D&D General Path of Feats: a Superior Design than Subclasses

[Corinnguard]

That's already a problem with a lot of subclasses and species choice. For example, it's a bad choice for a dragonborn draconic sorcerer to pick the same element/dragon type because the resistances overlap. Or for a Triton to be a sea druid because they get water breathing and a swim speed twice.

Pathfinder 1st edition sort of came up with a solution for this by producing species-specific archetypes. However, I doubt that making two versions of the same archetype, one for the species in question and one for everyone else, for the same class else will work for 5e.

 

[Blue]

Nothing about these paths are a feat tax. You aren't required to take them to be good at survival in 5e.

Yes, these paths. However, the OP is talking about more of them. And we all know that there's no such thing as perfect feat balancing. If there is a proliferation of them, players will find OP combos. And those OP combos will be easier to access than subclass-based ones with a higher barrier to entry.

 

[Maxperson]

3e prestige classes are maybe 75% redundant in 5e.

The main types of PrCs were

1. A multiclass fixer. You are leveling the main aspects of 2 classes at once (3e Mystic Thuerge)
2. An upgrading feat. You more or less get 1 or 2 featlike features that scale or you scale removal of the restrictions of a feat like feature. A feat chains in a class system (3e Thaumaturgist)
3. A sack of feats. You are swapping class features for feats. (3e Hierophant)
4. A subclass. You are doing a twist on a class (3e Arcane Archer)
5. A variant class. You are doing a twist of the class. (3e Assassin)
6. A sneak variant class. You are doing a twist of the class that doesnt stack with the class well. (3e Blackguard)
7. A whole class. You are basically playing a class that didnt have its first 5 levels designed (3e Dragon Disciple)
8. A whole class with a core feature too strong for level 1. You are basically playing a class that can't have its first 5 levels designed (3e Shadowdancer)
9. A whole class with the same start as another. You are basically playing a class that first 5 levels are the same as multiple others (3e Duelist)

Of those, 5e has no need for Prcs of #1-6. 7 is straight up a new class. So PRCs we could only be good for 8 or 9. Like Shadowdancer as rogues, rangers, and bards play Very differently.

This misses the entire point of prestige classes. They were meant as a thematic specialization of your class. My druid is specialized at shape changing. Yours is specialized as a summoner. My rogue is specialized as an acrobat. And so on.

 

[Minigiant]

Plus, what if you wanted to be a Dragonborn Dragon Disciple? As a Dragonborn, you already have a breath weapon and resistance to one damage type. There would be a stacking issue.

Well Dragon Disciples had to be nondragons so...

This misses the entire point of prestige classes. They were meant as a thematic specialization of your class. My druid is specialized at shape changing. Yours is specialized as a summoner. My rogue is specialized as an acrobat. And so on.

My point is with 5e subclasses and feat, that point of prestige classes is redundant.

5e already has the tools for minor flavor shifts or specialization.

5.5e only lacks a tool for complete PC shifting of style.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, these paths. However, the OP is talking about more of them. And we all know that there's no such thing as perfect feat balancing. If there is a proliferation of them, players will find OP combos. And those OP combos will be easier to access than subclass-based ones with a higher barrier to entry.

That still doesn't put them into a tax category. That simply means that the relatively few power gamers out there will pick them more often than other paths. For the overwhelming majority of players who are casual and don't bother going online to look for threads on the best combos, the thematic content will be more important.

5e is too easy for more powerful paths to become a feat tax.

 

[Silam]

So 1 choice among 48 possibilities from one side.
And 1 choice among 43 × 42 × 41 = 74046 possibilities from the other.

Sure. Quite similar. Same ballpark, really.
And that's just level 1-12.

I can tell you as an absolute fact that I have used feats for all my 5e characters and if I add all my characters together, I'm nowhere near considering 74k possibilities. You are massively overstating the issue.

You mean maths are wrong, as shown in your personal experience?

Maths are always right but these particular equations are wrong…

1 x 48 is only true in the context of single class characters, which is fine if you want to argue that multiclassing is an optional rule, but then we should consider that feats are also optional and you can play perfectly fine with only ASIs. In which case, levels 1-12 are a comparison between 1 x 48 subclass choices versus 6 ^ 3 possible +2 bumps, most of which are nonsensical anyway since you probably won’t bump Charisma on a Barbarian, etc.

And that brings us to the more important point: what is sensical?

