Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Feats - Improved!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ro" data-source="post: 7253402" data-attributes="member: 6890747"><p><strong>Healer</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>I was worrying about that movement/action connection. I am not sure how to make it more controlled. What about this:</p><p></p><p>"You may extend the range of your healing abilities: When you use your action or bonus action to restore HP or remove a condition or disease from a creature, you may simultaneously move toward that creature a distance up to your speed. Opportunity attacks against you have disadvantage during this movement, and this movement does not count against your movement for your turn."</p><p></p><p><strong>Mage Slayer</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, I like the attacker roll. I think simplifying it to an ability check rather than an attack is the easiest way to knock out magic item bonuses, +2 Archery, and the like.</p><p></p><p><strong>Magic Initiate - v1</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, Magic Initiate is a great feat. We do see that spells are already not gated to abilities when they cross between Wisdom and Charisma from Cleric to Bard or from Intelligence to Charisma from Wizard to Sorcerer. Personally, I think that multiclassing should allow the choice of a single casting stat rather than favoring Sorcerer/Warlock/Bard/Palading or Cleric/Druid/Ranger or Wizard/.... But, short of that, I at least think that it makes sense and isn't overpowered to let you change the little bump you get from Magic Initiate to match the class you are bumping.</p><p></p><p><strong>Magic Initiate - v2</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>It does seem OP, but it is level-limited. It does need to be balanced against Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight. This feat lags behind for 1st- and 2nd-level spells but jumps ahead for 3rd- and 4th-level spells. I don't like that. Unfortunately, we are stuck with the 4-8-12-16-19 feat progression. We could push 3rd back to 16 and 4th back to 19. Then it would be decidedly behind any spellcasting elsewhere in the game, keeping it safer in feat territory. Should everything be bumped back, ignoring the Variant Human? It would be slightly weaker than the stock feat before 8th level, but would improve later.</p><p></p><p>"Magic Initiate - Scaling</p><p>- Choose a class: bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard. You learn two cantrips of your choice from that class’s spell list. In addition, as you increase in character level, you learn the following spells from this list:</p><p>-- At 8th level, one 1st-level spell.</p><p>-- At 12th level, one 2nd-level spell.</p><p>-- At 16th level, one 3rd-level spell.</p><p>-- At 19th level, one 4th-level spell.</p><p>..."</p><p></p><p><strong>Martial Adept</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>This feat already does that to Battlemasters, but nobody takes it so it doesn't matter. The new version would let these classes gain a second fighting style without multiclassing.</p><p></p><p>Who was this feat targeted at the first time around? The new version can be appreciated by any martial class.</p><p></p><p>A fighting style is roughly equal to a half-feat in power.</p><p></p><p><strong>Mounted Combatant</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Absolutely no mind control. It is my understanding that RAW a mount can either act independently or, if the rider can communicate with it, act on the initiative of the rider, but in so doing it is limited to Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. My goal is for this feat to allow you to control an intelligent mount without limiting its abilities. Can you think of a wording that would convey this better?</p><p></p><p><strong>Savage Attacker</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps I misunderstand, but once per turn would be a 60% increase over average damage for this Rogue. That's huge. A +2 ASI, in comparison, is closer to 15% on average.</p><p></p><p>A maximized damage once per turn would be a boon for Rogues, but not so much for Fighters and other Extra Attackers.</p><p></p><p>Maximizing only base damage dice once per turn is a very large boost at low levels. For a Rogue, it doesn't even out to a +2 ASI until Sneak Attack is adding nearly 40 DPR. For a Fighter, it drops behind a +2 ASI after 3 attacks.</p><p></p><p>Based on your numbers from <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?590237-GWM-SS-CEx-updated!" target="_blank">GWM, SS CEx: updated!