D&D 5E Unarmored Defense as a Feat?

[Krachek]

So, say this feat existed, is it too good?

Unarmored Defense
Choose an ability other than Dexterity. When not wearing armor and not using a shield, your AC is equal to 10 + Dexterity modifier + the chosen ability modifier.

Simply too good.
At level 8 a wizard with 20 int and 14 dex, which is quite usual, would gain a 17 AC.
much better than taking the actual light armor and medium armor feats.

 

[Dausuul]

Simply too good.
At level 8 a wizard with 20 int and 14 dex, which is quite usual, would gain a 17 AC.
much better than taking the actual light armor and medium armor feats.

The same wizard using mage armor has AC 15. A feat for +2 AC and one 1st-level spell slot is solid but hardly excessive.

 

[TwoSix]

Simply too good.
At level 8 a wizard with 20 int and 14 dex, which is quite usual, would gain a 17 AC.
much better than taking the actual light armor and medium armor feats.

Being better than the light armor and medium armor feats is a pretty low bar, as those feats are crap.

 

[Krachek]

The same wizard using mage armor has AC 15. A feat for +2 AC and one 1st-level spell slot is solid but hardly excessive.

At low level the difference is small, the problem will occur at higher level, especially if a stat get over 20.

 

[Dausuul]

At low level the difference is small, the problem will occur at higher level, especially if a stat get over 20.

The difference is still only +2 at level 20.

 

[Quartz]

Unarmored Defense
Choose an ability other than Dexterity. When not wearing armor and not using a shield, your AC is equal to 10 + Dexterity modifier + the chosen ability modifier.

You might want to allow use of Proficiency Bonus instead of a stat or instead of Dex.

But really, this is a feat that every fighting class will take and become a feat tax. I think it's better to grant it as a class feature.

 

[Vael]

You might want to allow use of Proficiency Bonus instead of a stat or instead of Dex.

But really, this is a feat that every fighting class will take and become a feat tax. I think it's better to grant it as a class feature.

I thought of proficiency bonus, I'm not against it. But my reasoning is that using a stat is that this is a lower powered version, because it does mean a PC that takes it will feel like they have to up their two AC stats, while proficiency autoscales. The AC caps out lower too, a PC with maxxed out DEX and stat gets 20 AC, 21 with Prof.

As for the second part, yeah, but I'm not rewriting every class, just offering a feat.

I'm also less worried about "Feat taxes" these days, because both as a DM and a player, I'm willing to offer feats as alternate rewards. Sure, any wizard, non-Draconic Sorcerer, and probably most Druids really want this, but I don't feel like other classes are desperate for this feat.

 

[NotAYakk]

Proficiency goes from +2 (at 1st level) to +6 (at 17th level). I think the system can handle that without falling apart, and if the game designers are worried that a goblin can't hit the plate armored 17th level fighter, well, that's a trivial concern.

No, it is a core concern.

In raw 5e, fighting orcs/goblins at level 20 can be a threat. You have to expend resources (like spells) to kill them en-mass, and they can threaten in aggregate.

A non-magic item using L 20 fighter has 21 AC with defensive fighting style. A CR 1/2 orc has +5 to hit, hitting 1 time in 4.

With magic armor/shield, they become near-immune to the orc (only crits hit); or, with proficiency scaling, it is free.

With proficiency scaling, that fighter hits 31 AC base. Make it an EK with shield spell and we are talking a 36 AC to reliably hit the fighter. This shuts down even CR 20 foes.

---

A level 20 wizard has something like 16 AC (mage armor, 16 dex). With a staff of power and ring of protection, they have 17 AC.

The orc hits on a 12+ (45% of the time).

Toss in 4 points of proficiency scaling, and that orc hits 25% of the time and is barely half as effective at attacking a low-AC high level player.

---

Basically, hyper-scaling of defences makes low level monsters into trivial threats, even on low AC players. Already high level fighters can get AC sufficient to make high-level threats often miss; with proficiency scaling, they could make high level vsAC threats trivial.

A side effect of that is monsters will stop attacking AC, in practice.

 

[auburn2]

I feel like it is stepping on the toes of 2 classes and a subclass a bit too much ( Monk, Barbarian, and Bladesinger ). Straight up power-wise it is pretty powerful but shouldn't be game breaking in most cases.

This is my main concern with it. Pick one of these classes/kits instead.

I think it would be better as part of a homebrew kit.

 

[Stalker0]

But really, this is a feat that every fighting class will take and become a feat tax. I think it's better to grant it as a class feature.

I am actually not sure any fighting class would take this. At best it gives you AC 20, and that is only at very high levels when you have two stats at 20. Otherwise there are plenty of ways to get your AC that high through basic magic items... so if your willing to spend a feat for it, than by all means enjoy!

To me the best class for this seems to be the rogue, who can eek out +1 or +2 AC at higher levels. I mean sure that's useful, but there are other feats that are good for the rogue as well.