After checking some game I will not mention, what I feel (from start, not now) with D&D 5E is to be very limited in character choices. Only having a few feats pushes you to take always the same.
I am considering to use another method for when playing D&D, that would be something like (some notes):
- All the common characters (excluding the extra ones for some classes) original feats are reserved for ASI.
- Between those levels you get a feat that cannot be used for ASI. At levels 2, 6, 10...
- No feat grants score increase, just remove it from them.
- Remove most of the feat requirements, just let the player get what wants to mold its character.
- The extra feats for some classes cannot be used for ASI.
- Allow to get on ASI feats granting proficiencies (Skilled, Prodigy, Weapon Master), and if play with a style much based on skills and skill proficiency allow to get them multiple times if applicable (i.e. Skilled).
- ASI increases only 1 instead 2?. In this case give the option to sacrifice the next feat (if any and must be one to take this option) to increase 2.
Well currently are just notes and could require some polish, but that is the idea for flexibilizing character creation and allowing players to try more different things.
Should the OD&D make a step ahead and fix this changing the character progress choices mechanics? As most are imposed by class and subclass.
Sounds difficult to balance; if you drop the ability score increases from half-feats that only makes those much worse compared to "full feats" that give stronger abilities but no score increase.
If we assume feats are reasonably balanced against one another (they're not, but most are close enough) then all you really need to do is allow extra feat picks; I've done this in a few groups as our preferred start was 3rd-level with a free feat (it's now 5th-level with a free feat) which makes it much, much easier to establish a character early on.
There are definitely some feats that need to be vetoed though, as Polearm Expert for example can be absurdly strong at earlier levels without the tradeoff of losing an ability score increase. Not that that's ever stopped Variant Humans from taking it, but they are of course themselves an optional rule the DM can refuse.
Honestly though I'd recommend against giving out too many; one or two bonus feats is plenty IMO if you want to have stronger characters or give access to build options you wouldn't normally take until tier 3 or 4. Just keep in mind that these can make player characters a lot stronger; when calculating encounter challenge ratings I'd treat them as being at least half a level stronger per free feat, not unlike campaigns that give out rarer magic items early.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Feats should be WEAKER, more plentiful and detached from ASI. You should get 2 ASI points like usually, but also get access to feats at certain intervals. Maybe at the same levels as you'd get ASI to make those levels more exciting.
Half-Feats are almost all fine with the removal of the ASI as is. Some raw feats would need some rebalancing while others are mostly fine. e.g.
Enduring Mind: CON on concentration checks
Warcaster: No spell disadvantage on ranged spell attacks in melee + Reaction Spell attack
Sniper: Ignore half and 3/4 cover on ranged attacks.
Sounds difficult to balance; if you drop the ability score increases from half-feats that only makes those much worse compared to "full feats" that give stronger abilities but no score increase.
If we assume feats are reasonably balanced against one another (they're not, but most are close enough) then all you really need to do is allow extra feat picks; I've done this in a few groups as our preferred start was 3rd-level with a free feat (it's now 5th-level with a free feat) which makes it much, much easier to establish a character early on.
There are definitely some feats that need to be vetoed though, as Polearm Expert for example can be absurdly strong at earlier levels without the tradeoff of losing an ability score increase. Not that that's ever stopped Variant Humans from taking it, but they are of course themselves an optional rule the DM can refuse.
Honestly though I'd recommend against giving out too many; one or two bonus feats is plenty IMO if you want to have stronger characters or give access to build options you wouldn't normally take until tier 3 or 4. Just keep in mind that these can make player characters a lot stronger; when calculating encounter challenge ratings I'd treat them as being at least half a level stronger per free feat, not unlike campaigns that give out rarer magic items early.
Yes usually, but the idea is feats for molding your character style while detaching from ASI. So you can customize your own style for each character. I found very hard to achieve this with the current method. Then the feats for your abilities and independent of your stats, without that pressure.
I‘ll give it some more thinking but definitely not using the core method, too limited.
Are y’all actually playing enough games that you feel like characters that you’ve seen in play are all picking the same things or are y’all talking about stuff you heard online or seen on shows is getting repeated. If you feel there is a lack of options in the game feats are the last place you should be looking to fix it.
