D&D 5E Menacing and Diplomat from UA Skill Feats

[Oofta]

Well, technically, the "Stealthy Move 10 Feet" feature closes the arguments that might arise from ... well... rather vaguely written stealth rules.

As per RAW, you can't hide if the viewer has a clear line of sight to you. Now, in [MENTION=6703052]SA[/MENTION]tym's example, the guard's back is turned, so, no clear line of sight. However, that can lead to some friction at the table, particularly if the DM is being a bit of a dick - "Oh, his back was turned to you, but, he turned around just as you broke cover." - sort of shenanigans.

This feat just makes stealth a bit more reliable.

But, in your case [MENTION=6703052]SA[/MENTION]tym, the feats aren't really problematic, they're just already incorporated into your play style. They don't add anything to the game. In your shoes, I'd just not use the feats because, after all, why bother? Not a major issue, just something you're not going to get much use out of.

For groups that are a bit more by the book, this kind of feat leans 5e back towards 3e and 4e where these kinds of things were codified. Just a play style thing more than anything.

The problem I have with stealthy is that it's just ... lazy.

As written, this feat overrides the "clear line of sight" rule. That might be ok in some games, I just want a little more realism in my campaigns. Well, realism in the sense that things work like we would expect them too allowing for magic and simplification for making the game work.

 

[Bacon Bits]

The problem that I have with all the feats is that they start the, "you can't do X without this feat," problem. I hate that. I'd like to see more mechanics that the players and DMs can just use.

That said, Menacing is mostly fine, power-wise. It lasts 1 round. 6 seconds. *And* it costs an attack. I think it fits just fine, but I think it should just be how an Intimidation check works if the target fails the Insight check by 5 or more. I can see how this could be abused, since you can easily get to +17 vs an opposed Insight check, which can easily never improve above +0. It's bad enough that save DCs cap out at DC 19. I feel like there should be a limit on this. Like make it take an action, but affect everybody who can see and hear you, have it grant a Wis save vs 8 + Cha + proficiency bonus, and then make it last 1 round or 1d3 rounds and can't be used again on those creatures. Alternately, just let them cast cause fear 1/short rest or something using Cha or Str as the ability score. I don't know. There's so many ways to go with this mechanic.

Diplomat I really don't like. It starts out sounding like it's a 1 minute cast version of friends, but then it has this persistence issue. That's really a problem, I think, and pushes it beyond the power level of a cantrip into actual charm person territory. It's actually better, because it doesn't include the, "When this effect ends, the target knows it was charmed." I mean, the friends cantrip has a drawback so severe you basically only use it when you really need to succeed and don't care about the consequences. You use Diplomat whenever you talk to someone for 1 minute. There's no penalty for failure, no aftereffects for employing it, no cost for using it, etc.

 

[Jester David]

I dislike Diplomat.
While I don't have a problem with frightened or charmed being nonmagical per se, a feat is pretty easy to take and skill bonuses not hard to gets bonuses for, especially compared monsters. Especially since the feat lets you double your proficiency bonus. It's too esay to just talk and deny the monsters the ability to attack while the PCs position themselves.
(Imagine using it against a medusa or dragon.)

Menacing is okay. It has a high action cost and requires an over attack. Using frightened feels a little lazy though.

 

[Jester David]

Well, technically, the "Stealthy Move 10 Feet" feature closes the arguments that might arise from ... well... rather vaguely written stealth rules.

As per RAW, you can't hide if the viewer has a clear line of sight to you. Now, in [MENTION=6703052]SA[/MENTION]tym's example, the guard's back is turned, so, no clear line of sight. However, that can lead to some friction at the table, particularly if the DM is being a bit of a dick - "Oh, his back was turned to you, but, he turned around just as you broke cover." - sort of shenanigans.

It protects against the DM being a dick by punishing fair DMs, by forcing them into allowing potentially illogical rogue tricks, as they walk in front of a doorway or, RAW, step out five feet, give the monster the bird, and then step five feet back.
It forces fair DMs to overrule the rules and potentially become a dick.