Given the way 5e is balanced, and the way it is commonly played, most tables do play with both MC and feats, and yet most builds spend a significant chunk, if not the majority, of their feat slots on ASIs. And as far as ASIs go, each class is going to focus on just one or two abilities, so it’s not like they are actually considering all 6 stats to bump. So then the feat complexity of 5e is more like choosing between 1 to 3 stats for most feat slots, and then throwing in 1 or maybe 2 feats or half-feats with the remaining ASI/feat slots. Out of those feats, the vast majority will not be considered at all because they are clearly for a different archetype than you’re building for. A martial character will consider among maybe half a dozen feats. Same for a caster. Then there are feats which emulate other classes which you would only consider if you’re trying to minimize multiclassing but still get stuff from outside your archetype (e.g., armor proficiencies or metamagic adept) and those aren’t that common, given how prevalent multiclassing actually is…

On the class side, from levels 1-12, you could be considering 12 x 11 x 10 x 9, etc, combinations if you dipped 1 level per class, but that’s exaggerated. You could consider taking 3 levels per class, in which case the math comes up to 48 x 44 x 40 x 36, but that too is likely exaggerated for most people. Or you could take fewer classes and more levels in each and have correspondingly fewer permutations, but most likely, you’re still considering more than just 1 x 48 options.

Anyway, the point is, we can all come up with equations all day and they will be "right" for a given context. The question is always whether that context is pertinent. Let’s not devolve into throwing numbers that correctly describe not very relevant contexts…

 

[Maxperson]

Well Dragon Disciples had to be nondragons so...

My point is with 5e subclasses and feat, that point of prestige classes is redundant.

5e already has the tools for minor flavor shifts or specialization.

5.5e only lacks a tool for complete PC shifting of style.

Subclasses are not only pre-built feat chains, but they are also built-in prestige classes. That's the redundant part of it, not whether X or Y is covered by 5e.

These feat paths are neither subclass, nor prestige class. They are simply thematic chains of feats for a character to maybe travel down.

 

[Maxperson]

Maths are always right but these particular equations are wrong…

1 x 48 is only true in the context of single class characters, which is fine if you want to argue that multiclassing is an optional rule, but then we should consider that feats are also optional and you can play perfectly fine with only ASIs. In which case, levels 1-12 are a comparison between 1 x 48 subclass choices versus 6 ^ 3 possible +2 bumps, most of which are nonsensical anyway since you probably won’t bump Charisma on a Barbarian, etc.

And that brings us to the more important point: what is sensical?

Given the way 5e is balanced, and the way it is commonly played, most tables do play with both MC and feats, and yet most builds spend a significant chunk, if not the majority, of their feat slots on ASIs. And as far as ASIs go, each class is going to focus on just one or two abilities, so it’s not like they are actually considering all 6 stats to bump. So then the feat complexity of 5e is more like choosing between 1 to 3 stats for most feat slots, and then throwing in 1 or maybe 2 feats or half-feats with the remaining ASI/feat slots. Out of those feats, the vast majority will not be considered at all because they are clearly for a different archetype than you’re building for. A martial character will consider among maybe half a dozen feats. Same for a caster. Then there are feats which emulate other classes which you would only consider if you’re trying to minimize multiclassing but still get stuff from outside your archetype (e.g., armor proficiencies or metamagic adept) and those aren’t that common, given how prevalent multiclassing actually is…

On the class side, from levels 1-12, you could be considering 12 x 11 x 10 x 9, etc, combinations if you dipped 1 level per class, but that’s exaggerated. You could consider taking 3 levels per class, in which case the math comes up to 48 x 44 x 40 x 36, but that too is likely exaggerated for most people. Or you could take fewer classes and more levels in each and have correspondingly fewer permutations, but most likely, you’re still considering more than just 1 x 48 options.

Anyway, the point is, we can all come up with equations all day and they will be "right" for a given context. The question is always whether that context is pertinent. Let’s not devolve into throwing numbers that correctly describe not very relevant contexts…

The math is right, the usage is wrong.

People don't go through the PHB and consider every feat combination. They do something like the following, "I really like Sentinel, so I'm going to make a Paladin and take the Sentinel feat." Total feats considered? 1.

Now every combination of feats that doesn't include Sentinal is gone from possible consideration, not that anyone would bother to go through all the rest of the combinations. They're going to scan through and be like, "I don't want to be surprised, so I'm going to take Alert." Now, maybe they looked through to see which few feats made it to the final cut, but they still weren't going through all the combinations of feats that have Sentinal in them. And now the possibility pool excludes any combinations that don't have Sentinel and Alert in them.

