D&D 5E 2016 Feats Review

[CapnZapp]

It matters quite a lot, actually. Lying to my players or giving up my neutrality is not an acceptable resolution for any problem in the game.

What I mean has nothing to do with "lying".

I just prefer it if we replace
"Character has automatic success"
with
"Character only fails once in a blue moon"

The first removes storytelling power from the DM. "What do you mean I fail? I can never fail. It says so right there." is not a situation I want any rule to place me in. Sure you can invoke Rule 0, the DM is always right. I, however, prefer it if I don't have to arbitrarily break the rules.

The second retains a safety valve for the DM. If the story is undoubtedly wrecked by succeeding at whatever ability we're talking about, the DM can always claim a hidden roll failed. I don't have to invoke rule 0, I don't have to argue with the player.

Rules should never be absolutely absolute.

 

[CapnZapp]

But nothing about Crossbow Expert is even a good idea, and the feat should simply not exist at all. I have written about this extensively elsewhere and there is no reason to bloat this review with the details. See http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?470488-Crossbows-and-dual-wielding

I've (finally) remembered to update my earlier post with the link to my Crossbow Expert thread, as you can see from the above quote.

 

[Yunru]

That Crossbow Expert should be removed from the game in its entirety. It's the basis of a completely gamewrecking build.

If you want to offer constructive advice on how to rephrase the feat so it can't be used as that basis, I guess I should give that a shot in the interest of fairness. But I should tell you I am predisposed to cutting it out.

What will take you nowhere, however, is the argument "it's only overpowered together with X". One way or another, the final build needs to be made inaccessible.

For more on this, I refer the interested reader to an old thread of mine:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?470488-Crossbows-and-dual-wielding

On the contrary, all but one point you made against it either involved Sharpshooter, or were entirely Sharpshooter.

A logical person would therefore look at Sharpshooter as the cause, not dig in their heels and yell louder.

 

[CapnZapp]

Polearm Master
bonus attack, OA when moving into melee with you
Design:Two clean abilities. As a quibble, I would have preferred it if the weapons were identified by keyword (such as feats that say "when you use a heavy weapon" or finesse or two-handed etc) rather than a crude list. I won't let that quibble detract from my grade.
Fun: This feat makes your polearm feel polearmy, so, fun.
Power: A reliable way to use a bonus action for an extra attack is the cornerstone to combat power, so this feat will rate highly solely because of that. The "OA upon entry" is gravy. But not just gravy - for instance, coupled with sentinel is can stop a foe completely. Of course, that tactic is limited to once/round, only applies to melee monsters w/o reach, and doesn't prevent the monster from simply attacking someone else. So powerswise its gravy. So, is it too powerful then? I would say no. After all, you only have the one bonus action, and the attack is with a small damage die.

Resilient
saving throw proficiency
Design:I guess no complaints. Saving throws break at higher levels, but that's not this feat's fault. Making the half feat open is good.
Fun: Shoring up a weakness isn't exactly fun.
Power: Since there are six saving throws, and since proficiency doesn't exactly save you if you don't also have a decent score, this is not a powerful way of getting good at saving throws. (Not that there's much choice). Couldn't WotC have thrown this a bone?

Ritual Caster
cast spells from ritual spellbook
Design:Turns you into a "ritual wizard" that can cast spells without spellcaster levels. A nice inclusion, a clean design
Fun: This has to be rated fun for those interested
Power: At first it appears no more powerful than, say, Magic Initiate. But it will let you collect more rituals, and you can cast them approximately as a Wizard of your level. No earthshattering power, but definitely nice. Note my grade is based on the assumption your DM will generously allow you to find most of the better rituals for your chosen class.

 

[CapnZapp]

On the contrary, all but one point you made against it either involved Sharpshooter, or were entirely Sharpshooter.

A logical person would therefore look at Sharpshooter as the cause, not dig in their heels and yell louder.

Sharpshooter has its (deep) flaws, but a logical person wouldn't use that as an argument to ignore the flaws of Crossbow Expert.

Did you actually read my linked post? If you had, you would have seen how it talks about Crossbow Expert at length, not involving Sharpshooter at all.

