Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 8749073" data-attributes="member: 53980">Feats are a big investment, even for a fighter who gets more than average. They're also heavily pressured to build in certain "optimal" ways. Sure, you could take the Skilled feat instead of increasing your Strength/Dexterity, or taking something like Crossbow Expert or Sharpshooter. And you'd end up with a fighter whose mediocre in three more skills but significantly worse in combat than the paladin who took GWM.Moreover, unlike most other class features, feats are optional. And yes, I have seen games where the DM does not allow feats.Fast movement. Not sure why this is confusing to you? The athletic fighter gets a boost to their movement speed so that they are faster than the asthmatic wizard.No, spending a feat for 3 more skills is exactly what I don't mean! Exclusive uses for skills. Things that the fighter can do that nobody else can do. I even gave examples.I can only think of one feat that gives the fighter significant battlefield control: Sentinel. I'll grant you, that's a great feat. But, again, feats are optional. Moreover, these should be exclusive. "Letting" fighters take a feat to have decent field control is like creating a feat to allow anyone to cast 9th level wizard spells. Pretty sure that wizard players might have something to say if anyone could gain a "defining" feature of their class for the cost of a single ASI.</blockquote>