Thanks for the detailed responses. If I don't mention something it's because I agree with your thinking and have nothing more to offer.
Athlete
- Once per day when you would gain a level of exhaustion, you may choose not to. You regain this ability after a long rest and ingesting some food and drink."
That's more potent then I was considering, but not out-of-line for a feat. I was picturing it just let you treat as one level less but you still needed to remove it. Plus if you went into a day with some levels and gained one more it would have an effect. But still, that works.
Mounted Combatant - would like to add one thing - size based shoving should be based on mount size, not your own.
I think this is covered with "You can make the roll to shove using either your own, or your mount’s ability." How might this be clarified?
Ah, I took "ability" as the game term "ability score". So you could use your STR or your mount's STR. A Warhorse only has an 18 STR, other mounts could be even less, especially if you are small. I think we're in agreement on mounts size counting, just making sure the wording conveys that.
This shortens the path to being a grappler to one feat from two. Do you think that both feats are good enough separately to justify a character spending +4 ASI to get them? According to @
vonklaude's polling, they are very rarely taken.
Above I took your advice on Athlete and suggested changing it to advantage, and only after you take both Athletics and Acrobatics proficiencies. This should help mitigate this issue.[/quote]
Reasonable point - +4 ASI is a big deal. But...
Not getting taken often doesn't mean that the build that does focus on grappling is not powerful, just not common. With all that comes with being grappled (0 speed, which also means can't unprone, able to be moved, etc.), havign all of these extra chances to grapple someone seems just to take it a step too much. Compare extra attack where you use one attack to grapple and one attack to attack vs. a bonus action to grapple and then two attacks (with advantage) to attack. It's double the attacks plus a big chance extra to hit.
(Dungeon Delver)
Hm. Again, this is one that was almost never taken in the poll. The abilities added are mostly fluff from other feats that were almost never taken. The +1 ASI is notable, however. I personally don't think this feat is overpowered, and it was certainly underused before. What suggestions do you have for improving it? Would dropping the ASI solve the problem? (If you do drop it, that removes another feat from the options of Wis and Int characters who already have very, very few half-feats available to them.)
Oh no, leave the ASI. I'm more concerned that a rogue taking this will need serious adjustments in all traps and secret doors to keep them competitive. And the flip side - if someone does take it, the bar gets raised and anyone who has the skills via background or whatever but hasn't taken this has no chance to compete even though trained.
But you know what - there's so much focus on combat feats, if someone wants to really excel at part of the exploration pillar, let them. I withdraw my concerns.
Elemental Adept - you convinced me
There is at least one race or class feature that allows Con casting, which is why I opened it to this. I want the Mage Slayer feat to be for martials particularly, people who may very well have low Int/Wis/Chr. My thought is that the Counterspell is part of their attack.
What about this change:
- "You can cast Counterspell once per long rest without expending a spell slot. You must be able to target the creature with an attack or spell: your spellcasting ability for Counterspell is the ability you would use to attack or cast a spell at this creature."
Oh this I like. Now it fits. Good with it.
Though as an alternative, how about "Once per long rest you may use your reaction to attack a creature casting a spell. If you hit, they must make a Concentration save at disadvantage or the spell is not cast."
In other words, bring it back to an actual attack that does damage, and treats it like a spell that takes multiple rounds to cast (PHB pg 202) which is this edition's only interrupt spellcasting mechanic. Replaces the Counterspell roll with a too hit roll, and has the advantage of doing damage and really matching the mechanics to the in-game narrative.
(Or not, I'm fine with what you have.)
"Magic Initiate
- Choose a class: bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard. You learn two cantrips of your choice from that class’s spell list. As you increase in character level, you learn the following spells from this list:
- At 4th level, one 1st-level spell.
- At 8th level, one 2nd-level spell.
- At 12th level, one 3rd-level spell.
- At 16th level, one 4th-level spell.
- When you gain a level, you may replace any spell you know from this feat with another from the list of the same level. You may not change these spells otherwise.
- You also gain one spell slot which can be regained after a long rest. Its level matches the level of the highest spell you know from this feat, and it can be used for any spell you know or have prepared of that level or lower.
- These spells do not count against the number of spells you know or can prepare. If these spells have the ritual tag, you may cast them as rituals.
- These spells are associated with the class of your choice--e.g. if you are a Barbarian, they are Barbarian spells for you. Your spellcasting ability for these spells is Charisma, Wisdom, or Intelligence (your choice)."
Brilliant. I like your solution to scaling better then my own.
With the single slot, does that come in at 4th (because variant humans could start with this feat but no spells known). "Starting at 4th level, ..."
(Savage Attacker)
But it applies to all attacks on a turn. Is the rogue and paladin nova potential significantly greater than that of other characters?
This is inspired by the Channel Divinity of the Tempest Cleric, but it does not scale as Channel Divinity does.
If you limit nova damage to dice only and eliminate all static damage (because this only affects dice), then yes I think rogue or paladin can nova much more than anyone else.
Fighter 11 w/ 2d6 weapon: 3 attacks, 2d6 (avg 7) becomes 12. 15 HPs increase on average.
Rogue 11 w/ d6 shortswords fighting two weapon and 6d6 SA: 2 attacks: d6 (3.5) + once per round 6d6 (21) = 28. Maxed=38. Increase 20 damage. (Hmm, I would have expected this to be higher.)
Paladin 11 w/ 2d6 weapon and Divine Smite: 2 attacks: 2d6 (7) + d8 (4.5) (improved divine smite) + 3d8 (13.5) (divine smite slot) = 50 avg damage. Maxed=88. Increase 38 damage. AND that's with 2nd level slots used for divine smite, but if you know they are going to be maximized why not go for 3rd level slots.
Again, this is just the maximization effect. Fighters adding ability score damage three times will increase their total more than a rogue adding it once (assuming no two weapon fighting style). It's not saying any are weaker or more powerful (paladin uses up daily resources to do that), just that maximizing all attack damage helps some classes more than others.
Okay, so my math show me to be partially wrong. Rogues should be able to take advantage to keep their damage on par with the increases others get. But the Divine Smite brought paladins too far ahead. If they just had weapon and their always on Improved Divine Smite then it would be okay.
Thanks a great deal for taking the time to go through my feedback in such a thorough manner. It's been really constructive.
