D&D (2024) Playtest 6: Feats

[DEFCON 1]

I agree that pursuing max 20s isn't really that big of a deal, but I don't see the benefit to the game in leaving that option in the game at all. Why create a tension between pursuing mathematical effectiveness and choosing fun feats to develop your character when it isn't necessary?

Either cap stats to 18, or raise the values of the starting array/point buy, or make ASIs so they can't bump a stat by 2 (either get rid of it or make it give 2 +1s.)

I believe it is because...

1) A lot of people don't actually see it as a tension.

2) A lot of people do not want to use feats, or use as little feats as possible.

3) A lot of people don't really care whether you bump ability scores by higher point buy or ASI feats-- an increase is an increase regardless of how/when you get it-- so no method is necessarily better than the other where we need to eliminate one of them.

4) A lot of people don't even consider feats to be "fun" in the first place, because they are just additional game mechanics to have to think about-- one additional mechanic in a pile of 30 for your character-- so having it or not having it does not "fun" make. So making sure all players have access to them is not an actual benefit across the board.

WotC's chosen this path in their game-- ASI or feat at 4th, 8th, 12th level etc. And there's no substantive reason given yet to change that-- either balance-wise or fun-wise. While some players want (or feel the need for) both, and some players want (or feel the need for) neither... those players do not make up a substantial amount of the playerbase to warrant a wholesale change of the system. Those players either just have to accept what is given, OR add in their own house rules to double up / remove them at their own table.

 

[Horwath]

I agree that pursuing max 20s isn't really that big of a deal, but I don't see the benefit to the game in leaving that option in the game at all. Why create a tension between pursuing mathematical effectiveness and choosing fun feats to develop your character when it isn't necessary?

Either cap stats to 18, or raise the values of the starting array/point buy, or make ASIs so they can't bump a stat by 2 (either get rid of it or make it give 2 +1s.)

Cap at 18.

Every feat comes with floating +1 ASI.

If you do not want a feat, raise two scores by +1.

also point buy pool should be 31/32 to be comparable to rolling.

 

[MockingBird]

We have never used feats. It's there if the players want them but in my personal experience with new or casual players is they don't care. We will probably just rock on with the ASI at those given levels.

 

[Horwath]

We have never used feats. It's there if the players want them but in my personal experience with new or casual players is they don't care. We will probably just rock on with the ASI at those given levels.

In every campaign we had every character with a half-feat at 4th level for 17+1, fighters took 3 half feats for level 8 17+1+1+1.
rest just took +2 primary at 8th level.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Decouple ASIs from Feats.

 

[Scott Christian]

Decouple ASIs from Feats.

Honest question: Why?

Why not have it be a choice players can make?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Honest question: Why?

Why not have it be a choice players can make?

Because it's a choice between optimization and actual choices.

Bounded Accuracy makes every point you can squeeze out so precious that sacrificing customization for basic competency for the non-rogue, non-bard is almost a given

 

[mellored]

How about a reverse?
We cap abilities at 18 and in next MM rework numbers from CR8 forward with that in mind.

You're removing the simple option then.

This would leave room for more feats and raising secondary abilities.

The problem is that these 2 options are not equal.

Someone who wants a simple boost is going to be worse off than someone who takes a full feat that synergies with their class.

Unless they make other simple feats. (I.e. toughness, resilience).

 

[Justice and Rule]

Honest question: Why?

Why not have it be a choice players can make?

Because it's a bad choice. You are not given many ways of customizing your character after creation beyond choices you make within your class. And two major ways of customizing your character (ASIs and Feats) are put in direct competition with one another, so instead of getting more options to fill out your character you instead can only use half of them. Combined that with their relative scarcity and it's just a very bad option.

 

[bedir than]

Even the "overpowered" Archery style is not worth giving up +2 DEX.

The same people who take feats for story reasons will always take feats rather than the very bland +2 to a stat.
I've played with two dozen people and seen a total of five take +2 in the 100s of opportunities they've had available.

Optimization based on attribute inflation is bland. Doing things is fun.