D&D (2024) 1st vs. 4th Level Feats

[Amrûnril]

In the UAs so far, there are essentially 3 categories of feats, 1st level, 4th level and epic boons. Putting aside the epic boons, it seems like the key distinction between 1st and 4th level feats is that the latter have built in ability score increases. Without those ASIs, I feel like these feats would be more or less balanced with each other (with a few exceptions that don't seem balanced within the categories either), and I don't see a thematic reason the 4th level feats couldn't be associated with backgrounds: Actor, for instance, seems like the perfect example of a feat that would make sense as part of a background. Given all this, I really don't see the point in breaking these feats into two categories. It would be far more elegant and far more customization-friendly to simply remove the ASIs from the level 4 feats and then say that any feat chosen at level 4+ also grants an increase to one ability score.

What are your thoughts on the feat level system so far? Would it make sense to merge the level 1 and level 4 feats, or is there some benefit to having them as separate categories?

 

[Composer99]

I expect that part of it is to ensure that certain feats, such as Great Weapon Master, don't appear at 1st level. How much of a benefit that is depends on how annoying you find it to see those feats appear straight away.

Also, given the precedent of treating epic boons as a kind of feat, I shouldn't be surprised if future playtest packets include feats with either higher-level prerequisites (8th-level, 12th-level, etc.) or even "feat chains" 2-3 feats deep, where a feat has another feat for a prerequisite. (I didn't read the Dragonlance-themed UA, but I think it had feats like that.)

 

[payn]

I like that the feats bump a specific stat which makes sense based on what the feats is granting the character. Changing it to a blanket any removes a lot of the theme which I suppose will bother some more than others.

 

[Amrûnril]

I expect that part of it is to ensure that certain feats, such as Great Weapon Master, don't appear at 1st level. How much of a benefit that is depends on how annoying you find it to see those feats appear straight away.

Also, given the precedent of treating epic boons as a kind of feat, I shouldn't be surprised if future playtest packets include feats with either higher-level prerequisites (8th-level, 12th-level, etc.) or even "feat chains" 2-3 feats deep, where a feat has another feat for a prerequisite. (I didn't read the Dragonlance-themed UA, but I think it had feats like that.)

If it was only feats like Great Weapon Master, that would make more sense, but at the moment, the level 4 list looks more like "PHB Feats that weren't in the previous playtest" than a select group chosen for balance or flavor reasons. If they do retain the distinction, hopefully, they'll at least revisit the lists at some point.

I like that the feats bump a specific stat which makes sense based on what the feats is granting the character. Changing it to a blanket any removes a lot of the theme which I suppose will bother some more than others.

There is some flavor benefit, though I also feel like fixed +1 ASIs could encourage tedious forms of planning/minmaxing as players try to avoid keeping odd scores for too long or missing out on an ASI by already being at 20.

 

[payn]

There is some flavor benefit, though I also feel like fixed +1 ASIs could encourage tedious forms of planning/minmaxing as players try to avoid keeping odd scores for too long or missing out on an ASI by already being at 20.

Yeap, this is certainly a preference thing because I actually like all those things more.

 

[aco175]

We have not played with too many feats in my game, but I can see holding off on some until 4th and leaving the 'background' feats for 1st level to give more flavor to the PC and let the 4th level feats be more to specialize in something. I would even break some of the common ones viewed as broken to 4th and 8th level- or possibly 12th.

 

[Composer99]

If it was only feats like Great Weapon Master, that would make more sense, but at the moment, the level 4 list looks more like "PHB Feats that weren't in the previous playtest" than a select group chosen for balance or flavor reasons. If they do retain the distinction, hopefully, they'll at least revisit the lists at some point.

Except that the reason WotC chose for these feats to be 4th-level feats is for balance reasons. That's why they're appearing in this playtest document as 4th-level feats rather than appearing in the previous document as 1st-level ones.

 

[Amrûnril]

Except that the reason WotC chose for these feats to be 4th-level feats is for balance reasons. That's why they're appearing in this playtest document as 4th-level feats rather than appearing in the previous document as 1st-level ones.

I'm sure there's balance related reasoning in some cases, but it isn't at all consistent. I don't see any reason to think that Athlete or Weapon Training, for instance, would be imbalanced if they were added to the first level list without ASIs.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Worth pointing out that there is one first level feat in this playtest packet - Lightly Armoured for light armour, med armour, and shields. (IMO a very good thing to add)

Most of the weaker 4th level feats have been buffed - and they all have an ASI attached.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I agree -- taking the ASI away from All 4th level feats would balance them with the level 1 feats.