Plus, DMs who are dicks anyway will always find ways of being dicks. Or just ignore the rules... You can't fix bad DMs via the rules.

 

[Hussar]

It don't see how it closes any argument at all, except by saying players can't even bother trying this without the feat. But then that opens up another argument - like "why can't I move 12 feet with this feet?" And "why do I need a feat to do this when the hiding sidebar say this is already possible?"

But you're right, there is an easy solution for me. These feats would simply never be available. My feedback for this survey is gonna be something like "These feats could work well in a rules module to make 5e more codified like 3e, but simply don't fit my style."




Also, just FYI, my screen name ends in 'r n' not an 'm' - though now I'm curious who SA is.

Heh. Sorry, was reading without my glasses, [MENTION=6801204]Satyrn[/MENTION].

The thing is, by the rules, the player CAN'T try this. Full stop. You cannot enter a clearly seen area with stealth. This grants the player the ability to do something he or she couldn't do before. If you have a clear line of sight between the hider and the viewer (to mangle the language), you cannot hide. This way, yes, in very limited circumstances, you can.

I dislike Diplomat.
While I don't have a problem with frightened or charmed being nonmagical per se, a feat is pretty easy to take and skill bonuses not hard to gets bonuses for, especially compared monsters. Especially since the feat lets you double your proficiency bonus. It's too esay to just talk and deny the monsters the ability to attack while the PCs position themselves.
(Imagine using it against a medusa or dragon.)

Menacing is okay. It has a high action cost and requires an over attack. Using frightened feels a little lazy though.

If you can convince the dragon not to attack you for 10 rounds while you talk to it, I'm thinking that it's probably not that big of a deal that you gain advantage on checks afterwards. Let's not forget it takes 10 rounds to set this up. How many encounters with a medusa allow the PC's 10 rounds of talking with no combat whatsoever?

I really don't see how this is going to be overpowered at all.

It protects against the DM being a dick by punishing fair DMs, by forcing them into allowing potentially illogical rogue tricks, as they walk in front of a doorway or, RAW, step out five feet, give the monster the bird, and then step five feet back.
It forces fair DMs to overrule the rules and potentially become a dick.

Plus, DMs who are dicks anyway will always find ways of being dicks. Or just ignore the rules... You can't fix bad DMs via the rules.

Meh, the potential for player abuse here is pretty darn limited. I mean, ok, the PC steps out, gives the monster the bird and then steps back. So what? Since the baddy never saw it, who cares? This just helps that stealthy character be just a bit better at being stealthy, so that if he's scouting, he's not limited by the first open door. Again, I'm really not seeing the issue here.

 

[Jester David]

If you can convince the dragon not to attack you for 10 rounds while you talk to it, I'm thinking that it's probably not that big of a deal that you gain advantage on checks afterwards. Let's not forget it takes 10 rounds to set this up. How many encounters with a medusa allow the PC's 10 rounds of talking with no combat whatsoever?

It's not 10 rounds, it's 1 minute. It's spending 60 seconds flattering or delaying the dragon from attacking (how long did Bilbo interact with the dragon) and then it is unable to target you with attacks and you have advantage maintaining the charm so long as you keep talking.
You can just imagine players pullling up a stopwatch as they talk and saying "okay, that's 61 seconds. Make an Insight check. Legendary Resistance doesn't apply."

Meh, the potential for player abuse here is pretty darn limited. I mean, ok, the PC steps out, gives the monster the bird and then steps back. So what? Since the baddy never saw it, who cares? This just helps that stealthy character be just a bit better at being stealthy, so that if he's scouting, he's not limited by the first open door. Again, I'm really not seeing the issue here.

If the potential for abuse is low, the ability for use is also low. Then why does it matter if the feat goes away or is completely reworked?

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's not 10 rounds, it's 1 minute. It's spending 60 seconds flattering or delaying the dragon from attacking (how long did Bilbo interact with the dragon) and then it is unable to target you with attacks and you have advantage maintaining the charm so long as you keep talking.
You can just imagine players pullling up a stopwatch as they talk and saying "okay, that's 61 seconds. Make an Insight check. Legendary Resistance doesn't apply."

