D&D 5E Unearthed Arcana: 16 New Feats

"Today’s Unearthed Arcana presents a selection of new feats for Dungeons & Dragons. Each feat offers a way to become better at something or to gain a whole new ability."

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

The feats include Artificer Initiate, Chef, Crusher, Eldritch Adept, Fey Touched, Fighting Initiate, Gunner, Metamagic Adept, Poisoner, Piercer, Practiced Expert, Shadow Touched, Shield Training, Slasher, Tandem Tactician, and Tracker.

 

[dave2008]

They all seem fine I guess... but I'm one of the people who finds half-feats to be rather pointless.

I'm the opposite. I love half feats. We don't use ASI, so one of the few ways to increase an ability score is to use a half-feat.

 

[TwoSix]

Ah, "sense". I prefer "fun" as my guideline. Because, fun is the final objective of the game.

In a highly simulationist game, that verisimilitude would add to my fun. In a wonky game with HPs and surviving axe blows to the stomach or falling 100' feet and keeping fighting, trying to impose sense like that brings me zero additional fun.

So, let's evaluate it other ways:

Is it more powerful? No, any attack will only use one.

Which is more fun. Fun ranges from exactly the same (you never change your weapon style) to more fun for the player (they find a flavorful magic weapon of a different type, they switch up weapons to fight different targets just like clerics, druids and wizards switch up spells.

Final result - the "overly broad" feat is either the same or better when it comes to delivering fun to a D&D 5e game in every line item. Now, your table may have more focus on that "sense". But if it's actually important and not just a hill to stand on, you're already condeming yourself to playing a game you hate because that's not something 5e supports. On the other hand, if you like 5e, it has plenty of choices where "makes sense" was lower priority than "makes fun".

Heck, I'd just let it stack. I mean, you spend 3 feats to do a shove/slow/extra damage on one attack, and get a mega-awesome critical effect? Sounds good to me.

 

[Todd Roybark]

Masterminds get the range boost to the help action - allowing multi-help at range. The features stack.

Why take the mostly awful subclass when one can take a much better subclass and do what a 3rd level Mastermind does, TWICE as well?

2 Metamagic Extend spells = Double the effect, Double the savings!

I now need to cast Shadow Blade once, for 2 minutes of action. That could easily 3 encounters for one spell slot.

Magic Initiate does give you two Cantrips...I grant you that.

In any language this is Power Creep!
Power Creep on a very creepy, power level. I like power creep....I am not sure I like this.

 

[DnD Warlord]

I now need to get this chief feat on my baba yaga warlock...we will have ice cream bon bons that include triple experso flavor

 

[TwoSix]

They all seem fine I guess... but I'm one of the people who finds half-feats to be rather pointless. I'm much more the kind of DM that prefers to do feature swaps or just hand out for free small isolated mechanics that players want/need for their characters because they are usually never worth all that much. Especially not when they would have to spend an entire feat slot or do a level dip just to get it. And on top of that... a lot of these feats are all such minor mechanical bonuses that they probably should all have been in the game to begin with. And if these abilities were worthwhile, we DMs would have already been handing them out to players for years now.

I'm with you; most of this stuff is the kind of stuff I give out as freebies to players with good concepts.

 

[Weiley31]

Psssst, the Champion already gets two Styles...and now could get three! Ultimate Champion!

It should be it's own class.

Madge the halfling chef/fighter

There IS a Chef class, but it's along the lines of The Mercer Gunslinger, Blood Hunter, and the Puglist.

 

[MarkB]

I kinda wish the Chef feat had been a full on Bard subclass...

It would work even better as an Artificer subclass, since they can already use tools as their spellcasting focus. You could flavour all of their spells and abilities as on-the-fly culinary exploits.

 

[dave2008]

I just wish it was easier to adjust threats to account for them.

What do you mean? If feats are making fights to easy, there are several simple solutions. Are they making it to easy to hit or to much damage or both or something else>

 

[dave2008]

Ah, "sense". I prefer "fun" as my guideline. Because, fun is the final objective of the game.

For me they are mostly synonymous. If something doesn't make sense to me it isn't fun.

In a highly simulationist game, that verisimilitude would add to my fun. In a wonky game with HPs and surviving axe blows to the stomach or falling 100' feet and keeping fighting, trying to impose sense like that brings me zero additional fun.

Well I guess we already account for this items with our house rules, so maybe we are more on the simulationist side of 5e!

But if it's actually important and not just a hill to stand on, you're already condeming yourself to playing a game you hate because that's not something 5e supports. On the other hand, if you like 5e, it has plenty of choices where "makes sense" was lower priority than "makes fun".

Wow that is some unexpected hyperbole and assumptions about our game from someone named "Blue" No need to preach from on high, you can just accept that we like things different than you!

 

[Weiley31]

I still want my Captain America shield throw.

You could flavor your Shield implement as "throwing" the shield at somebody when the spell is casted at an enemy, and then it magically returns back to you with an auto catch after the attack spell is done casting.