alert with always be Alert, Resilient will never change. Skilled will always remain the same but the sooner you take something like Tough, the more you get out of it.
Oh, alright.
Say a character has 100 HP at level 20. Ok? Before any feats or anything. 100 HP.
Now, that same character takes Tough at level 4. That gives us 8 HP plus an additional +2 HP for each level after, that's 32 HP. Total: 140 HP.
But behold the magic. The same character takes Tough at level 16. That's 32 HP, plus an additional +2 HP for each level after that, that's 8 HP. Total: 140 HP.
It makes zero difference when you take the feat.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
You're not making sense. There's no compound interest element of Tough. Assuming you're doing the Fixed HP gain at level up instead of rolling, your HP at Level 16 will be the same whether you took Tough at Level 16 or Level 4.
Here's the text of the feat: "Your hit point maximum increases by an amount equal to twice your level when you gain this feat. Whenever you gain a level thereafter, your hit point maximum increases by an additional 2 hit points."
Let's say you have a Level 1 Paladin with a Con score of 16. They'll start off with 10+3 HP at Level 1, and they'll gain 6+3 HP each level after. To keep the math simple, let's assume they never boost their Con score. If they never take tough, their HP progression will be 13,22,31,40,49,58,67,76,85,94,103,112,121,130,139,148,157,166,175,184.
Now, if they take Tough at Level 4, they'll have the same 13,33,31. But at Level 4 they'll get the 40, plus an additional 2 per existing level, so 48. And every level up after they'll get 6+3+2 HP. So now their HP progression will be 13,22,31,48,59,70,81,92,103,114,125,136,147,158,169,180,191,202,213,224.
Let's say they instead choose Tough at Level 16. So their HP progression would be the same as the first set, but when they hit Level 16 they'll get the 148, plus the feat gives them 2 for each existing level, which means 32 HP. What does that give them total? The SAME 180 HP as they would have if they'd taken Tough at Level 4. And going forward, they'll get the same 6+3+2 HP at new levels, giving them the same 191,202,213,224 for their last levels.
Yes, taking Tough early means benefiting from it for more levels, but the benefit at any ONE level is the same whether you've just taken Tough or if you've had it the whole time. It's the same thing as what happens when your Con modifier increases, only it's by 2 HP instead of 1.
Go ahead, check my math. Make a Level 1 Paladin on D&D Beyond with a Con score of 16 after racial bonuses, and make sure it stays 16 as they level up. Choose Fixed HP leveling. Check their HP at Level 20, taking the Tough feat at different points in their progression.
Thanks for all responses. This has now turned into a tough discussion 😂. So I’m going to take inspiring leader for one of the options. For the other one (if I live that long), which is better tough or sentinel? With sentinel, I don’t find that enemy creatures really run away causing opportunity attacks that often.
Very DM dependent.
If creatures are intelligent, and not just beasts I generally try to make them escape when it becomes hopeless. The way Action economy works in dnd 5e, once one side starts loosing it starts spiraling down fast. That bandit that just half his party get ripped apart, and his leader go down has got to be asking himself why they are still there. But some DMs like to keep the fight going, and make the enemies desperate to inflict damage (and it isn't hard to come up with in game reasons for that).
But, I found sentinel useful for stopping that fast attacker sprinting past you to your back line. But again DM dependent if they play enemies with a sense of tactics or just attack those closest to them.
Edit: as mentioned above some of the coolness of sentinel comes when pared with Pole Arm Mastery as you can smack them as they come into you and stop them short.
Thank you, I will consider what you said about sentinel and maybe talk a bit more to my dm about it. With the pole arm mastery, my character uses a shield so I can’t use glaive or halberd. However, I would be able to use a quarterstaff or spear. My current weapon is a war hammer which I’m using in 1 hand so it is 1d8. I know 1d6 + the 1d4 will do more damage but I’m not sure it will be worth it when I could use a different feat instead.
The thing with all the discussion about toughness at L4 or L16 is that the vast majority of time at L4 you aren’t taking a feat - you’re picking up ASIs. So you are probably picking up either strength or charisma at L4 and just living with what ever Con you have. You aren’t likely to have a free feat/ASI until L16 & L19. Taking inspiring leader at L16 helps the whole party for 4 more levels so that is a good place for it. Taking tough at L19 ads 38 HP to what should be around 152 so that is a 25% ncrease in survivability to get you to retirement at L20 not too shabby.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Do you have access to Tasha's? If so, take a look, there's some good feats for final touches there as well; Crusher/Piercer/Slasher add a little extra kick to your weapon, and Fey/Shadow Touched gives you a few free casts if you want to slip an extra spell or two in while saving your slots for smiting.