As I've said quite few times before with this Diplomat feat.

Okay, now what?


You successfully charm the dragon, and he can't target you with attacks. What is step two? Position yourself for the coming battle? Ok, did you start doing that before the dragon was charmed? Did he notice? Why didn't he attack you then.

Steal from him? Depending on how that goes it could still cause problems. The dragon can't target you, but it can target all your buddies. And once you start fighting too, charm is supposed to be broken and... well, the best you did was positioning.

Convince it to do something? Great, roll skills, using skill rules and you have advantage.


And, a lot of people are pointing out that a character with Expertise in Persuasion is going to be really hard to beat, insight checks for monsters don't get that high. So... why did you need the advantage? Sure, just makes it more likely the dice won't ruin it, but it's just a minute of schmoozing to nudge the results in their favor at that point.

Perhaps it allows you to flee the dragon. Well, as long as it isn't attacking, it can still do anything else. It lays down in front of the exit and keeps chatting you up. Now what do you do? Or maybe it casts some spell, like Wall of Stone to seal the cave, or whatever it is the dragon could do.


I just can't imagine how this feat keeps getting called broken. It doesn't seem to break anything, and actually, it might encourage the players to talk to the villains, you know, instead of just stabbing them the moment they see them. I'd like that.

 

[Jester David]

As I've said quite few times before with this Diplomat feat.

Okay, now what?


You successfully charm the dragon, and he can't target you with attacks. What is step two? Position yourself for the coming battle? Ok, did you start doing that before the dragon was charmed? Did he notice? Why didn't he attack you then.

Steal from him? Depending on how that goes it could still cause problems. The dragon can't target you, but it can target all your buddies. And once you start fighting too, charm is supposed to be broken and... well, the best you did was positioning.

Convince it to do something? Great, roll skills, using skill rules and you have advantage.


And, a lot of people are pointing out that a character with Expertise in Persuasion is going to be really hard to beat, insight checks for monsters don't get that high. So... why did you need the advantage? Sure, just makes it more likely the dice won't ruin it, but it's just a minute of schmoozing to nudge the results in their favor at that point.

Perhaps it allows you to flee the dragon. Well, as long as it isn't attacking, it can still do anything else. It lays down in front of the exit and keeps chatting you up. Now what do you do? Or maybe it casts some spell, like Wall of Stone to seal the cave, or whatever it is the dragon could do.


I just can't imagine how this feat keeps getting called broken. It doesn't seem to break anything, and actually, it might encourage the players to talk to the villains, you know, instead of just stabbing them the moment they see them. I'd like that.

Okay then, a challenge:
For your next session, give your party face the charm benefit for free. Tell them to go nuts. Play the session and watch what they do.

If the feat isn't broken or problematic, nothing of interest should occur. Nothing that dramatically changes an encounter will happen.

 

[jgsugden]

Charmed means they find you charming. Essentially, your pick up line has opened the door and they're receptive to your reasonable suggestions. This is far from game breaking. Light years from it.

As for frightening one enemy for one round as an attack replacement? Nice. Strong in a solo battle. The equivalent of a spell. However, there are a lot of battles where it would be a huge waste. I know of some PCS that would actually take this one, although Animal Handler seems more abusable to me.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

While I don't have a problem with frightened or charmed being nonmagical per se, a feat is pretty easy to take and skill bonuses not hard to gets bonuses for, especially compared monsters.

While I agree with some of your considerations about Diplomat and its effects in the game (I'll use some stuff in this thread when I answer the survey), I don't think that either feats are easy to get or skill bonus are easy to accumulate. Feats are hard to come by, and most characters who would want to take Diplomat as a feat would be better just maxing out their main ability scores before doing that. Charm person (the spell), on the other hand, is really easy to get. I'd go as far as saying that it's hard to think of a 1st level party with no way to access charm person. You'd have to go without a Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock or Bard to end in that situation, and if that's the case, I believe it's a good thing that any character can get a similar ability with a feat.