D&D 5E Full feats from Tasha's: are they worth a "full feat slot"?

[Horwath]

As the title says, could this feat just be turned to half feats and would that break balance too much


Artificer initiate;
This feat is closest to Magic initiate with difference that you get one tool proficiency instead of one cantrip. I could hardly call that an improvement.
And Magic initiate is not one of the strongest PHB feats, and it gives more options in what spell lists you can chose. This one is locked to one list.
Maybe if it provides expertise to one tool in addition and/or spell is recharged on short rest it would be worth a full feat...maybe.

Eldritch adept:
this is the feat that most looks and feel like a full feat. some invocations are really good, but they are locked to warlock class so that does diminish the worth of the feat, not to mention as you get more invocations "good" choices for your character concept are running out.
maybe make it half-feat and limit to only invocations that require no warlock level(that is what you can take as 2nd level warlock).

Fighting initiate:
This is plain half feat.
Almost in every single situation +2 to your attack ability is clearly better than a fighting style. By a lot.
And there is no sense in having this feat as a secondary option at 12th level when your attack stat is already maxed and 90% of campaigns are over.

Metamagic adept:
this would work as a full feat if it gives more sorcery points, maybe equal to your proficiency bonus or/and add 3rd metamagic option at 11th level or similar.

or just 1 metamagic option and 2 sorcery points for a half feat.

Poisoner:
lots of little benefits that in the end do not add to a lot.
poison DC should scale with your proficiency bonus. maybe 12+PB,
number of doses equal to twice your PB.
add non costly option for poisons that last only 24hrs and deal less damage. I.E. 2d6. So you cannot stock on them. make it that production is a part of the long rest.
damage could also scale:
1d8 for costly poison, 1d6 for free one
2d8/2d6 at level 5,
3d8/3d6 at level 11,
4d8/4d6 at level 17,
or just take the printed version, reduce the damage to 2d6 and make it half feat.

 

[NotAYakk]

Almost in every single situation +2 to your attack ability is clearly better than a fighting style. By a lot.

Archery style is better than +2 to primary attribute damage wise. +2 to hit > +1 hit+1damage. Archery + SS is -3 to hit/+10 damage, which is sweet and compares decently well with +2/+2.

But most viable archers already get a fighting style; except bardchers I guess.

Dueling style is close.

 

[Horwath]

Archery style is better than +2 to primary attribute damage wise. +2 to hit > +1 hit+1damage. Archery + SS is -3 to hit/+10 damage, which is sweet and compares decently well with +2/+2.

But most viable archers already get a fighting style; except bardchers I guess.

Dueling style is close.

archery is +2 attack vs. +1 attack, +1 damage, +1 AC, +1 init, +1 dex save, +1 for 3 skills.

dueling is the same except when it's for STR and that gives it's own sets of bonuses for higher STR.

two handed style is horrible, and you better take Magic initiate(not a strong feat in the 1st place) instead of 2 extra cantrips as a style. At least you get extra 1st level spell cast per day.

martial adept feats(again not a great one) is better than superior technique style.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Archery style is better than +2 to primary attribute damage wise. +2 to hit > +1 hit+1damage. Archery + SS is -3 to hit/+10 damage, which is sweet and compares decently well with +2/+2.

But most viable archers already get a fighting style; except bardchers I guess.

Dueling style is close.

There are actually many that are better than an ASI. For example Blindfighting simply cannot be compared to an ASI. Duel wielder for Rogues, Barbarians, Bladesingers etc. What's bad for a fighter isn't necessarily bad for other classes. Superior Technique gets better the more battlemaster dice you already have. etc. Unarmed Fighting can significantly boost the damage of low level monks. Interception is great at low levels but doesn't scale well. But the nice thing is you can swap it for something else at any ASI level.

It's the urp durp great weapon master "look at the size of my damage" type players who can't see the value.

 

[BacchusNL]

-Artificer Initiate, I think, is fine if you slap on +1 to a stat. it would be a decent choice among many.

-Eldritch Adapt would definitly be pretty pushed with +1 to a stat. It kind of depands what choices you go for ofcoarse but Devil's Sight, for example, by itself is very powerful already. But a feat for that single trait is a pretty steep price. Other things, like the new invocation that gives advantage on concentration rolls (which is an undeniably good invocation) are also strickly outclassed by feats like Warcaster and Resilient: con. I think +1 would make it a VERY good feat, with many uses. It could be that some builds will push the limit with it a bit.

-Fighting Initiate would become a very competative choice aswell for the same reason.

-Metamagic adapt would become very competative for any sorc build (and a reason to aim for 17 cha at the start), and an interesting choice for some other classes with specific shennenigans in mind (subtle casting and the like)

-Poisoner is a cheap cop-out for a system that shouldn't require a feat investment.