The math drops precipitously with each decision made. Again, not that anyone actually goes through the possible combinations. These combination possibilities shown by the math are just an interesting math exercise, not something that is going to be useful in game play.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If people are really so desperate for making unique characters... you'd all be better off doing it the easiest way-- by the character's personality and how you roleplay it. Rather than waiting for someone to write a book that throws in a couple game mechanics to theoretically do it.

I mean... here is what your PC gains mechanically to make them "unique" when they take one of the Paths n this latest UA...

4th level:
INT/WIS or CHA +1
+1d6 + MOD on next attack after someone is reduced to 0 HP

8th level:
INT/WIS or CHA +1
recover 4 levels of spell slots once per short or long rest

OR

INT/WIS or CHA +1
ally gains Temp HP

OR

INT/WIS or CHA +1
gain cantrip and use spell slot to add 1d10 necrotic damage per spell slot and CON save to avoid Paralyzed

12th level:
INT/WIS or CHA +1
Type becomes Undead, resistance to Necrotic and Poison damage, no Exhaustion levels for certain things
gain spell and always have it prepared-- cast it modifier times per long rest without spell slot
self-resurrection in 1d10 days

So your so-called "unique" PC is gaining bonuses to INT, WIS, or CHA... the same bonuses that any other character can also get when choosing a feat. They are also potentially regaining spell slots just like almost every spellcasting class already can do. They maybe are giving out Temporary Hit Points-- a mechanic that is seen countless times across the entire game. Or making a single cantrip more powerful and adding a rider on it to give the Paralyzed condition to someone... an ability that is already given out numerous other ways in the game (either Paralyzed itself or even more powerful conditions that render a creature helpless) via all manner of other spells or abilities. And finally you can gain Resistance to two energies at 12th level or above that many other PCs already had back at like 1st, 2nd or 3rd level, a free spell PCs can already take without this feat and you can get resurrected from being dead just like probably every PC was already getting back at 5th level when the Cleric took Revivify as a spell.

So what exactly is "unique" here? As far as I can tell... nothing. None of these mechanics are unique. They are the same mechanics given out to PCs at any number of different levels across the board. So these feat chains are not some grand bonus to character originality that makes your PC a special snowflake... they are just alternate ways for characters to gain mechanics at different levels and in different groups that everyone can already get. Game mechanics do not make your PC unique because it uses the exact same mechanics dozens of times across dozens of different options. I mean heck... how many times do we see "gain X skill" or "gain Advantage on next attack roll" for all of these classes, subclasses, feats, features etc. etc. etc. in an attempt to make us think we are getting something cool and unusual? All the time!

But do you know what is TRULY unique? What is actually different when they make all of these new abilities and things in all these books and UAs? It's the flavor they put on top of them. The truly unique thing is the story that defines these abilities and tries to fool us in thinking they are actually different. THIS ability is your PC making a Vow as part of their oath to see their hated rival defeated for what they had done to you... while THAT ability is your PC getting so riled up and bloodthirsty in combat that you just overpower your foes as you swing your weapon savagely. Both abilities define how your PC "behaves" within the story of the game and how you as a player roleplay your PC as a part of that story. Your two characters are different and react differently and behave differently... all because of the flavor that is given to you by the game designers to inspire you to roleplay differently.

Meanwhile... mechanically both of them give you Advantage on your attack. The exact same mechanic for two "different" abilities.

So why are they different? Because you as a roleplaying game player... roleplay your character using that ability differently. One might say "uniquely". The roleplay of the ability is what makes your character unique. How you roleplay in general makes your character unique. And believe it or not... you can roleplay your character as a unique character while not having a single game mechanic that is different than anyone else. Your PC wildly swinging a battleaxe in the narrative of combat is roleplayed by you differently than that player making very grand slashes and parries with their longsword, even though they are both doing 1d8 damage.

And once you can accept that... that you can make a unique character just by how you roleplay them... you no longer need or care the manner in which WotC decides to bundle all these repeating game mechanics into new groups. And whether they get called "subclasses" or "feat chains" or "prestige classes" or any other term that gets tossed out to try and fool you into thinking this ability that gives you a +2 to your AC is somehow different than all the other abilities in the game that can grant you a bonus to your Armor Class.

Come over to the light side! Let go of mechanics and embrace story! You will be much happier and find things much more "unique" when you do!

