D&D 5E Is my DM being fair?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[jaelis]

Guess my point is that +2 to an ability score is quite strong. If you're uncomfortable with a feat being equivalently strong, then there probably isn't much reason to use feats.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Corwin]

For future reference be listed banned / broken feats we cannot use:

Lucky
Alert
Sharpshooter
Great weapons master
Polearm master

By definition, when you remove what you perceive to be the top five most potent items from a larger list of items, there will be a new top five most potent items on the remaining list of items.

I wonder which five are next for the ban list?

And when you eventually get down to the last five "crappy" feats left not to be banned, you'll still have one better than the others in some way. Now you have four. And so on...

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Ovinomancer]

The most common mistake originates from the fact that the most common way to see if a PC is surprised is to roll Perception. Therefore, if you are not surprised it is because you have perceived something: body language, verbal/somatic components, heard them breathing, seen their shadow, whatever explains the established fact that you have perceived them via a successful Perception check.

However, immunity to surprise does not equal a successful Perception check! Just because you are not surprised, this does not mean that you have perceived...anything!

It just means that you don't suffer the game mechanics of surprise: cannot move or act on your first turn, cannot use reactions until after your first turn.

The situation: an evil caster wants to cast a spell from hiding.

First: establish surprise. Everyone rolls Perception (because the DM feels that this is the appropriate method to establish who is surprised in this situation).

The PCs who's Perception rolls exceed the villain's Stealth perceive the caster; make up the exact reason why on the spot. Maybe they heard the verbal component, whatever.

Those PCs who rolled too low on Perception did not perceive, therefore they are surprised.

How does immunity to surprise come into it?

If the Alert PC succeeded on their Perception check then they heard the verbal components and realise there is an enemy caster round the corner. His roll means that he wouldn't have been surprised even without the feat, but his Perception check tells him: caster, around that corner.

If the Alert PC rolled too low, then they did not perceive the enemy, even though they are not surprised! The alert PC did not hear the verbal components, therefore does not know there is a caster or that there is an enemy around the corner! However, he may still be first in the initiative order and can still move/act on his first turn and may take reactions even before his first turn.

So, Perception checks are rolled and the Alert PC fails. Initiative is rolled and the Alert PC goes first.

DM: So, Alert guy, you're up. What do you do?
Alert PC: I go around the corner and attack the caster.
DM: No, you do not know there is anyone there.
Alert PC: Okay, I have a bad feeling about this, so I move behind the paladin and take the Dodge action.
DM: Cool. It turns out that the Alert feat hasn't destroyed my game after all.

Strongly disagree. At no point should you be punishing a player for their abilities, and saying 'you have no idea what's going on, and I will not inform you of anything, but you must now declare an action without knowing why because you picked a feat, rolled poorly once, and too well the second time' is just bad, bad, bad. This also shows a failure to understand what surprise is -- it's not 'I don't know what up' it's 'something is now happening, but it shocked me and I hesitate.' The wizard acting should be made know to everyone at the same time -- those with good perception checks don't freeze; those with poor check do. The Alert players don't need to roll -- they're not surprised, period. Punishing players for succeeding at initiative is bad play.

Again, if you ask for initiative it is incumbent for you to frame the precipitating event. This action is just known, it's not gated behind a roll. If you think that this precipitating event may catch characters off guard, check for surprise, but this doesn't remove the fact that even the surprised players will still know what precipitated initiative, they just can't act the first round of combat.

 

[GameOgre]

I like feat games, I like no feat games.

they each have their good points. With no feats the pc's stats get UNREAL with most stats that apply bonus's to the pc being 20+ with magic items.

The Feat games have much lower ability totals other than a few the pc might get with magic items but they will have abilities that are awesome!

 

[Mercule]

Lucky
Alert
Sharpshooter
Great weapons master
Polearm master

Interesting. I've had Lucky and Alert in my game and found neither one particularly broken. In fact, I use Lucky as the stand-in for action points when running Eberron and give it away for free to 1st level characters -- unless they want a Dragonmark. I've also played a character with Lucky and probably made almost perfect use of it. Still not broken and did not annoy the DM. It plays much, much better than it reads.

The Ranger in my current game considered taking Sharpshooter, but opted for +2 Dexterity, instead. Here's why -- the feat grants three abilities:
1) No disadvantage at long range. I've yet to see this come up in a game. It's a ribbon ability, especially if you're using a bow or crossbow that have longer ranges than pretty much any dungeon visibility.
2) Ignore cover. When compared to the +2 Dexterity, the choice is actually, "Would you rather have a +2 to hit with bows half the time and a +5 to hit with bows every few sessions or get a +1 to hit and damage all the time with bows and melee weapons (that you use) as well as a +1 to saves against about half the savable attack spells in the game and a +1 to AC?" The math of a +2 to hit vs. a +1/+1 hit/dmg is pretty even. Throw in the other benefits, and this one makes little sense until you've maxed your dexterity or if you're in a Robin Hood/William Tell game.
3) Ranged "power attack". At low levels, the attack penalty actually causes you to miss enough that the net effect on damage means the range of ACs you're likely to encounter at low levels (12-18 AC) are going to benefit only slightly vs. the stat boost (5.25 mean for SS, 5.10 mean for stat +2). It almost immediately starts to swing more in favor of the SS as your proficiency bonus (and stat bonus) improves. It's a boost, but not crazy and potentially makes the whole thing a break-even with the +2 Dexterity.

As others have said, it's really your DM's call about whether to allow feats or not. I allow all PHB feats but cherry pick from the UA feats, so it'd be a bit hypocritical for me to say he can't cherry pick. I don't think I'd do it the same way, though. If there are that many core feats that he doesn't like, maybe he should say feats are not permitted. Alternatively, he should be clear that feats are discouraged and should be assumed to be off limits unless explicitly included as an option.

 

[Caliban]

For future reference be listed banned / broken feats we cannot use:

Lucky
Alert
Sharpshooter
Great weapons master
Polearm master

Next on the chopping block:

Observant
Skulker
Heavy Armor Master
Mobile
Shield Master

 

[JonnyP71]

Again, if you ask for initiative it is incumbent for you to frame the precipitating event. This action is just known, it's not gated behind a roll. If you think that this precipitating event may catch characters off guard, check for surprise, but this doesn't remove the fact that even the surprised players will still know what precipitated initiative, they just can't act the first round of combat.

I couldn't agree less with this. It's perfectly fine to ask a party to roll initiative when they do not have a clue of what they face or where it is, in fact it is sometimes necessary to do so in order to preserve a real sense of tension.