D&D (2024) Expert Classes - Feats Discussion

[Bill Zebub]

Yeah I don't like that change. The old version was quite underrated but actually felt great if you took it and was quite powerful a. which I find good if you take something that helps other instead of yourself.

The thing I didn’t like about the old version is that it got wasted most of the time. You would use it, then the monster would either still hit, or would have missed anyway. So you not only waste the ability but your reaction.

This new version is ‘weaker’ but never wasted.

Overall I like it, but I wish it were either PB instead of fixed +2, or lasted until end of current turn.

 

[Baumi]

Crossbow Expert - Dual Wielding is one of the most confusing written Descriptions.

 

[Weiley31]

I honestly don't know how to feel about Fighting Styles being feats.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I honestly don't know how to feel about Fighting Styles being feats.

Since they are in a sub-category of feat, I’m guessing warriors will get one of these in addition to regular feats. I suspect the real purpose is to save page count.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I honestly don't know how to feel about Fighting Styles being feats.

It shouldn't really change anything. You could previously pick up a fighting style with a feat, now they are just placed into feats individually. Because Rangers still get one fighting style for free, you'd imagine actual Warriors will get at least one, too.

It's just a change in presentation.

 

[Horwath]

I honestly don't know how to feel about Fighting Styles being feats.

they suck.

fighting styles should be half feats at best.

nerf archery, buff GW fighting and make all those half-feats.

 

[Amrûnril]

It shouldn't really change anything. You could previously pick up a fighting style with a feat, now they are just placed into feats individually. Because Rangers still get one fighting style for free, you'd imagine actual Warriors will get at least one, too.

It's just a change in presentation.

It is slightly more restrictive, in that the UA format only alllows Warrior classes (and Rangers) to take the feat, whereas the Tasha's fighting style feat only requires a martial weapon proficiency. Personally, I'd dump this requirement- I don't see any reason not to allow War Clerics, Battle Smiths etc. to invest a feat into gaining a fighting style.

It's also slightly more flexible, in any class with access to fighting styles can select any style, rather than being constrained to a pre-specified list. This could be helpful if a player wants to go slightly outside the box and build a strength-focused ranger, for instance.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Just as long as I can still play a monk with blindsight, I’m happy.

 

[Tonguez]

I honestly don't know how to feel about Fighting Styles being feats.

Easiest way to turn it into D20 GURPS probably

 

[Horwath]

Elemental adept.

drop the damage on 1 being 2, and add:
you treat immunity on chosen element as resistance.

New feat:
elemental master: requires elemental adept
+1 ASI
for your element chosen by elemental adept feat, you gain +1 damage for every damage die of the spell.
I.E. 3rd level fireball gains +8 damage on its 8d6 damage roll.