D&D 5E PHB Feats taken - RESULTS

[DeJoker]

Yeah imagine that, a reply you made to someone else, about something else, is not something I consider in reply to my argument.

Yeah imagine that, the only thing you have proven is that you cannot seem to extrapolate just about anything nor are you all that observant. If you had been you would have noticed that reply was in response to someone defending your position on this topic using a very similar argument to the one you have used.

That is a very silly equivalency you're trying to manufacture there. It doesn't follow logically at all.

Precisely but it was the logical counterpoint to what was being presented and thus a perfect application so thank you for pointing out for me just how ridiculous your point is.

which someone else already referred you to,

Actually that is a complete lie, I even went back and double checked no one has presented a link to this reference you made. The only reference to it besides the one you made (which you provided no link for) is a post-Edit that guachi made that I did not read because it was put in place after I initially read that post and all that one says is :

EDIT: Hunting down the actual analysis, tool/language proficiency are both at zero points.

So no link to this information was ever provided by anyone but see the next item below.

it listed skill proficiency at a value of 2 and tool proficiency at a value of 0.... I suggest you check that work out

Interesting even if it had been pointed out to me, which it was not (see previous comment), why on earth would I want to check out something produce by someone that obviously has no clue on how to rate an ability from a game design perspective (which is probably why you praise it so much). I mean anyone that would rate Tool Proficiency as having a value of 0 is totally clueless because that would mean that a Tool Proficiency would have no worth in the game and would be equivalent to something like the color of ones hair (assuming that in the game the color of one's hair had no significance) and as such the designers would have simply not put it in as an item that had value as they most obviously did and it would have been religated to game design meaninglessness much like say your characters shoe size or their eye color or any of the other of the various insignificant details that do not affect game balance that you as a player are allowed to freely pick and choose for your character at your whim. So thank you not for I will simply keep my wheel and you can keep that misshapen thing you are calling a wheel and play with it all you want I have absolutely no interest in it. Besides I am not even saying the Feats are needing to be changed this is vonklaude's thread I simple made an observation

and then getting pissy at anyone who points out your square wheel doesn't look right.

Actually you have missed the mark on this as much as you have missed the mark on just about everything else, for that is not what I find annoying about you at all.

 

[jmucchiello]

⁽⁵⁾⁽⁶⁾If you choose a skill or tool that you are already proficient in, then your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses that skill or tool. You may gain both proficiency and expertise in a skill or tool through one use of this feat.

Um,... Missing a "not"?

 

[cbwjm]

For the armour feats, I think that they should at least combine light armour with medium armour & shields.

 

[DeJoker]

For the armour feats, I think that they should at least combine light armour with medium armour & shields.

I understand the why of this but that does not work well either -- I mean I requested once to have my Cleric (Trickery) trade their Medium Armor Proficiency for just about anything because they were Dex based and were never going to wear Medium Armor so dumping them into a single basket does not work either.

Perhaps for those wanting to learn an Armor Proficiency, they do not have, you allow them to learn it along with either Shields or a Melee Weapon Proficiency or something along those lines

Personally I think (I know this is slightly off what you were talking about) Tool Proficiency should be removed from the arena of you can learn them for a small amount of money and small amount of downtime. As they are really equivalent to a Skill Proficiency in mechanics and realistically would take just as much effort to learn as a Skill Proficiency

 

[clearstream]

Good call:

TRAINED
You may take this feat more than once.

You gain any combination of the following benefits, adding up to 10 points:

5 points: Increase one ability score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
4 points: Learn a cantrip⁽¹⁾, or gain proficiency in light armor, medium armor⁽²⁾ and shields, or heavy armor⁽³⁾.
3 points: Gain proficiency in simple weapons, martial weapons⁽⁴⁾, or shields.
2 points: Gain proficiency in a skill⁽⁵⁾.
1 point: Gain proficiency in a tool⁽⁶⁾, language, or weapon.

⁽¹⁾If you learn a cantrip, you may choose Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma as the spellcasting ability modifier for that cantrip.
⁽²⁾You must be proficient in simple weapons before gaining proficiency in martial weapons.
⁽³⁾You must be proficient in light armor before gaining proficiency in medium armor.
⁽⁴⁾You must be proficient in medium armor before gaining proficiency in heavy armor.
⁽⁵⁾⁽⁶⁾If you choose a skill or tool that you are already proficient in, then your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses that skill or tool. You may gain both proficiency and expertise in a skill or tool through one use of this feat.
⁽⁵⁾At the DM's discretion, expertise may cost an additional point.
⁽⁶⁾At the DM's discretion, proficiency for a particularly useful tool may cost 2 points rather than 1 point.​

Rogue is now substantially over-shadowed by this feat. Rogue Expertise gives them expertise in two skills, and another two at 6th - which is their only benefit at that level. A Fighter can spend their 6th level ASI to take this feat and gain an skill + expertise in four skills. Seeing as the Fighter is better at combat than a Rogue, I think this feat comes close to writing Rogue out of the game.