 

[Maxperson]

If people are really so desperate for making unique characters... you'd all be better off doing it the easiest way-- by the character's personality and how you roleplay it. Rather than waiting for someone to write a book that throws in a couple game mechanics to theoretically do it.

I mean... here is what your PC gains mechanically to make them "unique" when they take one of the Paths n this latest UA...

4th level:
INT/WIS or CHA +1
+1d6 + MOD on next attack after someone is reduced to 0 HP

8th level:
INT/WIS or CHA +1
recover 4 levels of spell slots once per short or long rest

OR

INT/WIS or CHA +1
ally gains Temp HP

OR

INT/WIS or CHA +1
gain cantrip and use spell slot to add 1d10 necrotic damage per spell slot and CON save to avoid Paralyzed

12th level:
INT/WIS or CHA +1
Type becomes Undead, resistance to Necrotic and Poison damage, no Exhaustion levels for certain things
gain spell and always have it prepared-- cast it modifier times per long rest without spell slot
self-resurrection in 1d10 days

So your so-called "unique" PC is gaining bonuses to INT, WIS, or CHA... the same bonuses that any other character can also get when choosing a feat. They are also potentially regaining spell slots just like almost every spellcasting class already can do. They maybe are giving out Temporary Hit Points-- a mechanic that is seen countless times across the entire game. Or making a single cantrip more powerful and adding a rider on it to give the Paralyzed condition to someone... an ability that is already given out numerous other ways in the game (either Paralyzed itself or even more powerful conditions that render a creature helpless) via all manner of other spells or abilities. And finally you can gain Resistance to two energies at 12th level or above that many other PCs already had back at like 1st, 2nd or 3rd level, a free spell PCs can already take without this feat and you can get resurrected from being dead just like probably every PC was already getting back at 5th level when the Cleric took Revivify as a spell.

So what exactly is "unique" here? As far as I can tell... nothing. None of these mechanics are unique. They are the same mechanics given out to PCs at any number of different levels across the board. So these feat chains are not some grand bonus to character originality that makes your PC a special snowflake... they are just alternate ways for characters to gain mechanics at different levels and in different groups that everyone can already get. Game mechanics do not make your PC unique because it uses the exact same mechanics dozens of times across dozens of different options. I mean heck... how many times do we see "gain X skill" or "gain Advantage on next attack roll" for all of these classes, subclasses, feats, features etc. etc. etc. in an attempt to make us think we are getting something cool and unusual? All the time!

But do you know what is TRULY unique? What is actually different when they make all of these new abilities and things in all these books and UAs? It's the flavor they put on top of them. The truly unique thing is the story that defines these abilities and tries to fool us in thinking they are actually different. THIS ability is your PC making a Vow as part of their oath to see their hated rival defeated for what they had done to you... while THAT ability is your PC getting so riled up and bloodthirsty in combat that you just overpower your foes as you swing your weapon savagely. Both abilities define how your PC "behaves" within the story of the game and how you as a player roleplay your PC as a part of that story. Your two characters are different and react differently and behave differently... all because of the flavor that is given to you by the game designers to inspire you to roleplay differently.

Meanwhile... mechanically both of them give you Advantage on your attack. The exact same mechanic for two "different" abilities.

So why are they different? Because you as a roleplaying game player... roleplay your character using that ability differently. One might say "uniquely". The roleplay of the ability is what makes your character unique. How you roleplay in general makes your character unique. And believe it or not... you can roleplay your character as a unique character while not having a single game mechanic that is different than anyone else. Your PC wildly swinging a battleaxe in the narrative of combat is roleplayed by you differently than that player making very grand slashes and parries with their longsword, even though they are both doing 1d8 damage.

And once you can accept that... that you can make a unique character just by how you roleplay them... you no longer need or care the manner in which WotC decides to bundle all these repeating game mechanics into new groups. And whether they get called "subclasses" or "feat chains" or "prestige classes" or any other term that gets tossed out to try and fool you into thinking this ability that gives you a +2 to your AC is somehow different than all the other abilities in the game that can grant you a bonus to your Armor Class.

Come over to the light side! Let go of mechanics and embrace story! You will be much happier and find things much more "unique" when you do!

These aren't mutually exclusive things. I can make a unique personality AND pick a thematic feat chain. You are also assuming that we would take the thematic chains for uniqueness, rather than just character story development. That's an assumption that will prove wrong a whole lot of the time.

I'd rather have both options available to me, as well as the option to not take a feat path and just take feats that fit my character's theme.