D&D 5E Feats removed from the PHB, for the last Playtest !

[maritimo80]

The last Playtest had very interesting feats, as ARCHERY MASTER, FENCING MASTER, MASTER LORE, ARCANE INITIATE, DRUID INITIATE, Cleric INITIATE, ADEPT MAGIC, MAGIC IMPROVED ADEPT, TOP MAGIC ADEPT, which were removed in the PHB.


1- Do you know why they were removed?


2- There is something in their mechanics that disrupts the game?


3 In the New DMG has new Feats?

 

[DM_Jeff]

I don't know why they were removed but I'm glad I kept all the playtest documents. I'm letting my players choose from these and already have PCs with Archery Master and Druid Initiate with no rules issues at all.

 

[doctorhook]

The last Playtest had very interesting feats, as ARCHERY MASTER, FENCING MASTER, MASTER LORE, ARCANE INITIATE, DRUID INITIATE, Cleric INITIATE, ADEPT MAGIC, MAGIC IMPROVED ADEPT, TOP MAGIC ADEPT, which were removed in the PHB.


1- Do you know why they were removed?


2- There is something in their mechanics that disrupts the game?


3 In the New DMG has new Feats?

Arcane Initiate, Druid Initiate, and Cleric Initiate were redundant; the function of all of these is now served by one feat, Magic Initiate.

As far as I've heard, there are no feats in the DMG.

 

[Kobold Stew]

The last Playtest had very interesting feats, as ARCHERY MASTER, FENCING MASTER, MASTER LORE, ARCANE INITIATE, DRUID INITIATE, Cleric INITIATE, ADEPT MAGIC, MAGIC IMPROVED ADEPT, TOP MAGIC ADEPT, which were removed in the PHB.


1- Do you know why they were removed?


2- There is something in their mechanics that disrupts the game?


3 In the New DMG has new Feats?

Archery master: rolled into sharpshooter
Fencing master: rolled into defensive duelist (and nerfed)
Loremaster (sic): became linguist and skilled
Arcane Initiate: see magic initiate
Cleric Initiate: see magic initiate
Druidic Initiste: see magic initiate

For all of these, the PHB version is (IMO) clearly replacing the provious one, either amping it up or nerfing it.

The only feats in this list that are not represented in the play test are these:
Magic Adept, Improved Magic Adept (sic), Superior Magic Adept (sic). I would suggest that they were removed because with the heavy feat cost, it is more natural for a fighter (the only class who can reasonably get the feats required to pursue this) there exists Eldritch Knight (or multiclassing).

I'd have no problems if a player wanted these; they seemed particularly weak to me in the play test, but perhaps they have appeal to some players, and now with the variant human, a fighter could have a fourth-level spell by Fighter 8 (cf. Wizard 7).

Hope this helps.

 

[Evenglare]

Super sad that arcane archer was cut. That was great.

 

[Sitara]

Yeah Arcane Archer was the only one that does not have a 5e equivalent, renamed/merged/nerfed/amped or otherwise. I think this is because the abilities of the feat were merged somewhat into the Ranger's spell list, with Lightning Arrow and the like.

Also, while the feat was flavorful, it was not well designed wrt the final version of 5e. As it is, the maximum benefit of the feat would have been with most levels in Wizard or Sorcerer, which is kind of not what I think they were going for. Though it could be used with Eldritch Knight I guess. Hopefully we will see an improved version down the line in a sourcebook.

 

[DaveDash]

Sharpshooter is quite OP. Did the rolled up version ever get any play testing? Seems much more balanced to me to have the "ignore cover" part of that feat separate.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Sharpshooter is quite OP. Did the rolled up version ever get any play testing? Seems much more balanced to me to have the "ignore cover" part of that feat separate.

It's a step down from the Archery Master feat, which also granted proficiency.

 

[guachi]

Sharpshooter OP? Not really. It's not OP for a Rogue. It's not really OP for a Ranger (depending on build and level). If the Ranger has Colussus slayer and/or Hunter's Mark a lower level Ranger is better off just taking the Dex increase.

Comparing taking Sharpshooter vs. Dexterity increase, assuming Ranger takes Archery Fighting Style:
Example Ranger with 1d8 longbow and Level 4. Dexterity increase does more average damage from AC 18-26. (+8 hit, +4 damage vs. +2 hit, +13 damage)
1d8 longbow, 1d6 Hunter's Mark and Level 4. Dexterity increase does more average damage from AC 16-27
1d8 longbow, 1d8 Colossus Slayer and Level 4. Dexterity increase does more damage from AC 15-27
1d8 longbow, 1d8 Colossus Slayer, 1d6 Hunter's Mark and Level 4. Dexterity increase does more damage from AC 13-27

At level 8 the AC range is, for the same examples as above:
AC 19-28
AC 17-29
AC 16-29
AC 14-29

Even at level 12 where the Sharpshooter has a Dexterity of 20 and matches the non-Sharpshooter here are the numbers:
AC 23-29
AC 21-30
AC 21-30
AC 19-30

Using Hunter's Mark and/or Colossus Slayer every round can't be that hard, can it?

Plus, a higher Dexterity grants better saves, better initiative, and better Dexterity ability checks. So, basically, Sharpshooter is good after your Dexterity is already 20, assuming you have nothing else you can do.

Rogue Level 4, shortbow. Dex increase is better at:
AC 12-25

Level 8:
AC 10-27

Level 12:
AC 11-28

Ouch!!! Sharpshooter actually gets worse!!! There are some benefits as a Rogue can ignore disadvantage at long range. So, if hidden he gains advantage and therefore can sneak attack with a longbow (assuming he can use one) from 600'.

 

[rjfTrebor]

i know for sure that fencing master was removed for being hands down too good. i used it on a character and i was adding +9 to AC as a reaction at one point. it did get rolled down into Defensive Duelist and is now a decent and balanced option.