</a>, it looks like we want an increase of ~150 damage per day. If once per rest gives us ~70 for the Fighter, twice per rest gives ~140, which is very close. Would that be a reasonable change?</p><p></p><p>"Savage Attacker</p><p>- Twice per short rest you can maximize some of your damage. For the rest of your turn, all of your base weapon damage dice rolls are replaced with the maximum possible roll."</p><p></p><p><strong>Sharpshooter - Hunter</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Too true. That's why I let them beef it up with this feat. But I'm not tied to this idea at all.</p><p></p><p><strong>Sharpshooter - Sniper</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm thinking of a sniper making a critical head shot. But in D&D, one shot kills are not (normally) a thing. But, an accurate shot could still debilitate an enemy, and exhaustion is a mechanism to do that.</p><p></p><p>This would, obviously, be a replacement for the -5/+10 mechanic. It could be a fun, unique way to influence combat, but it has to be appropriately balanced.</p><p></p><p><strong>Skulker</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Right, which is why I changed it to advantage instead of Expertise. Advantage will still benefit Rogues.</p><p></p><p><strong>Spell Sniper - v1</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>The choice is limited to Charisma, Intelligence, or Wisdom.</p><p></p><p><strong>Spell Sniper - v2</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fair enough. Advantage is an easily found bonus in gameplay as it is, although rarely for spellcasters. This gives spellcasters a piece of the fun. For a price. (1 feat)</p><p></p><p><strong>Cantrip Master</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Less special? Perhaps. They already share this with Clerics, Draconic Sorcerers, and Warlocks (who have it way better). This gives Evokers an additional bonus, and so that can still keep ahead of unspecial cantrip casters. Note that it does not apply to Eldritch Blast.</p><p></p><p>So, they do not scale for a reason. What is that reason, exactly? Note that the damage scaling does not apply to something like Shillelagh when used with Extra Attack. Also note that the very few cantrips that have not scaled by default seem oddly lacking.</p><p></p><p>As to scaling non-damaging cantrips, why not make utility cantrips more useful? It gives spellcasters more to do than a single spell cast and possibly a damage roll, if they are creative. Other characters get to make multiple attacks and such on their turns already. Mostly this will improve fun and flavor rather than power.</p><p></p><p><strong>Dabbler</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Haha! Yeah, this is near impossible to balance. I focused on early game abilities to try to keep it in check. This would obviate some multiclassing, which could be good or bad. It does make sense for a Ranger to be able to dabble in other Ranger subclasses, for instance. And it some cross-class dabbling can make sense, too.</p><p></p><p>It is definitely important to limit it to single class features rather than everything an entire class offers. I don't think that this is necessarily overpowered (you are spending a feat to get a roughly feat-powered ability) but it is certainly unpredictable.</p><p></p><p><strong>Favored Item</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's an option. I like the idea of a character choosing to be built around a favorite item though with out the DM's direct involvement.</p><p></p><p><strong>Magic Manipulation</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Nonsense! Increasing DC was in both Theurgy and Lore Master UAs. It barely compares to all the attack bonuses every martial class gets. Changing the save is a Lore Master thing, too: it's not really that crazy, once per rest. Again, this is a full feat. And spellcasters don't have many feat options.</p><p></p><p><strong>Magical Weapon</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>I could totally see that. I've thought about Pact of the Blade when reading over it. It's not OP for a feat though.</p><p></p><p><strong>Trained</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Why is that, exactly? Do you really think skill advantage is that much of a game breaker that a play shouldn't be able to spend a feat to get it?</p><p></p><p><strong>Weapon Master</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>This one I'm having more trouble balancing. My intent was to make something that could replace GWM and SS and apply to the player's chosen weapon path. The abilities presented are all carefully balanced to be approximately a +1 ASI in value, half a feat.