The main thing, I think, is that if a feat isn't already competing for top tier (like GWM, SS, Lucky, Polearm Master, Res: con, Elven Accuracy ect) then you can often slap a +1 on it. And some feats, like actor or mage slayer, should have been background features or so.

 

[Horwath]

There are actually many that are better than an ASI. For example Blindfighting simply cannot be compared to an ASI. Duel wielder for Rogues, Barbarians, Bladesingers etc. What's bad for a fighter isn't necessarily bad for other classes. Superior Technique gets better the more battlemaster dice you already have. etc. Unarmed Fighting can significantly boost the damage of low level monks. Interception is great at low levels but doesn't scale well. But the nice thing is you can swap it for something else at any ASI level.

It's the urp durp great weapon master "look at the size of my damage" type players who can't see the value.

yes, blind fighting is an outlier in styles, so it has to be addressed in balance between styles.
but, really it's just 10ft(so any ranged attack with have auto-advantage all the time) and all it does is removes the need to carry around a torch. In a game where everyone has darkvision by 3rd level in one way or the other.

two weapon fighting: at 4th level, where you have 16 in attack stat gives you +3 damage to one attack vs. +1 attack and +1 damage to two attacks, and before mentioned additional bonuses for higher str/dex.

Unarmed fighting as Monk? yeah thanks, but I'll take my +2 dex instead.

Superior technique gets worse as you have more battlemasters dice.
it' OK at 4th level where you go from 4 dice to 5(+25%) and from 3 to 4 maneuvers(+33%)
at 15th level you get 6 dice, so 7 makes it +17% and you get extra maneuver on top of 9 that you already know. No real help there.
and extra dice does not scale(or it does, I might be reading RAW wrong)
and in the end Martial adept feat from PHB is better.

 

[Guest User]

Fighting Initiate: Blind Fighting is a decent choice for any character.

Unless you opponent is Hidden, being Invisible doesn't do much beyond assessing Disadvantage to Attack Action combatants.

Your foe being Invisible, can wreck your plans if you are a Spellcaster.
Now, one can at least "see" everything within a 10' range regardless of illumination or Invisibility.

The Interception Fighting Style also is something to consider. Negating 1d10+ PB of damage always stays useful. Hell...yesterday even 8 more points of damage mitigation would have prevented a PC, from being 'Dusted' by a Disintergrate effect.

 

[Guest User]

and extra dice does not scale(or it does, I might be reading RAW wrong)

Battle Master's get this:
IMPROVED COMBAT SUPERIORITY
At 10th level, your superiority dice turn into dlOs. At 18th level, they turn into d12s.

Also the value of a maneuver such as Riposte, is not in the size of the superiority die, it is in the utility of the Reaction attack, itself.

 

[Horwath]

Fighting Initiate: Blind Fighting is a decent choice for any character.

Decent the key word. I would say that decent is worth +1 to an ability

Unless you opponent is Hidden, being Invisible doesn't do much beyond assessing Disadvantage to Attack Action combatants.

Your foe being Invisible, can wreck your plans if you are a Spellcaster.
Now, one can at least "see" everything within a 10' range regardless of illumination or Invisibility.

As I said, it's just 10ft. you still cannot do anything beyond that point. No ranged attacks, no enemy position info...

The Interception Fighting Style also is something to consider. Negating 1d10+ PB of damage always stays useful. Hell...yesterday even 8 more points of damage mitigation would have prevented a PC, from being 'Dusted' by a Disintergrate effect.

1d10+PB is nice of once per round, but you need an ally within 5ft, that makes both you cannon fodder for even smallest AoE effects

 

[Kobold Stew]

I'm afraid I think these are all full feats:

Artificer Initiate. The comparison is Magic Initiate, the feat I have probably given characters first more times than any other. So (for me) it's useful, and useful throughout one's adventuring career. You get a cantrip, which can be an attack cantrip, and a 1-st level spell; the tool-for-SECOND-cantrip is a choice a player might make. Full Feat.

Eldritch Adept. You can choose Mage Armor at will, Devil's Sight, Detect Magic at will, Silent Image, Disguise Self, False Life.... The first three of these are certainly a full feat's worth, probably all of them are. Or, mechancically less useful but would instantly improve my real-world life immeasurably, Eyes of the Runekeeper. Full Feat.

Fighting Initiate. Blindfighting is obviously a full feat; I would build characters around unarmed fighting (not just monks, for whom it is obivously worthwhile until level 11, beyond what most campaigns go). Dueling or TWF would avoid some 1-level dips for rogues and bards. Full feat.

Metamagic Adept. I can think of court-intrigue-type games where the ability to cast subtle spell twice a day would have shifted the balance of power. Given that spellcasters are sometimes thought to be feat-poor, this is clearly more powerful for spellcasters than almost every feat in the game. Full Feat.

Poisoner. A reliable way of having a poison without needing to negotiate with NPCs of the DM to purchase it? Full Feat.