D&D 5E Shift Feat: Usefulness?

[BASHMAN]

So I have a character and I want to ultimately take the Strike & Fade feat; which has the (unfortunate?) pre-requisite of the Shift feat.

Shift allows you to move up to 5 feet on your turn without incurring Opportunity Attack. I can see how that might be moderately useful, but can't we already "Withdraw" anyway without incurring? And then you get to move 10 feet instead of 5. Sure, you cannot attack when you withdraw, but nothing is stopping you from moving again (your action is Withdraw, then you move).

Shift would be "Move 5' away from enemy" then "Hustle" or "Attack" but I don't see much usefulness here over the previous option. If I chose to Hustle, I may as well just Withdraw and get 5' further away. If I choose Attack, why am I bothering to shift away at all anyway? Especially since I'm not using a reach weapon.

I can't even see how this would be useful for someone making *RANGED* attacks. I can't find anything about shooting in melee incurring OA, or even Disadvantage. The only thin I can think of is be able to shift back 5' and shoot a guy, and enable an ally to block interposing space if he goes before the enemy does.

There must be something I'm missing that makes Shift useful, right? Maybe "Strike and Fade" should just say "this counts as 2 feats" and be done with it.

Is Shift meant to only be useful when used in concert with other feats, like Warding Polearm or Charge?

 

[Traken]

I could see it potentially being useful for ranged characters. If you are rushed by an enemy, you can take a step back and then shoot around them with no penalty.

However, it does seem like it's just a left-over feat that does not do a whole lot. If there were opportunity attacks against ranged weapons, it would be decent. If you provoked opportunity attacks by moving within someone's reach instead of when leaving someone's reach, it would be decent. But there's not.

It really does kind of look like a feat tax to get Strike and Fade.

 

[Ferghis]

I share your lack of enthusiasm for the feat. It has some marginal (albeit non-trivial) utility, but I would probably rarely select it.

 

[BASHMAN]

I could see it potentially being useful for ranged characters. If you are rushed by an enemy, you can take a step back and then shoot around them with no penalty.

However, it does seem like it's just a left-over feat that does not do a whole lot. If there were opportunity attacks against ranged weapons, it would be decent. If you provoked opportunity attacks by moving within someone's reach instead of when leaving someone's reach, it would be decent. But there's not.

It really does kind of look like a feat tax to get Strike and Fade.

I know; and I'd rather take the *infinitely more useful* Fast Movement feat or Charge instead of that one.

 

[Sunseeker]

I'm not sure why we need a feet for a shift. And it seems like it's just a horrible excuse for bloat if we've got a special move action for backing up, moving sideways, or the inevitable one for moving forwards.

Seems like we'd be better served to just have "Shift" and then a feat to allow you to move greater distances during a shift.

 

[Ferghis]

Exra squares of shifting movement sounds pretty powerful to me. Maybe add a level requirement if that's going to be a feat.

I think they stuck this among feats because they wanted to make a slim core ruleset, and the shift concept starts making things more fiddly. They maybe should have just made it an optional rule.

 

[BASHMAN]

Exra squares of shifting movement sounds pretty powerful to me. Maybe add a level requirement if that's going to be a feat.

I think they stuck this among feats because they wanted to make a slim core ruleset, and the shift concept starts making things more fiddly. They maybe should have just made it an optional rule.

I get that; in the case of Charge as a feat, I think it is great. It is a special ability to move twice and still attack, instead of letting everyone do it, and try to make some sort of bonus/penalty thing with it. It makes the game and in play tactics easier and smoother to run.

But in the case of Shift, as is, you already have a (sometimes better) alternative to shifting in Withdraw, EVEN IF YOU HAVE THE FEAT. If the shift feat were slightly changed to say "You can Withdraw as a move, instead of using your Action" or "When you Withdraw, you can make one attack immediately before or after without using Martial Dice or adding Ability Bonus" that would be better, I think.

 

[BASHMAN]

Actually a better option might be to let the shift feat allow you to Shift 1/round separate from your movement. Then it is very much worth taking.