D&D 5E Adding Feats to the Existing Backgrounds

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't it radical discourages taking feats.

Which is a big plus in my opinion.
So the default choice is easy. Just take ASI. Only if you really want to deviate from that, you have to deal with feats.

I also inherently don't like just pumping your main stat to 20. I rather just remove ASI's than having both feats and ASI.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Which is a big plus in my opinion.
So the default choice is easy. Just take ASI. Only if you really want to deviate from that, you have to deal with feats.

I also inherently don't like just pumping your main stat to 20. I rather just remove ASI's than having both feats and ASI.

Out of curiosity, what don't you like about feats?

 

[HammerMan]

That is interesting. You could still use existing feats or new feats duplicating features


I see no reason why backgrounds would not be built in and feats still be optional. as such you can have the one feat that is your background, but not able to take more... or you can take the optional rules and be able to take feats as you level.

so do you think that 'free food and lodging' is worth a ASI/Feat?

Heck I just did my 3rd session (not in a row) were the entire thing was about reserch and I don't think I would have a feat for researcher...

in general if you want to upgrade background features that is cool... but lets not pretend that the soldier's rank is worth even half a feat except in a few campaigns at most

 

[HammerMan]

I don't it radical discourages taking feats.

I found giving a slightly higher then normal stat array, and incentivizing the flavor of some of the lesser feats actually made it to when NO players took ASI until 10+ level. I think it's a hard line to walk making it so everyone in the party isn't going all one way.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Out of curiosity, what don't you like about feats?

I like feats. But I don't want to enforce it on every character as much as I don't want to force everyone to raise their main stat to 20. I like that right now both are possible.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think the idea of feats being balanced against ASIs and picking one or the other at appropriate levels is a good one. But I think a lot of feats are under-tuned for that. I think the handful of feats that tend to get focused on as “overpowered” (i.e. PAM, GWM, SS, and CE). are actually about right, considering you’re potentially giving up a +2 to your primary score for them.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For all we know they might very well actually be prepping for a combat/non-combat split with feats... with all the so-called "non-combat" feats becoming those features you gain via Backgrounds and then the combat feats being the ones you gain at 4th/8th/12th levels etc. So if you wanted the Keen Mind feat for example, you'd take (or create) the Background that gave it.

Now that being said... if they went in this direction you might start running into mechanics/fluff conflicts where a player might say they want to be able to be an Actor via feat without actually having to start as a Performer or Charlatan via Background (for example). Maybe they'd want to be an Acolyte of a Trickster god while also getting the features from the Actor feat. In that case... maybe that where the "create or adapt a new Background" comes in, or maybe there's another way to gain a non-combat feat besides just via Background.

But however they end up doing it... it would allow them to shift a lot of stuff off and out of racial features and feats and onto Backgrounds... thereby letting them do a better job at balancing the combat feat options separately.

 

[bedir than]

I keep on saying I'm just going to grant a feat at 1st level and then I keep forgetting to do it

Add it to your campaign one sheet.

I also use a 1st level feat as a differentiator between certain cultures. The fey peoples get a magic empowering feat. The human-ish get an animal companion. The technical get Artificer Initiate and the Rock Gnome tech ability.

This narrows their selection, but emphasizes the questions and foundations of play in the world, just as Strixhaven's feats do.

 

[Amrûnril]

Now that being said... if they went in this direction you might start running into mechanics/fluff conflicts where a player might say they want to be able to be an Actor via feat without actually having to start as a Performer or Charlatan via Background (for example). Maybe they'd want to be an Acolyte of a Trickster god while also getting the features from the Actor feat. In that case... maybe that where the "create or adapt a new Background" comes in, or maybe there's another way to gain a non-combat feat besides just via Background.

Even with custom backgrounds, I'd be disappointed if feats like Actor were only available during character creation. That sort of ability could come from one's background, but I think it's also something one should be able to learn over the course of a campaign.

As an extremely underdeveloped idea, I wonder if it would make sense to divide ASIs from leveling into two categories- one could be used for combat feats and increases to a character's primary ability score, while the category would be limited to nonprimary ability scores and noncombat feats. (Note that my preference would be to do away with the idea of primary ability scores, but sadly I think that's unlikely).

 

[Charlaquin]

For all we know they might very well actually be prepping for a combat/non-combat split with feats... with all the so-called "non-combat" feats becoming those features you gain via Backgrounds and then the combat feats being the ones you gain at 4th/8th/12th levels etc. So if you wanted the Keen Mind feat for example, you'd take (or create) the Background that gave it.

That doesn’t seem consistent with the feats in the Dragonlance UA. The Background-granted feats seem to have combat benefits. I mean, they’re not as powerful as PAM and friends, but they aren’t just some proficiencies and out-of-combat features.