</p><p></p><p><strong>Cantrips</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>I like the idea of extending True Strike to two rounds. That gives a little benefit. Even so, it probably is better to just attack twice in that case unless you are waiting for an enemy to come in range.</p><p></p><p>What if rather than give advantage, it only negated disadvantage?</p><p></p><p>"<strong>True Strike</strong></p><p><em>Divination cantrip</em></p><p>Casting Time: 1 bonus action</p><p>Range: 30 feet </p><p>Components: S </p><p>Duration: Concentration, up to 2 rounds</p><p>You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target’s defenses. Once before this spell ends, you may ignore disadvantage on one of your ability checks, attack rolls, or saving throws."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ro, post: 7253402, member: 6890747"] [B]Healer[/B] I was worrying about that movement/action connection. I am not sure how to make it more controlled. What about this: "You may extend the range of your healing abilities: When you use your action or bonus action to restore HP or remove a condition or disease from a creature, you may simultaneously move toward that creature a distance up to your speed. Opportunity attacks against you have disadvantage during this movement, and this movement does not count against your movement for your turn." [B]Mage Slayer[/B] Yeah, I like the attacker roll. I think simplifying it to an ability check rather than an attack is the easiest way to knock out magic item bonuses, +2 Archery, and the like. [B]Magic Initiate - v1[/B] Yeah, Magic Initiate is a great feat. We do see that spells are already not gated to abilities when they cross between Wisdom and Charisma from Cleric to Bard or from Intelligence to Charisma from Wizard to Sorcerer. Personally, I think that multiclassing should allow the choice of a single casting stat rather than favoring Sorcerer/Warlock/Bard/Palading or Cleric/Druid/Ranger or Wizard/.... But, short of that, I at least think that it makes sense and isn't overpowered to let you change the little bump you get from Magic Initiate to match the class you are bumping. [B]Magic Initiate - v2[/B] It does seem OP, but it is level-limited. It does need to be balanced against Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight. This feat lags behind for 1st- and 2nd-level spells but jumps ahead for 3rd- and 4th-level spells. I don't like that. Unfortunately, we are stuck with the 4-8-12-16-19 feat progression. We could push 3rd back to 16 and 4th back to 19. Then it would be decidedly behind any spellcasting elsewhere in the game, keeping it safer in feat territory. Should everything be bumped back, ignoring the Variant Human? It would be slightly weaker than the stock feat before 8th level, but would improve later. "Magic Initiate - Scaling - Choose a class: bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard. You learn two cantrips of your choice from that class’s spell list. In addition, as you increase in character level, you learn the following spells from this list: -- At 8th level, one 1st-level spell. -- At 12th level, one 2nd-level spell. -- At 16th level, one 3rd-level spell. -- At 19th level, one 4th-level spell. ..." [B]Martial Adept[/B] This feat already does that to Battlemasters, but nobody takes it so it doesn't matter. The new version would let these classes gain a second fighting style without multiclassing. Who was this feat targeted at the first time around? The new version can be appreciated by any martial class. A fighting style is roughly equal to a half-feat in power. [B]Mounted Combatant[/B] Absolutely no mind control. It is my understanding that RAW a mount can either act independently or, if the rider can communicate with it, act on the initiative of the rider, but in so doing it is limited to Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. My goal is for this feat to allow you to control an intelligent mount without limiting its abilities. Can you think of a wording that would convey this better? [B]Savage Attacker[/B] Perhaps I misunderstand, but once per turn would be a 60% increase over average damage for this Rogue. That's huge. A +2 ASI, in comparison, is closer to 15% on average. A maximized damage once per turn would be a boon for Rogues, but not so much for Fighters and other Extra Attackers. Maximizing only base damage dice once per turn is a very large boost at low levels. For a Rogue, it doesn't even out to a +2 ASI until Sneak Attack is adding nearly 40 DPR. For a Fighter, it drops behind a +2 ASI after 3 attacks. Based