D&D 5E How would you replace stat bumps in feats?

[Quartz]

I wouldn't change them, but if I did, perhaps replace the +1 STAT with a skill proficiency?

For which feats would that be appropriate and which skills would be appropriate for those feats?

 

[Quartz]

I think each of those suggestions take the feats in a markedly different direction - sometimes in ways that would have significant consequences.

Please go on,

No longer suffer disadvantage on Stealth from heavy armor? Do you *want* rogues running around in plate mail? Because that's how you get rogues running around in plate mail.

They'd have to take two feats to get there - Heavy Armour proficiency and Heavy Armour Mastery. (Multi-classing is a whole different can of worms.)

 

[Grognerd]

For which feats would that be appropriate and which skills would be appropriate for those feats?

To be honest, I'm not sure. Personally, I think it is a bad idea. But if I were to do it I would probably sit down and come up with options. As a general rule, I would use a skill that falls under the same stat as the ability increase would have been from.

 

[Umbran]

To not have players choosing the feats for the stat bump.

If you wanted a stat bump, you could just take a stat bump. So, you never choose a feat *for* the bump.

You may feel the feat becomes worhtwhile if it has the stat bump, but it isn't *for* the bump itself.

 

[Quartz]

If you wanted a stat bump, you could just take a stat bump. So, you never choose a feat *for* the bump.

Sorry, I accidentally trimmed my post. The idea is to not have stat bumps at all: no racial stat bumps, no stat bumps from feats.

 

[Hriston]

If you wanted a stat bump, you could just take a stat bump. So, you never choose a feat *for* the bump.

You may feel the feat becomes worhtwhile if it has the stat bump, but it isn't *for* the bump itself.

This may not be the case if you’re a first level variant human.

 

[Hriston]

To the OP: For HAM, you could raise the damage reduction to 6.

 

[jmartkdr]

That would still only get you a 17 at most with point buy/standard array - for a net +2 to one stat and +1 to another. Or what anyone else can easily get. I don't see how this creates a problem.

If you're rolling for stats, you've already accepted that some people could start with a 20 and hopefully that's within your balance tolerance.

 

[Dausuul]

Sorry, I accidentally trimmed my post. The idea is to not have stat bumps at all: no racial stat bumps, no stat bumps from feats.

Ah, okay - that makes sense.

Hmm... next question: To what standard are you trying to balance feats? Are you trying to make these feats competitive with Polearm Mastery/GWM, or are you shooting for something a little lower?

 

[5ekyu]

If you wanted a stat bump, you could just take a stat bump. So, you never choose a feat *for* the bump.

You may feel the feat becomes worhtwhile if it has the stat bump, but it isn't *for* the bump itself.

Edit - shoulda read ahead before posting.

Why remove all stat bumps?

Whatd is the goal?

If its lower overall ability scores then choose lower point buy.