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

[CleverNickName]

Too much rolling IMO.

Do 2x weapon damage or something instead.

Yeah, agreed. "For my first attack...and my second...and my third...and my fourth...and my fifth...and my sixth...and now I'll Action Surge, and for my other first attack....and my other second...and my other third..." No thank you.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

One Warlock invocation is seen as being equivalent to a basic (no-level-prerequisite) feat. Likewise, one feat is seen as equivalent to a no-level-prerequisite Warlock invocation. Hence, there's a certain equivalency there. It's not quite equivalent, due to the enforced limitations, but it's a starting point.

There is an invocation in 5.5e, which gives Extra Attack. It requires a specific class (Warlock) to be 5th level. It becomes 2x Extra Attack (that is, attack three times) at Warlock 11, without needing to invest another invocation. It's Thirsting Blade, and that's all it does.

To me, this says that the baseline feat requiring 5th level is fine, regardless of multiclassing. However, if you wanted to allow higher amounts, I would add...

Improved Extra Attack
Prerequisite: Extra Attack feat, character level 12, 11 levels in at least one single class
When you use the Attack action, you may attack three times instead of only once.

This is less powerful than Thirsting Blade (since it requires two feats, not just one), and requires a high degree of focus. You'll have given up two of the three feats usually available to your character at this level, and you have to have nothing more than a one-level dip to make it work--or wait until even higher levels than 12.

It'd probably still be a little wonky in terms of power, because now you can have Extra Attack on a Rogue. But 5e doesn't really care that much about balance to begin with, and thus helps non-spellcasters far more than it helps spellcasters.

 

[NotAYakk]

Preq: Combat Style, 11th level, 16 strength, 16 dexterity, proficiency with a martial weapon, heavy armor proficiency, shield proficiency, proficiency with strength saving throws.

Still a top notch feat with all of that.

 

[Deset Gled]

I would prefer to balance this by limiting the number of uses rather than by prerequisites. Something along the lines of 1 per short rest when first taken, and maybe 6 per short rest at level 20.

This would make it much more in line with feats like Martial Adept or Magic Initiate that give you a taste of another class.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I think this is what we are trying to fix. Make it easier to get for a PC who is not a martial and does not want to take a subclass designed for that.

I look at someone playing a Sorcerer specifically, because there are no good Gish subclass options for that class.

Also it is just not going to be broken. My 4th level caster with extra attack is not all of a sudden OP and my 12th level full caster with extra attack is probably actually weaker than the other full caster in the party who got warcaster, Fey Touched, or another spell-casting aligned feat instead.

In terms of relative power increase I think Magic Initiate-Warlock with Hex, Eldritch Blast and Minor IIlusion on a strength-based Fighter or Paladin does more for the character build than an extra attack feat would do for most full casters.

Well if it's weaker, then why gate it behind a feat tax? Just make it so every class gets extra attack at 5th level, because it's clearly weaker than existing options and not an upgrade for anyone. Seems reasonable?

 

[Shardstone]

Too much rolling IMO.

Do 2x weapon damage or something instead.

Itd only be too much if games lasted to 17th level

 

[Horwath]

You're giving away almost all of the fighter's special stuff with one feat. Hence my comment of "what are the appropriate prereqs for balancing a feat giving full 9 level casting". I don't think any prereqs would balance it. Three feats might be doable.

This.

it's +100% damage output, it's a full feat

2nd feat for 3rd attack might be a half-feat as it gives only +50% damage, from 2 to 3 attacks.

level requirement could be 8 and 16, so fighters and other martials get that feature sooner.


might add a half feat for a fighter exclusive at 16th level. +1 extra attack.

 

[Fanaelialae]

IMO, you can't just balance a feat around the worst use-case you can think of (even if that's your focal use-case, like in the case of giving a wizard the ability to gain extra attack).

For example, let's consider a more optimal use-case for this hypothetical feat. Paladin 2 / Sorcerer X multiclass. Assuming a full 20 levels of progression, this offers full progression casting up to 9th level spells, and smites for days. The one drawback compared to something like P5/SX, is that it only has one attack, which makes its damage output more swingy and limits its maximal output. With a feat like this, the cost to get the extra attack becomes fairly trivial (one ASI vs 3 sorcerer levels is a no brainer).

 

[TwoSix]

IMO, you can't just balance a feat around the worst use-case you can think of (even if that's your focal use-case, like in the case of giving a wizard the ability to gain extra attack).

For example, let's consider a more optimal use-case for this hypothetical feat. Paladin 2 / Sorcerer X multiclass. Assuming a full 20 levels of progression, this offers full progression casting up to 9th level spells, and smites for days. The one drawback compared to something like P5/SX, is that it only has one attack, which makes its damage output more swingy and limits its maximal output. With a feat like this, the cost to get the extra attack becomes fairly trivial (one ASI vs 3 sorcerer levels is a no brainer).

The OP has mentioned in other posts that this is being considered as an alternative to MCing.

 

[Fanaelialae]

The OP has mentioned in other posts that this is being considered as an alternative to MCing.

I'm aware of that, but I'm not aware of them saying that they were removing MCing.