Bacon Bits
Legend
The Athlete feat used to be quite powerful, but thanks to tough actin' Tinactin my Athlete feat is totally cured!
You are giving a bonus to three saves (up to +3 in tier 4), an extra ASI +1 (whether you believe it is important or not), and +5 speed ON TOP of everything the feat already gives! If you think that just "looks strong" you likely play over-the-top style of games. This variant you've contrived doesn't just "look" strong, it IS strong... way too strong.I'd sum this up as "it looks strong, and isn't mechanically weak". Which is what I was aiming for.
LOL you sure did! The bonus to two of the three strong saves (DEX and CON) is worth a half-feat on its own!I'll agree, I did try to make it attractive and interesting.
I could give you plenty of examples, but you already touched on the obvious ones (plus my mention of the casters above) should be sufficient. If it isn't, well...You haven't given a single example of an actual character where it would be an overpoweringly good choice.
LOL what would I dare ADD!? You have already added way too much for a single feat.Oh yes: and feel free not to reply if you have nothing to add.
I walked in on my Athletic Feat the other day and it was benching 120.(Yes, I know all sorts of weak word plays to make on this one.)
While it's not spelled out exactly what the rule is, jumping farther is covered in the Athletics skill. From the PHB Page 175, "You try to jump an unusually long distance or pull off a stunt midjump."Yeah, I hate the 5e fixed-distance jumping mechanic. "How far, 15? Drat, I can only jump 14." Unbelievable there's no official mechanism for trying to jump more than 14. (That said, I see DM's improvise all the time.)
I was thinking a bonus to jumping distance.
This is probably the key point. You can't evaluate feat strength by simply looking at the features and saying "Oh, this one has more features than that one." You need to look at how the feat option fits into the overall build structure, and at what level it becomes the go-to option over other choices. Nothing in this feat makes me think "Oh boy, I need to take VHuman at level 1 just to get this feat", unlike say PAM. I might take this at 1st level if I was playing a medium armor character who was Str focused, but that's about it. But there at least ARE some concepts where I would consider taking it at level 1, which to me is the sweet spot for feats. Most feats don't come anywhere close to that benchmark.In short: I get why it looks strong to offer +1 str AND dex, but it is way weaker than it looks. Actual cases where it is strong are a good argument why it is too strong, but "that is better than an ASI" looks mostly like it is falling for the appearance of strength not actual strength. And, in my opinion, encouraging people to have str and dex increased has verisimilitude advantages.
If I can get my casters to take an Athlete feat over the same old Resilient(Con) and War Caster, I've already won.You realize for the saves, speed boost, and every thing else Clerics, Druids, Warlocks, and Wizards will all love this feat since none of them have proficiency in STR, DEX, or CON saves (avoid knock-down, avoid damage, avoid losing concentration--and much more). If you have an odd DEX score you get a bump to AC and Initiative as well. Better movement is never a bad thing nor is being able to carry more (specifically for groups who use the variant encumbrance rules).
Honestly, I think it's more a personal preference thing than a group thing. I have people who beeline 20s, others who only take feats, and others who just decide on a whim. Personally, I try to have an initial 16, an 18 by level 8, and a 20 by level 12.Oh, and in many groups IME getting the almighty "20" in your main score just isn't necessary--especially at lower levels. By tier 3 you would like an 18, and maybe bother with the 20 at tier 4--maybe...
In T3/T4, where a caster might want to grab it for concentration saves, Resiliant (Con) is a lot more tempting. Because +4.5 to +6.5 to con saves is a lot better than +2-3.This is probably the key point. You can't evaluate feat strength by simply looking at the features and saying "Oh, this one has more features than that one." You need to look at how the feat option fits into the overall build structure, and at what level it becomes the go-to option over other choices. Nothing in this feat makes me think "Oh boy, I need to take VHuman at level 1 just to get this feat", unlike say PAM. I might take this at 1st level if I was playing a medium armor character who was Str focused, but that's about it. But there at least ARE some concepts where I would consider taking it at level 1, which to me is the sweet spot for feats. Most feats don't come anywhere close to that benchmark.
Agreed on all counts. I really think it's excellent design, and I think I'll use it for my own games.In T3/T4, where a caster might want to grab it for concentration saves, Resiliant (Con) is a lot more tempting. Because +4.5 to +6.5 to con saves is a lot better than +2-3.
The bonuses to str/dex saves and dex might be enough to make it tempting. Also the ability to stack it with Resiliant(Wis) if you value that higher.
After Resiliant(Con), it offers an extra +1 to the save, which is non-zero but not something you get a feat for. You might do it if you had an odd dex and want the +1 AC/initiative/etc. But a full ASI in con would give you +1 HP/level and +1 to con saves, and many casters sort of like HP.
At level 12, 12 HP vs (+3.5 str/dex saves, 5' movement, +0.5 AC, +0.5 initiative, fluff) is an interesting choice. Tough is a full feat for +24 HP, but not considered a great feat even on casters.
Not if it is so tempting they ALL take it. Then it becomes nearly a must-have like the other "strong" feats people (including yourself) talk about being taken all the time.If I can get my casters to take an Athlete feat over the same old Resilient(Con) and War Caster, I've already won.
Agreed. It is totally a personal preference thing within the group. We have one player who, like you, likes to beeline it to 20, but even he will get there by taking half feats twice (for +2) and then usually a dedicated +2 ASI once.Honestly, I think it's more a personal preference thing than a group thing. I have people who beeline 20s, others who only take feats, and others who just decide on a whim. Personally, I try to have an initial 16, an 18 by level 8, and a 20 by level 12.
Cool. Glad it works for you and more power to ya! I talked it over with another guy in our group today and he laughed about it, agreeing it is way too OP for our games--we just don't need "super"-feats.Agreed on all counts. I really think it's excellent design, and I think I'll use it for my own games.