D&D 5E Practice and Training: Feats vs ASI

[dave2008]

I was reading @Retreater 's participation thread and @Zardnaar 's Time thread and think about how I level my players (typical need significant downtime to level), and came up with an idea based sports for separate when a player can choose a feat or ASI. In sports, you typical get stronger, faster, etc. in the off-season when you train, and then become more technically proficient when you gain experience in a game (practice). That made me think of changing my default leveling assumption a bit.

First I realize the game is not designed for this concept; however, what if to gain an ASI a player was required to take significant downtime (off-season) to train that ability, but could take a feat immediately (representing experience gained through practice). EDIT: So basically you can take a feat anytime you level up, but you can only take an ASI when you have a period of downtime to train (say 40 hrs min. broken up however). Do you think that would change how your players take feats or ASIs? Any thoughts of the concept in general?

 

[Coroc]

Well you want roleplay when leveling up? Make them needing a tutor or trainer. Nice idea to give a pure mechanic some more fluff.

Generally in a "vanilla" / "pseudo vanilla" campaign setting I would prefer feats or at least optional feats to be taken instead of ASI.

In Darksun (and also in Ravenloft eventually, at least I did it that way back in 2015) I would leave out feats and only allow ASI instead for several game mechanical reasons interfering with my idea how the feeling of the setting and some of its challenges should be.
Any character in Darksun would get a free psi talent though and starting level would be 3 with max Hitpoints.

In settings where I do allow feats I do not allow standard human but instead only variant human (free feat at 1st only 2 points for attributes). I did so in my current campaign (Greyhawk) , and as a little extra I gave everybody an additional feat at first level (So humans would have 2) Furthermore I encouraged the group to select feats instead of ASIs at higher levels, but did not enforce them to do so.
My intention here was to test out feats and how they influenced the game. I guess in future I would leave out the houserule bonus feat at level 1, but since everyone got it atm., it is not unbalancing anything.

 

[Oofta]

I don't do anything formally, but people only level up during a long rest. Long rests regularly last weeks, if not months of time. I just narrate a generic "what's happening during downtime" story and ask if anyone wants to clarify or do something special. I tried using the "downtime activities" from the DMG for a while but it didn't seem to really add all that much.

If it's shorter period of time for long rests, I just assume the PCs have been training all along.

 

[delphonso]

Some feats may not match your idea, as well. Magic Initiate, specifically might be more of a long study instead of picked up on the field.

I like the concept and rationale, though. My main concern would be how this plays in game. If two party members take a feat and two take ASI, where do you start gameplay?

 

[Li Shenron]

How about just have the PCs gain XP during active adventuring days only and spend XP (i.e. level up, or partially level up if you prefer) during inactive days?

 

[Larnievc]

I was reading @Retreater 's participation thread and @Zardnaar 's Time thread and think about how I level my players (typical need significant downtime to level), and came up with an idea based sports for separate when a player can choose a feat or ASI. In sports, you typical get stronger, faster, etc. in the off-season when you train, and then become more technically proficient when you gain experience in a game (practice). That made me think of changing my default leveling assumption a bit.

First I realize the game is not designed for this concept; however, what if to gain an ASI a player was required to take significant downtime (off-season) to train that ability, but could take a feat immediately (representing experience gained through practice). Do you think that would change how your players take feats or ASIs? An thoughts of the concept in general?

I let my guys level up as soon as their experience point total ticks over the next level target.

They get all their level stuff immediately as it’s assumed that by knocking that last kobold’s block off all their studying finally clicks into place.

 

[dave2008]

Well you want roleplay when leveling up? Make them needing a tutor or trainer. Nice idea to give a pure mechanic some more fluff.

I already currently require downtime for leveling. That is specifically not what I am asking. I am asking about restricting one aspect of leveling (ASI) and not another (Feats) based on downtime. Specifically: "Do you think that would change how your players take feats or ASIs? An thoughts of the concept in general? "

 

[dave2008]

I don't do anything formally, but people only level up during a long rest. Long rests regularly last weeks, if not months of time. I just narrate a generic "what's happening during downtime" story and ask if anyone wants to clarify or do something special. I tried using the "downtime activities" from the DMG for a while but it didn't seem to really add all that much.

If it's shorter period of time for long rests, I just assume the PCs have been training all along.

Interesting, but that is not what I asked. I am curious what people think about the idea of restricting access to ASI (requiring downtime) and not to Feats (no requirement). Specifically: "Do you think that would change how your players take feats or ASIs? Any thoughts of the concept in general? "

 

[dave2008]

I have edited the OP as the first few response to this thread seemed to complete miss the question I was asking.

 

[dave2008]

Some feats may not match your idea, as well. Magic Initiate, specifically might be more of a long study instead of picked up on the field.

Yes I realize there may issues, that is why I acknowledge the system was not designed with this concept in mind. If I was to try it I would have to look at the feats on a case by case basis.

I like the concept and rationale, though. My main concern would be how this plays in game. If two party members take a feat and two take ASI, where do you start gameplay?

Good point.