Are y’all actually playing enough games that you feel like characters that you’ve seen in play are all picking the same things or are y’all talking about stuff you heard online or seen on shows is getting repeated. If you feel there is a lack of options in the game feats are the last place you should be looking to fix it.
Is not the number of feats, is your choices when creating characters. Only have feats at levels 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19, usually only the first 3 are used. So you are very limited on your REAL choices, taking into account the ability increase plus the own feats requirements.
Are y’all actually playing enough games that you feel like characters that you’ve seen in play are all picking the same things or are y’all talking about stuff you heard online or seen on shows is getting repeated. If you feel there is a lack of options in the game feats are the last place you should be looking to fix it.
Is not the number of feats, is your choices when creating characters. Only have feats at levels 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19, usually only the first 3 are used. So you are very limited on your REAL choices, taking into account the ability increase plus the own feats requirements.
People who want to play pathfinder should play pathfinder. It’s a fine game. I don’t want D&D to start emulating that system. There is enough choice in D&D when creating a character for play. If you just want to sit around theory crafting builds then sure Pathfinder gives you more choice to build characters, but as someone who onboards new players imo D&D definitely has a enough choices. 5e was never meant to be a game of Feats. That was 3.5e
For me is an self-limitation that makes the game worse, while it can perfectly have the same balance system making character creation more satisfactory. No need to be Pathfinder it can be done just with D&D own rules, that IMHO is just a matter about distribution.
More thinking about it, maybe this method:
- The feats granted by class are original feats.
- The original ones can be used for ASI or any feat.
- All classes get one extra feat at levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 17.
- The extra ones can be used for ASI or feats granting proficiency/ies.
- ASI only increases 1 instead 2.
- Remove most of the feats requirements, when applicable.
- Remove any ASI from feats.
- Unless not possible, allow to get any feat multiple times (DM discretion).
This way if you only get ASI is like the original, or getting a half-feat + ASI is the same than getting only the original half-feat. This method improves the feats without ASI specially those granting proficiencies, that IMO makes more interesting and unique characters.
I.e., using the original 5E, you can have a Sorcerer with light armor and a combat style at level 4, getting a combat style at 4th (we remove the martial weapon requirement) and light armor at 2nd, then using ASI at level 6 and 8 to improve Charisma if started with 16, or ASI at 6th and medium armor at 8th if started with 17.
A Wizard can finally take back Metamagic with the feat at Tasha, getting it multiple times i.e. at level 4, 8, 12 while ASI at 2, 6, 10 to get 6 Sorcery Points if want to specialize on that.
A Fighter can get Fey Touch multiple times to get some magic usage, including multiple uses of Invisibility with no need to multi-class.
Any character can be tempted to get Mounted Combat.
The party explorer could want to get Dungeon Delver finally.
As summary increasing granularity seems better to me, instead focusing so much in just a few points in your character life to define how it is. In the case of half-feats losing ASI, you probably want to have them, or did no one would get GWM now? Probably you want it.
After checking some game I will not mention, what I feel (from start, not now) with D&D 5E is to be very limited in character choices. Only having a few feats pushes you to take always the same.
I am considering to use another method for when playing D&D, that would be something like (some notes):
- All the common characters (excluding the extra ones for some classes) original feats are reserved for ASI.
- Between those levels you get a feat that cannot be used for ASI. At levels 2, 6, 10...
- No feat grants score increase, just remove it from them.
- Remove most of the feat requirements, just let the player get what wants to mold its character.
- The extra feats for some classes cannot be used for ASI.
- Allow to get on ASI feats granting proficiencies (Skilled, Prodigy, Weapon Master), and if play with a style much based on skills and skill proficiency allow to get them multiple times if applicable (i.e. Skilled).
- ASI increases only 1 instead 2?. In this case give the option to sacrifice the next feat (if any and must be one to take this option) to increase 2.
Well currently are just notes and could require some polish, but that is the idea for flexibilizing character creation and allowing players to try more different things.
Should the OD&D make a step ahead and fix this changing the character progress choices mechanics? As most are imposed by class and subclass.