on your numbers from [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?590237-GWM-SS-CEx-updated!"]GWM, SS CEx: updated![/URL], it looks like we want an increase of ~150 damage per day. If once per rest gives us ~70 for the Fighter, twice per rest gives ~140, which is very close. Would that be a reasonable change? "Savage Attacker - Twice per short rest you can maximize some of your damage. For the rest of your turn, all of your base weapon damage dice rolls are replaced with the maximum possible roll." [B]Sharpshooter - Hunter[/B] Too true. That's why I let them beef it up with this feat. But I'm not tied to this idea at all. [B]Sharpshooter - Sniper[/B] I'm thinking of a sniper making a critical head shot. But in D&D, one shot kills are not (normally) a thing. But, an accurate shot could still debilitate an enemy, and exhaustion is a mechanism to do that. This would, obviously, be a replacement for the -5/+10 mechanic. It could be a fun, unique way to influence combat, but it has to be appropriately balanced. [B]Skulker[/B] Right, which is why I changed it to advantage instead of Expertise. Advantage will still benefit Rogues. [B]Spell Sniper - v1[/B] The choice is limited to Charisma, Intelligence, or Wisdom. [B]Spell Sniper - v2[/B] Fair enough. Advantage is an easily found bonus in gameplay as it is, although rarely for spellcasters. This gives spellcasters a piece of the fun. For a price. (1 feat) [B]Cantrip Master[/B] Less special? Perhaps. They already share this with Clerics, Draconic Sorcerers, and Warlocks (who have it way better). This gives Evokers an additional bonus, and so that can still keep ahead of unspecial cantrip casters. Note that it does not apply to Eldritch Blast. So, they do not scale for a reason. What is that reason, exactly? Note that the damage scaling does not apply to something like Shillelagh when used with Extra Attack. Also note that the very few cantrips that have not scaled by default seem oddly lacking. As to scaling non-damaging cantrips, why not make utility cantrips more useful? It gives spellcasters more to do than a single spell cast and possibly a damage roll, if they are creative. Other characters get to make multiple attacks and such on their turns already. Mostly this will improve fun and flavor rather than power. [B]Dabbler[/B] Haha! Yeah, this is near impossible to balance. I focused on early game abilities to try to keep it in check. This would obviate some multiclassing, which could be good or bad. It does make sense for a Ranger to be able to dabble in other Ranger subclasses, for instance. And it some cross-class dabbling can make sense, too. It is definitely important to limit it to single class features rather than everything an entire class offers. I don't think that this is necessarily overpowered (you are spending a feat to get a roughly feat-powered ability) but it is certainly unpredictable. [B]Favored Item[/B] That's an option. I like the idea of a character choosing to be built around a favorite item though with out the DM's direct involvement. [B]Magic Manipulation[/B] Nonsense! Increasing DC was in both Theurgy and Lore Master UAs. It barely compares to all the attack bonuses every martial class gets. Changing the save is a Lore Master thing, too: it's not really that crazy, once per rest. Again, this is a full feat. And spellcasters don't have many feat options. [B]Magical Weapon[/B] I could totally see that. I've thought about Pact of the Blade when reading over it. It's not OP for a feat though. [B]Trained[/B] Why is that, exactly? Do you really think skill advantage is that much of a game breaker that a play shouldn't be able to spend a feat to get it? [B]Weapon Master[/B] This one I'm having more trouble balancing. My intent was to make something that could replace GWM and SS and apply to the player's chosen weapon path. The abilities presented are all carefully balanced to be approximately a +1 ASI in value, half a feat. [B]Cantrips[/B] I like the idea of extending True Strike to two rounds. That gives a little benefit. Even so, it probably is better to just attack twice in that case unless you are waiting for an enemy to come in range. What if rather than give advantage, it only negated disadvantage? "[B]True Strike[/B] [I]Divination cantrip[/I] Casting Time: 1 bonus action Range: 30 feet Components: S Duration: Concentration, up to 2 rounds You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target’s defenses. Once before this spell ends, you may ignore disadvantage on one of your ability checks, attack rolls, or saving throws." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Feats - Improved!
Top