Wood Elf, Fighter, Spy
Dexterity-based fighting styles e.g. Dueling with Shield and Rapier
*Perception
*Stealth, Deception or *Investigation
Common, Elven, three other languages, Thieves' cant
Disguise Kit
*Thieves' Tools
*Athletics
Acrobatics

4th ASI
6th ASI - Trained (*s above indicate Expertise)

Depending on their Charisma, the fighter could take expertise in four skills and add Deception, which they otherwise might have skipped. As a Dexterity-based fighter, their rogue skills are as good as the Rogue. They don't have access to Reliable Talent or the Thief archetype, but their combat abilities easily make up for that. The point here is that, relative to the Rogue, the fighter hasn't even really given up anything. They get one extra ASI - at 6th - which they spent to outmatch Rogue Expertise (they gained expertise to five skills, while Rogue only gets four).

The minimum fix to make this feat fair on Rogues is to increase the price of expertise to 3 points. I'm feeling grumpy this morning, so I will add that written this way, the feat appears to willfully ignore something that surely everyone familiar with D&D skills through the editions knows, which is that one high-proficiency skill is worth more than two average-proficiency skills. It is better at say 6th to have Stealth at +10, than to have Stealth and Thieves Tools at +7, because very few monsters or foes will ever have Passive Perception 20, and you can always get Guidance, Help (advantage) or some other buff on checks that you can take your time over. RPGs work in curves, and getting something over the curve-at-your-level is what causes imbalance (over-shadowing, narrative-warping, trivialising).

 

[ro]

Rogue is now substantially over-shadowed by this feat. Rogue Expertise gives them expertise in two skills, and another two at 6th - which is their only benefit at that level. A Fighter can spend their 6th level ASI to take this feat and gain an skill + expertise in four skills. Seeing as the Fighter is better at combat than a Rogue, I think this feat comes close to writing Rogue out of the game.

Wood Elf, Fighter, Spy
Dexterity-based fighting styles e.g. Dueling with Shield and Rapier
*Perception
*Stealth, Deception or *Investigation
Common, Elven, three other languages, Thieves' cant
Disguise Kit
*Thieves' Tools
*Athletics
Acrobatics

4th ASI
6th ASI - Trained (*s above indicate Expertise)

Depending on their Charisma, the fighter could take expertise in four skills and add Deception, which they otherwise might have skipped. As a Dexterity-based fighter, their rogue skills are as good as the Rogue. They don't have access to Reliable Talent or the Thief archetype, but their combat abilities easily make up for that. The point here is that, relative to the Rogue, the fighter hasn't even really given up anything. They get one extra ASI - at 6th - which they spent to outmatch Rogue Expertise (they gained expertise to five skills, while Rogue only gets four).

The minimum fix to make this feat fair on Rogues is to increase the price of expertise to 3 points. I'm feeling grumpy this morning, so I will add that written this way, the feat appears to willfully ignore something that surely everyone familiar with D&D skills through the editions knows, which is that one high-proficiency skill is worth more than two average-proficiency skills. It is better at say 6th to have Stealth at +10, than to have Stealth and Thieves Tools at +7, because very few monsters or foes will ever have Passive Perception 20, and you can always get Guidance, Help (advantage) or some other buff on checks that you can take your time over. RPGs work in curves, and getting something over the curve-at-your-level is what causes imbalance (over-shadowing, narrative-warping, trivialising).

There is more to the rogue than Expertise. Rogues get sneak attack. Rogues are better at dodging. Rogues get an extra saving throw proficiency. Etc. Expertise is only one small part of being a rogue. Giving other classes access to expertise doesn't ruin the rogue.

Yes, a Fighter gets an extra ASI at 6th that he could use to gain expertise. Is it a problem that Fighters get extra ASIs in general? Presumably they would be otherwise underpowered.

