Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What feats are "missing"?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6407962" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>I heard someone mention that it just got renamed but it's still in the PHB.</p><p></p><p>OTOH, I just thought that WotC would really make me happy if they put Arcane Archer and a bunch of other feats inspired by older PrCl/archetypes in the DMG.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes I agree they are very hard!</p><p></p><p>Mearls has explained clearly before that in design they wanted to keep a principle of "class trumps race trumps spell trumps feat" (although the order may be different), meaning that no feat should allow someone to become better than another class at something which the other class is strongly identified with, like Rogue's sneak attack or expertise, the Barbarian's rage or the Druid's wildshape.</p><p></p><p>Combat feats are OK, but a single combat feat should not make e.g. a Wizard or Rogue an overall better combatant than a Fighter. It <em>can</em> make such Rogue better e.g. with polearms than a Fighter, because the Fighter is not necessarily associated with polearms. This means that the feat shouldn't cause the Rogue who starts using ONLY polearms after taking the feat, to end up being better in every combat than the Fighter who hasn't taken any feats.</p><p></p><p>"Multiclassing feats" are still valid design, but those clearly serve the purpose of creating characters that <em>do</em> have another class' stick, but notice that they won't ever get as good as a single-class of the other class anyway.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Totally agree that this would be the best plan for feats: use them to cover something that is NO base class main thing. Best is, if the feat really grants something NEW to all base classes.</p><p></p><p>I wouldn't actually mind to see <em>a few</em> feats that improve one side of a main class, such as one feat improving Wildshape or another improving Rituals. But it has to be designed with care... it must not become a "must-have" and it probably should rather expand the base feature "horizontally" than "vertically" i.e. more flexible rather than more powerful.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I am not really sure I'd like the expertise suggestions. I have been thinking that <em>in some specific settings</em> having PCs with very high skill bonuses is important; this is the case IMHO in Rokugan, which I'm writing a 5e conversion of. But easy-to-get expertise works in Rokugan because every PC is expected to be a "master" of something like an art or craft, and there are no proper Rogue PCs, so having such feats wouldn't steal one of the Rogue's primary features.</p><p></p><p>OTOH I really like your thematic suggestions! "Herbalist", "Charioteer" and "Archaeologist" are really great examples of concepts that could be covered by feats because:</p><p></p><p>1) none of them is a specific concept associated to one class</p><p>2) none of them is necessarily a background (although they <em>might</em> be, if you preferred to see them as job occupations / society roles)</p><p>3) all of them are complex enough to be represented by a small "bundle" of features, rather than just a single skill for example</p><p>4) all of them can provide benefits to be used during adventures and perhaps even combat</p><p></p><p>For example, a "Herbalist" feat wouldn't just grant proficiency in herbalist's kit (which the PC probably already has since 1st level), but could allow her to create non-magic potions or infusions which cure wounds or have other usefulness. "Charioteer" may not only grant land vehicles proficiency but maybe allow to cut travel times or avoid certain hazards while travelling by wagons, and ease of use of chariots in combat. "Archaeologist" not just history proficiency but some abilities to recognize useful features or dangers in certain locales or dungeons, find routes to locales of historical importance, recognize the age and origin of objects...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6407962, member: 1465"] I heard someone mention that it just got renamed but it's still in the PHB. OTOH, I just thought that WotC would really make me happy if they put Arcane Archer and a bunch of other feats inspired by older PrCl/archetypes in the DMG. Yes I agree they are very hard! Mearls has explained clearly before that in design they wanted to keep a principle of "class trumps race trumps spell trumps feat" (although the order may be different), meaning that no feat should allow someone to become better than another class at something which the other class is strongly identified with, like Rogue's sneak attack or expertise, the Barbarian's rage or the Druid's wildshape. Combat feats are OK, but a single combat feat should not make e.g. a Wizard or Rogue an overall better combatant than a Fighter. It [I]can[/I] make such Rogue better e.g. with polearms than a Fighter, because the Fighter is not necessarily associated with polearms. This means that the feat shouldn't cause the Rogue who starts using ONLY polearms after taking the feat, to end up being better in every combat than the Fighter who hasn't taken any feats. "Multiclassing feats" are still valid design, but those clearly serve the purpose of creating characters that [I]do[/I] have another class' stick, but notice that they won't ever get as good as a single-class of the other class anyway. Totally agree that this would be the best plan for feats: use them to cover something that is NO base class main thing. Best is, if the feat really grants something NEW to all base classes. I wouldn't actually mind to see [I]a few[/I] feats that improve one side of a main class, such as one feat improving Wildshape or another improving Rituals. But it has to be designed with care... it must not become a "must-have" and it probably should rather expand the base feature "horizontally" than "vertically" i.e. more flexible rather than more powerful. I am not really sure I'd like the expertise suggestions. I have been thinking that [I]in some specific settings[/I] having PCs with very high skill bonuses is important; this is the case IMHO in Rokugan, which I'm writing a 5e conversion of. But easy-to-get expertise works in Rokugan because every PC is expected to be a "master" of something like an art or craft, and there are no proper Rogue PCs, so having such feats wouldn't steal one of the Rogue's primary features. OTOH I really like your thematic suggestions! "Herbalist", "Charioteer" and "Archaeologist" are really great examples of concepts that could be covered by feats because: 1) none of them is a specific concept associated to one class 2) none of them is necessarily a background (although they [I]might[/I] be, if you preferred to see them as job occupations / society roles) 3) all of them are complex enough to be represented by a small "bundle" of features, rather than just a single skill for example 4) all of them can provide benefits to be used during adventures and perhaps even combat For example, a "Herbalist" feat wouldn't just grant proficiency in herbalist's kit (which the PC probably already has since 1st level), but could allow her to create non-magic potions or infusions which cure wounds or have other usefulness. "Charioteer" may not only grant land vehicles proficiency but maybe allow to cut travel times or avoid certain hazards while travelling by wagons, and ease of use of chariots in combat. "Archaeologist" not just history proficiency but some abilities to recognize useful features or dangers in certain locales or dungeons, find routes to locales of historical importance, recognize the age and origin of objects... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What feats are "missing"?
Top