Now let's stop playing about. What's your agenda here, Yunru? I'm all for constructive criticism, but you come across as sniping at my posts without offering anything in return.

 

[Yunru]

Sharpshooter has its (deep) flaws, but a logical person wouldn't use that as an argument to ignore the flaws of Crossbow Expert.

Did you actually read my linked post? If you had, you would have seen how it talks about Crossbow Expert at length, not involving Sharpshooter at all.

Now let's stop playing about. What's your agenda here, Yunru? I'm all for constructive criticism, but you come across as sniping at my posts without offering anything in return.

My "agenda" is to stop you from rating stuff based on personal bias. Of the points you've made in this thread only one wasn't related to Sharpshooter. Hell, only two were related to Crossbow Expert at all.

The only valid point you've made this thread about Crossbow Expert is "Crossbow Expert allows you to in effect dual wield with Hand Crossbows." Which... is cool I guess?

As for snipping, I've offered plenty of feedback on how you're rating for Crossbow Expert is wrong because it's not a rating for Crossbow Expert.


Edit: And now I've read you initial prose on the linked thread I can see you've no new points to add by linking it, so what was the point?

 

[Prism]

The only valid point you've made this thread about Crossbow Expert is "Crossbow Expert allows you to in effect dual wield with Hand Crossbows." Which... is cool I guess

Isn't the point that it doesn't let you dual wield since you can't actually load the things, but it does possibly give you an extra attack anyway, putting it into the same damage range as a standard melee dual wielder (fighter or ranger) for the cost of a feat.

Saying that, we don't actually let it work like that since it requires a loaded crossbow which is unusual and specific wording

 

[guachi]

True, you can't dual wield hand crossbows. But loading is part of the act of firing and, unless your hand that is grabbing the ammunition is otherwise engaged, you can fire a hand crossbow a number of times equal to whatever your attack action gives you plus one for the bonus action.

 

[CapnZapp]

Isn't the point that it doesn't let you dual wield since you can't actually load the things, but it does possibly give you an extra attack anyway, putting it into the same damage range as a standard melee dual wielder (fighter or ranger) for the cost of a feat.

Saying that, we don't actually let it work like that since it requires a loaded crossbow which is unusual and specific wording

True, you can't dual wield hand crossbows. But loading is part of the act of firing and, unless your hand that is grabbing the ammunition is otherwise engaged, you can fire a hand crossbow a number of times equal to whatever your attack action gives you plus one for the bonus action.

Thank you both for actually reading what I wrote.

Yes, Crossbow Expert is a feat I dislike on every level.

Not least because you don't actually get to dual-wield hand crossbows (which would be awesome).

You do get effectively all the mechanical benefits of dual-wielding (including Dex bonus to the bonus attack, effectively giving you the two-weapon fighting fighting style for free so you can stack it with your chosen fighting style which obviously will be archery), including not having to worry about loading and ammunition properties, but you don't get the cool imagery.

This point has nothing to do with power or balance. It's just a WTF moment when they hose fantasy Chow Yun Fat just because they suddenly go ultra-realistic on ammunition loading

They could even have solved it without "fantasy reload", just by adding, say, "Gnomish Invention - Repeating Hand Crossbow" to the equipment chapter.

 

[Yunru]

Thank you both for actually reading what I wrote.

Yes, Crossbow Expert is a feat I dislike on every level.

Not least because you don't actually get to dual-wield hand crossbows (which would be awesome).

You do get effectively all the mechanical benefits of dual-wielding (including Dex bonus to the bonus attack, effectively giving you the two-weapon fighting fighting style for free so you can stack it with your chosen fighting style which obviously will be archery), including not having to worry about loading and ammunition properties, but you don't get the cool imagery.

This point has nothing to do with power or balance. It's just a WTF moment when they hose fantasy Chow Yun Fat just because they suddenly go ultra-realistic on ammunition loading

They could even have solved it without "fantasy reload", just by adding, say, "Gnomish Invention - Repeating Hand Crossbow" to the equipment chapter.

You don't just ignore that? I guess I got lucky. My DM agreed that dual wielding decreases the power, if anything, and so allowed dual wielding for thematics.