D&D 5E PHB Feats taken - RESULTS

[Blue]

If a player wants a character concept that organizes around armor, I see no need for a feat tax to implement it. A Wizard who wants to wear heavy armor? One feat should cover it.

"If a player wants a character concept that organized around hit points, I see no need for a feat tax to implement it. A wizard who wants barbarian HP? One feat should cover it."

Just because you want a mechanical advantage, doesn't mean you should get it without an offsetting opportunity cost. "Just because his concept is to cast Wish at 1st level ...". If it gives a big bonus, it should have costs equal to other big bonuses.

Also, just about any character can get heavy armor by taking (at 1st) a level of a different class. perhaps that's a reasonable point for the concept of someone trained in the use of heavy armor

Oh, a feat tax is a mandatory feat that everyone needs to take. No one likes them so them make great rhetoric, but only when you use the term correctly. "Feat chain" is at least a bit correct, though even that's arguable because they don't require each other, just the proficiency.

 

[Blue]

I examined the races, classes and backgrounds and came to the conclusion that a Feat is equal to a +2 to an Attribute which in turn is equal to 2 Skill Proficiencies which in turn is equal to 2 Tool Proficiencies which in turn is equal to 4 Weapon Proficiencies which in turn is equal to 4 Armor Proficiencies which in turn is equal to 2 Cantrips

I would argue that 4 weapon proficiencies is not the same as 4 armor proficiencies. 4 armor profs is no armor to all armor plus shield. Or do you mean that it's about the same as getting proficiency in 4 armors, which is about one category. heck, just getting a shield is +2 AC all-the-time for a number of caster classes.

 

[Yaarel]

"If a player wants a character concept that organized around hit points, I see no need for a feat tax to implement it. A wizard who wants barbarian HP? One feat should cover it."

Just because you want a mechanical advantage, doesn't mean you should get it without an offsetting opportunity cost. "Just because his concept is to cast Wish at 1st level ...". If it gives a big bonus, it should have costs equal to other big bonuses.

Also, just about any character can get heavy armor by taking (at 1st) a level of a different class. perhaps that's a reasonable point for the concept of someone trained in the use of heavy armor

Oh, a feat tax is a mandatory feat that everyone needs to take. No one likes them so them make great rhetoric, but only when you use the term correctly. "Feat chain" is at least a bit correct, though even that's arguable because they don't require each other, just the proficiency.

The thing is, the Wizard class fails to synergize with high hit points. If he has extra hit points, so what? It is nice, but the Wizard is better off spending precious feats to improve the spells!

Also, every other full caster (Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Warlock) does have hit points. Their balance works fine.

If a Wizard wants better hit points too, who cares?



Likewise with armor. If a Wizard would rather have heavy armor than have better spells, that is ok.

 

[DeJoker]

I would argue that 4 weapon proficiencies is not the same as 4 armor proficiencies. 4 armor profs is no armor to all armor plus shield. Or do you mean that it's about the same as getting proficiency in 4 armors, which is about one category. heck, just getting a shield is +2 AC all-the-time for a number of caster classes.

Okay let me break it in half which would look like the following :
+1 Attribute == +1 Skill Proficiency == +1 Tool Proficiency == 2 Weapon Proficiencies == 2 Armor Proficiencies

So why 2 Weapon and/or 2 Armor well frankly you can generally only use 1 at a time someone is not going to wear both Light armor and Medium Armor -- okay Shields are an anomaly when it comes to the Armor category but it is 1 out of 4 so we go with the majority and call it a day. However if you look at the Armor progression it mostly goes like this -- Light + Medium then Shield + Heavy --- and if they halfsies you get Light (0.5) or Light, Medium, Shield (1.5)

 

[Mistwell]

Okay let me break it in half which would look like the following :
+1 Attribute == +1 Skill Proficiency == +1 Tool Proficiency == 2 Weapon Proficiencies == 2 Armor Proficiencies

So why 2 Weapon and/or 2 Armor well frankly you can generally only use 1 at a time someone is not going to wear both Light armor and Medium Armor -- okay Shields are an anomaly when it comes to the Armor category but it is 1 out of 4 so we go with the majority and call it a day. However if you look at the Armor progression it mostly goes like this -- Light + Medium then Shield + Heavy --- and if they halfsies you get Light (0.5) or Light, Medium, Shield (1.5)

Tool proficiency is nearly free. It's 250gp, and some down time. You can literally learn a new tool during downtime, at any time. Same with a language.

 

[DeJoker]

Tool proficiency is nearly free. It's 250gp, and some down time. You can literally learn a new tool during downtime, at any time. Same with a language.

Yeah I know that but you have to look at it from the game designers perspective and what they did with it. A Tool Proficiency is considered equivalent to a Skill Proficiency technically they then equate that equal to a Language Proficiency but really with everyone knowing Common a language proficiency is like so limited as to be nearly worthless unless a GM specifically makes them worth something. While Tool Proficiency which Thieves Tools are part of -- are useable most of the time by whomever takes them.

Of course no one is going to take a Tool Proficiency unless they have to because it is part of a package deal so if you want to drop one of those in as because you are making the Feat rather strong otherwise it seems like a good filler.

 

[Mistwell]

Yeah I know that but you have to look at it from the game designers perspective and what they did with it. A Tool Proficiency is considered equivalent to a Skill Proficiency

It's really not. The game designers do not consider them equal. You've over simplified your measurement. In fact I'd say almost none of your measurements are accurate, but this one in particular is noteworthy for being off by a lot.

 

[DeJoker]

Well if you look closely at the various classes and the various backgrounds and the various Feats I think you will find that they are indeed considered equal. Now from a players perspective you might not get the same view but like a said from the designers point of view. Okay so maybe they nerfed them a bit by allowing you to learn one fairly easily with a little gold but what if you could not do that? What then would they be equivalent to Skill Proficiency from your view point. So far the only reason you have stated they are not worth as much is because you can learn them in game and that in and of itself does not necessarily ring true. So remove it from the equation and see what you get, because frankly if you wanted to you could do the same thing for Skills and I think you can already do the same thing with languages.

 

[Blue]

The thing is, the Wizard class fails to synergize with high hit points.

Every single d6 HD character at my local FLGS has at least a 14 CON because they need HPs. I think I've seen one without, in SKT, because he figured that if he was hit by a giant he was dead either way. I really can't grok a comment that "Wizards fail to synergize with high HPs" and more HPs would not be a boon to the character.

Every table has it's own way about it - I have no choice to believe you if you say this isn't a big deal at yours, please believe me when I say it would be a big deal at mine.

 

[Krachek]

It is WoTC and other party that offer character builder that have the better stat.
But based on those stats should we nerf ASI?