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
[Homebrew] Defensive Duelist
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="clearstream" data-source="post: 7284707" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>The intent of my revision was that a versatile weapon wielded in two hands would also be able to use the feat, i.e. "...one-handed <u><strong>or</strong></u> <em>Versatile</em>". While perhaps versatile weapons should have their own feat, I don't see harm in broadening feats like Defensive Duelist, and elsewhere WotC's designers have claimed that a goal of theirs was to ensure feats could be used by a wider range of characters. The original version of DD limits to finesse and has the Dex 13 requirement, which... seems really at odds with what they do with feats elsewhere.</p><p></p><p>For me, the key to Defensive Duelist is resolving the over-leveraged action-economy. When I ask myself - why wouldn't a player take this feat? - I come up with answers like:</p><p></p><p>I'm using my reaction for Uncanny Dodge (doubly poor in the un-revised version given that Rogues will be a key user of finesse weapons!)</p><p>I'm using my reaction to cast Shield</p><p>I'm saving my reaction to Riposte</p><p>I'm saving my reaction for Sentinel triggers</p><p>I'm saving my reaction for Opportunity Attacks</p><p>I'd rather have +1 AC always, +1 initiative, +1 attack modifier, +1 damage, +1 to skills</p><p>I'm sword-and-board and would rather have Shield Master</p><p>It's not <em>skilfull</em> i.e. I can't make it play into my other abilities</p><p></p><p>I feel that if this feat can play <em>into</em> those, instead of forestalling them, it starts to become good. If it is broader - matters to more characters - by removing the pre-req and letting it work for Longsword et al, that helps. Limiting to finesse just feels like bad design to me: it puts the feat in direct competition with a Dexterity ASI and pushes it away from sword-and-board unnecessarily. Unnecessary, is how those limitations feel: I don't think anyone is saying the feat will be OP if it covers all one-handed and versatile.</p><p></p><p>Even with the use broadened and the reaction resolved, I feel like the feat doesn't out-compete alternatives for ASIs. At 4th I think many characters will prefer an ability increase. And I dislike the paradoxical narrowing that entails (of making the feat priority more a Fighter 6th pick). Hence pulling what is otherwise a trap feat - Savage Attacker - into it. This works reasonably for Versatile weapons as it adds a point of damage to them even when rolling one die, and obviously pays off for a key client which is Sneak Attack damage. The feat then does as well on damage as +2 Dex, and much better on AC. Losing in trade initiative, attack modifier, and some skill improvements. It starts to look better than the ASI unless you're already using your reaction for something. With the reaction fixed it's starts moving toward the power of SS and SM.</p><p></p><p></p><p> [MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION]'s version upgrades Dodge to give you one attack. That will be reasonable for Rogues, discouraging for Fighters. It gets rid of OAs making it conflict with Sentinel and Polearm Master. On the other hand, it would reward Battlemasters with Riposte who are using their reaction that way. It then counteracts that by demanding your reaction to get future advantage.</p><p></p><p>It was helpful to see this direction explored. I feel it moves quite far away from what the original does (my design intent is generally conservative - limiting additional concepts and language). For me, crucially, it doesn't seem to resolve my posited reasons for being unable to take DD.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 7284707, member: 71699"] The intent of my revision was that a versatile weapon wielded in two hands would also be able to use the feat, i.e. "...one-handed [U][B]or[/B][/U] [I]Versatile[/I]". While perhaps versatile weapons should have their own feat, I don't see harm in broadening feats like Defensive Duelist, and elsewhere WotC's designers have claimed that a goal of theirs was to ensure feats could be used by a wider range of characters. The original version of DD limits to finesse and has the Dex 13 requirement, which... seems really at odds with what they do with feats elsewhere. For me, the key to Defensive Duelist is resolving the over-leveraged action-economy. When I ask myself - why wouldn't a player take this feat? - I come up with answers like: I'm using my reaction for Uncanny Dodge (doubly poor in the un-revised version given that Rogues will be a key user of finesse weapons!) I'm using my reaction to cast Shield I'm saving my reaction to Riposte I'm saving my reaction for Sentinel triggers I'm saving my reaction for Opportunity Attacks I'd rather have +1 AC always, +1 initiative, +1 attack modifier, +1 damage, +1 to skills I'm sword-and-board and would rather have Shield Master It's not [I]skilfull[/I] i.e. I can't make it play into my other abilities I feel that if this feat can play [I]into[/I] those, instead of forestalling them, it starts to become good. If it is broader - matters to more characters - by removing the pre-req and letting it work for Longsword et al, that helps. Limiting to finesse just feels like bad design to me: it puts the feat in direct competition with a Dexterity ASI and pushes it away from sword-and-board unnecessarily. Unnecessary, is how those limitations feel: I don't think anyone is saying the feat will be OP if it covers all one-handed and versatile. Even with the use broadened and the reaction resolved, I feel like the feat doesn't out-compete alternatives for ASIs. At 4th I think many characters will prefer an ability increase. And I dislike the paradoxical narrowing that entails (of making the feat priority more a Fighter 6th pick). Hence pulling what is otherwise a trap feat - Savage Attacker - into it. This works reasonably for Versatile weapons as it adds a point of damage to them even when rolling one die, and obviously pays off for a key client which is Sneak Attack damage. The feat then does as well on damage as +2 Dex, and much better on AC. Losing in trade initiative, attack modifier, and some skill improvements. It starts to look better than the ASI unless you're already using your reaction for something. With the reaction fixed it's starts moving toward the power of SS and SM. [MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION]'s version upgrades Dodge to give you one attack. That will be reasonable for Rogues, discouraging for Fighters. It gets rid of OAs making it conflict with Sentinel and Polearm Master. On the other hand, it would reward Battlemasters with Riposte who are using their reaction that way. It then counteracts that by demanding your reaction to get future advantage. It was helpful to see this direction explored. I feel it moves quite far away from what the original does (my design intent is generally conservative - limiting additional concepts and language). For me, crucially, it doesn't seem to resolve my posited reasons for being unable to take DD. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[Homebrew] Defensive Duelist
Top