D&D 5E If "Extra Attack" Was A Feat, What Would Its Prerequisites Be?

[CleverNickName]

I thought you were proposing changing it to a Feat though?

No, I'm not removing anything...just adding a feat. As it is written, this feat would only be useful for characters that normally wouldn't get Extra Attack unless they multiclassed.

 

[Clint_L]

I agree that it should be baked into rogue. Not as a feat, though.

 

[Yaarel]

Extra Attack is a damage MULTIPLIER, that creates non-linear geometric math.

It cannot balance by means of prerequisite. It can only be factored in carefully as a class feature at the appropriate tiers − and at the cost of many other features.

 

[Clint_L]

No, I'm not removing anything...just adding a feat. As it is written, this feat would only be useful for characters that normally wouldn't get Extra Attack unless they multiclassed.

That's even worse. Thus, with the feat as you described, wizards would get more attacks per round at high levels than paladins, barbarians, monks, and rangers. That doesn't make any sense.

 

[CleverNickName]

It cannot balance by means of prerequisite. It can only be factored in carefully at the appropriate tiers − and at the cost of many other features.

I don't disagree, but what would you suggest? (Besides multiclass with Fighter, I mean.)

with the feat as you described, wizards would get more attacks per round at high levels than paladins, barbarians, monks, and rangers.

I'm having trouble seeing this. How so? (Unless you're talking about the older version I had written, before I removed the scaling.)

 

[TwoSix]

Nope, the intent is to provide a way for characters that wouldn't normally get the Extra Attack feature to get it, and without having to multiclass.

The thing is, I really don't like the way that multiclassing works in 5E, so I'm looking for other ways to mix-and-match class features. Feats were a logical first place to start.

The only strong build where this would seem to be an obvious choice is Paladin 2/Caster X. So if you're changing/removing MC, I don't see where the issue is. Especially since with no MCing, no one can actually get the feat until level 8.

The only class that jumps out at me as really wanting this feat is Rogue, and maybe Cleric and Druid.

 

[Fanaelialae]

A fighter (for example) can gain spellcasting ability that scales with level just by taking a single feat (Magic Initiate). I guess I'm not seeing the problem with a sorcerer (for example) gaining two weapon attacks in the same manner. But you aren't the only one to suggest it's a problem, so it's probably a lack of understanding on my part.

A fighter can gain cantrips that scale with level using a feat. To the best of my knowledge, there is no official feat that gives a fighter the ability to cast fireball, which was what I noted in my response as what I see as the appropriate balancing point (and which is insufficient if the feat scales past one extra attack).

 

[TwoSix]

That's even worse. Thus, with the feat as you described, wizards would get more attacks per round at high levels than paladins, barbarians, monks, and rangers. That doesn't make any sense.

I think you missed that he modified the feat in the OP, so that it doesn't scale to Extra Attack(2) and Extra Attack(3) at levels 11 and 20.

 

[ECMO3]

Suppose you were going to make the Extra Attack class feature into a feat. You have your reasons: maybe you love clerics but hate multiclassing, maybe you want to play some kind of weird "half-martial" character, maybe you just like hitting things with a hammer, whatever. You've already figured out the "Why" for your table, and now you're working on the "How." How would you balance it? How would you fill in the orange text?

Extra Attack
Prerequisites: <Your Text Here>
You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the attack action on your turn.
The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level, and to four when you reach 20th level.

I'm leaning toward "5th level, proficiency with a martial weapon" but I'm curious what others might think.

They would probably put a level limit on it, but I don't think there should be any prerequisites.

That might lead to an interesting design change - take away Fighters and Barbarians as classes and roll extra attack into a feat that can be taken by any class at any level. That would lead to some very interesting builds and open up the Sorcerer class a lot.

 

[Yaarel]

I don't disagree, but what would you suggest? (Besides multiclass with Fighter, I mean.)

I dont see how it is possible.

Consider how the Fighter class is gaining an Extra Attack INSTEAD of high tier spells.

In any case, an Extra Attack is certainly worth more than a single feat − especially if there are already other Extra Attacks multiplying the damage.

A better approach would be to create a subclass. Then look carefully at the math − and compare damage versus high level spells − to get a sense of what amount of total damage possible is tolerable within gaming balance. Then calibrate the levels of the subclass to "pay" for the Extra Attack at a higher subclass level.