Other classes that don't get extra ASIs have just as much access as rogues. They have to spend a feat and can get expertise, but a rogue could also spend the feet and get even more skills and more expertise. At the very least the rogue at level 6 has four skills with expertise and two without. The rogue could get three more skills and give two skills expertise, or get two more skills and give three skills expertise, for a total of seven skills with expertise, still beating out every other class.

Sure, the rogue might already have expertise in Stealth and Perception, but lots of skills can be useful. You could have Stealth, Perception, Insight, Persuasion, Slight of Hand, Thieves' Tools, and Arcana, all with expertise. That's quite a list! That would make a skill monkey rogue even more of a monkey. Bards would benefit similarly.

So yes, if another class wanted to sacrifice expanding its core concept for becoming a skill monkey, it could do that. This feat would give the skill-monkey rogue or bard a chance to make its concept even better.

 

[clearstream]

So yes, if another class wanted to sacrifice expanding its core concept for becoming a skill monkey, it could do that. This feat would give the skill-monkey rogue or bard a chance to make its concept even better.

Regarding skills, this feat has lower value to a Bard or Rogue than it does to other classes, because the 7th to 12th skill picks are worth less than the 1st through 6th. Similarly, the 5th through 10th applications of expertise are worth less than the 1st through 4th. That is because players will prioritise what is most important to them. Also, unless they rolled godly ability scores they will start picking skills that are away from their best modifiers, making those skills less impactful.

Conversely, skills with high modifiers are much more valuable than those with low ones. For example, +4 Stealth can't be relied on and is therefore not that relevant. +6 starts to be reliable and becomes very relevant. I believe people frequently make the mistake of assuming that taking one more skill is better than taking expertise in an existing skill. Given racial, class and background skills to cover a character's priorities, the opportunity to take expertise is worth more than the additional skill picks. The least fix to make Trained work is to put 3 points on the cost of expertise.

Yes, a Fighter gets an extra ASI at 6th that he could use to gain expertise. Is it a problem that Fighters get extra ASIs in general? Presumably they would be otherwise underpowered.

An increase to the power of feats entails an increase to the power of a feat pick. Think about it this way, at 1st level Rogues got Expertise and Fighters got Fighting Style and Second Wind. Then at 6th level, Rogues get the second half of Expertise for four skills total, but via Trained, Fighters do one better - they get expertise on five skills. Rogues have been somewhat over-shadowed, Fighters have been pushed up a notch in power.

There is more to the rogue than Expertise. Rogues get sneak attack. Rogues are better at dodging. Rogues get an extra saving throw proficiency. Etc. Expertise is only one small part of being a rogue. Giving other classes access to expertise doesn't ruin the rogue.

For a small fraction of their career - at 15th level, outside most supported content - they will have a Wisdom save. In exchange, they lived with an Intelligence save - relevant for only 1% of spells and monster abilities - for 14 levels. Sneak attack doesn't quite keep Rogues on par with Fighters in combat, and few combats are brought to a conclusion by dodging. What makes Rogues compelling is their combination of reasonable (but not top-tier) combat abilities with good (second to Bard) social abilities, and top-tier (albeit, impinged on by casters) exploration abilities.

 

[Stalker0]

I really like that trained feat with the removal of the "Expertise" clause. I agree that should not be in a generic feat. Everything else looks really good though.

 

[ro]

Regarding skills, this feat has lower value to a Bard or Rogue than it does to other classes, because the 7th to 12th skill picks are worth less than the 1st through 6th. Similarly, the 5th through 10th applications of expertise are worth less than the 1st through 4th. That is because players will prioritise what is most important to them. Also, unless they rolled godly ability scores they will start picking skills that are away from their best modifiers, making those skills less impactful.

Yes, getting more skills is not always better, and the benefit tapers off the more you get. Nevertheless, for a skill-monkey whose goal is to get all the skills anyway, this helps out a lot.

Conversely, skills with high modifiers are much more valuable than those with low ones. For example, +4 Stealth can't be relied on and is therefore not that relevant. +6 starts to be reliable and becomes very relevant. I believe people frequently make the mistake of assuming that taking one more skill is better than taking expertise in an existing skill. Given racial, class and background skills to cover a character's priorities, the opportunity to take expertise is worth more than the additional skill picks. The least fix to make Trained work is to put 3 points on the cost of expertise.

All expertise skills will improve greatly with proficiency bonus, even when not in a preferred stat.

Making expertise cost more implies that the Knowledge Domain's 1st level feature is overpowered relative to other Cleric Domains. Do you believe that this is the case?