Sounds difficult to balance; if you drop the ability score increases from half-feats that only makes those much worse compared to "full feats" that give stronger abilities but no score increase.
If we assume feats are reasonably balanced against one another (they're not, but most are close enough) then all you really need to do is allow extra feat picks; I've done this in a few groups as our preferred start was 3rd-level with a free feat (it's now 5th-level with a free feat) which makes it much, much easier to establish a character early on.
There are definitely some feats that need to be vetoed though, as Polearm Expert for example can be absurdly strong at earlier levels without the tradeoff of losing an ability score increase. Not that that's ever stopped Variant Humans from taking it, but they are of course themselves an optional rule the DM can refuse.
Honestly though I'd recommend against giving out too many; one or two bonus feats is plenty IMO if you want to have stronger characters or give access to build options you wouldn't normally take until tier 3 or 4. Just keep in mind that these can make player characters a lot stronger; when calculating encounter challenge ratings I'd treat them as being at least half a level stronger per free feat, not unlike campaigns that give out rarer magic items early.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Feats should be WEAKER, more plentiful and detached from ASI. You should get 2 ASI points like usually, but also get access to feats at certain intervals. Maybe at the same levels as you'd get ASI to make those levels more exciting.
Half-Feats are almost all fine with the removal of the ASI as is. Some raw feats would need some rebalancing while others are mostly fine. e.g.
Yes usually, but the idea is feats for molding your character style while detaching from ASI. So you can customize your own style for each character. I found very hard to achieve this with the current method. Then the feats for your abilities and independent of your stats, without that pressure.
I‘ll give it some more thinking but definitely not using the core method, too limited.
WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?!!
Are y’all actually playing enough games that you feel like characters that you’ve seen in play are all picking the same things or are y’all talking about stuff you heard online or seen on shows is getting repeated. If you feel there is a lack of options in the game feats are the last place you should be looking to fix it.
Is not the number of feats, is your choices when creating characters. Only have feats at levels 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19, usually only the first 3 are used. So you are very limited on your REAL choices, taking into account the ability increase plus the own feats requirements.
People who want to play pathfinder should play pathfinder. It’s a fine game. I don’t want D&D to start emulating that system. There is enough choice in D&D when creating a character for play. If you just want to sit around theory crafting builds then sure Pathfinder gives you more choice to build characters, but as someone who onboards new players imo D&D definitely has a enough choices. 5e was never meant to be a game of Feats. That was 3.5e
For me is an self-limitation that makes the game worse, while it can perfectly have the same balance system making character creation more satisfactory. No need to be Pathfinder it can be done just with D&D own rules, that IMHO is just a matter about distribution.
More thinking about it, maybe this method:
- The feats granted by class are original feats.
- The original ones can be used for ASI or any feat.
- All classes get one extra feat at levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 17.
- The extra ones can be used for ASI or feats granting proficiency/ies.
- ASI only increases 1 instead 2.
- Remove most of the feats requirements, when applicable.
- Remove any ASI from feats.
- Unless not possible, allow to get any feat multiple times (DM discretion).
This way if you only get ASI is like the original, or getting a half-feat + ASI is the same than getting only the original half-feat. This method improves the feats without ASI specially those granting proficiencies, that IMO makes more interesting and unique characters.
I.e., using the original 5E, you can have a Sorcerer with light armor and a combat style at level 4, getting a combat style at 4th (we remove the martial weapon requirement) and light armor at 2nd, then using ASI at level 6 and 8 to improve Charisma if started with 16, or ASI at 6th and medium armor at 8th if started with 17.
A Wizard can finally take back Metamagic with the feat at Tasha, getting it multiple times i.e. at level 4, 8, 12 while ASI at 2, 6, 10 to get 6 Sorcery Points if want to specialize on that.
A Fighter can get Fey Touch multiple times to get some magic usage, including multiple uses of Invisibility with no need to multi-class.
Any character can be tempted to get Mounted Combat.
The party explorer could want to get Dungeon Delver finally.
As summary increasing granularity seems better to me, instead focusing so much in just a few points in your character life to define how it is. In the case of half-feats losing ASI, you probably want to have them, or did no one would get GWM now? Probably you want it.