An increase to the power of feats entails an increase to the power of a feat pick. Think about it this way, at 1st level Rogues got Expertise and Fighters got Fighting Style and Second Wind. Then at 6th level, Rogues get the second half of Expertise for four skills total, but via Trained, Fighters do one better - they get expertise on five skills. Rogues have been somewhat over-shadowed, Fighters have been pushed up a notch in power.

Yes, somewhat overshadowed by a Fighter who chooses not to improve his fighting. You mentioned Rogues getting Expertise at 1st level, but you left out Sneak Attack (and Thieves' Cant). At 6th, the Rogue gets two more expertise, and the Fighter gets his ASI/Feat, say Trained for 5 expertise.

So the balance comes to: How does Fighting Style, 1 expertise, and Second Wind compare to Sneak Attack and Thieves' Cant? The requirements for Sneak Attack are pretty easy to meet for a 6th level Rogue, and 3d6 (10.5) extra damage is nothing to sneeze at.

Rogues v. Fighters (6th Level)

Let's add in the 5th level features, Extra Attack for Fighter and Uncanny Dodge for Rogue, to help the comparison:

(R) Sneak Attack (usually once per turn, but could be more) +3d6 (+10.5)
v. (F) Extra Attack (once per turn) Greatsword +2d6 (+7) and Great Weapon Fighting (+1.3 on each attack = +2.7)
= (R) Sneak Attack (+10.5) v. (F) Extra Attack + Fighting Style (+9.7)
(R) Uncanny Dodge 1/2 damage per round v. (F) Second Wind 1d10+6 (11.5) HP per short rest
= unless the Rogue can only Uncanny Dodge once per short rest, it is significantly better on saving HP
(R) Thieves' Cant is a language probably, not a full skill.
(R) Rogue has 4 expertise. (F) Fighter has 5 expertise.

So from these abilities:
Rogues have better damage than Fighters
Rogues have much better damage mitigation than Fighters
Rogues get an extra language (1 point), but Fighters have expertise in one skill!

Taking Trained for 5 expertise, Fighters are weaker than Rogues.

Increasing expertise to a 3-point cost results in two less expertise for the Fighter but the gain of a language to counter Thieves' Cant:
Rogue has better damage
Rogue has better defense
Rogue has extra expertise.
Fighter... doesn't have better/extra anything.

For a small fraction of their career - at 15th level, outside most supported content - they will have a Wisdom save. In exchange, they lived with an Intelligence save - relevant for only 1% of spells and monster abilities - for 14 levels. Sneak attack doesn't quite keep Rogues on par with Fighters in combat, and few combats are brought to a conclusion by dodging. What makes Rogues compelling is their combination of reasonable (but not top-tier) combat abilities with good (second to Bard) social abilities, and top-tier (albeit, impinged on by casters) exploration abilities.

Yeah, Wisdom save is only later on. I'll give you that.

All this is to say that I don't think expertise in this feat is unbalanced. But I think it is fine to keep a note there saying that DMs can adjust that if it causes problems at their tables. As discussing any feat, we always have to remember that there is always a trade off: the opportunity cost of the best other feat or +2 ASI to your most important stat(s).

 

[ro]

Though I do not think it is balanced to increase the cost of expertise, you could limit the choice of expertise as follows:

TRAINED
You may take this feat more than once.

You gain any combination of the following benefits, adding up to 10 points:

5 points: Increase one ability score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
4 points: Learn a cantrip⁽¹⁾, or gain proficiency in light armor, medium armor⁽²⁾ and shields, or heavy armor⁽³⁾.
3 points: Gain proficiency in simple weapons, martial weapons⁽⁴⁾, or shields.
2 points: Gain proficiency in a skill⁽⁵⁾.
1 point: Gain proficiency in a tool⁽⁶⁾, language, or weapon.

⁽¹⁾If you learn a cantrip, you may choose Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma as the spellcasting ability modifier for that cantrip.
⁽²⁾You must be proficient in simple weapons before gaining proficiency in martial weapons.
⁽³⁾You must be proficient in light armor before gaining proficiency in medium armor.
⁽⁴⁾You must be proficient in medium armor before gaining proficiency in heavy armor.
⁽⁵⁾⁽⁶⁾Expertise: If you choose a skill or tool that you are already proficient in, then your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses that skill or tool. You may gain both proficiency and expertise in a skill or tool through one use of this feat. You may choose at most three skills or tools to gain expertise each time you select this feat.
⁽⁶⁾At the DM's discretion, proficiency for a particularly useful tool may cost 2 points rather than 1 point.​