D&D 5E D&D Beyond Revisits Popular Feats

The folks over at D&D Beyond have revisited the stats in the most popular feats used by class on the DDB platform. It looks like the percentage of characters using feats has increased slightly. Here are the most popular feats in 2018 and now. And here are the top feats for each class in 2018 and now.

The folks over at D&D Beyond have revisited the stats in the most popular feats used by class on the DDB platform.

It looks like the percentage of characters using feats has increased slightly.

Screen Shot 2020-02-15 at 12.44.56 PM.png


Screen Shot 2020-02-15 at 12.46.13 PM.png


Here are the most popular feats in 2018 and now.

Screen Shot 2020-02-15 at 12.47.30 PM.png


Screen Shot 2020-02-15 at 12.48.19 PM.png


And here are the top feats for each class in 2018 and now.

Screen Shot 2020-02-15 at 12.49.17 PM.png


Screen Shot 2020-02-15 at 12.49.55 PM.png
 

log in or register to remove this ad

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
Only real surprise is that Lucky isn't as high as I'd expected. War Caster wasn't on my mind for a top pick, but makes perfect sense. So many classes and subclasses cast spells and many want to do so without losing them.

Much more surprising is that so many characters have feats. There's a strong voice in the community that says feats are absolute anathema, and it's interesting to see that that's not reflected in the stats. Sort of like how there are so. goddamn. many. DMs who love to crap on Dragonborn and yet despite them not being a very good pick mechanically they're pretty commonly played (as of the last official article on the subject)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

People evaluate things so differently than I do.

I think Tough is a no-brainer feat... over level 12 or so. I don't really see the allure before then, especially when it competes with +2 Con. I'd probably put Resilient (Wisdom) higher than Resilient (Constitution), too.

Are people really that terrified about losing a concentration spell to damage? I mean, I do think that aspect of concentration is far too punitive -- spells like Hold Person or Ray of Enfeeblement are a complete joke now because there's often 3 checks of some kind made before the spell actually does anything and that is very feelsbad for the player -- but I guess I just don't see spending a feat on it early.
 

RogueJK

It's not "Rouge"... That's makeup.
Surprised Magic Initiate isn’t more popular.

I see it mostly on Variant Humans taken as their free Level 1 feat... And not much on others.

Ritual Caster (Wizard) seems to be more popular, from what I can tell.

Spell Sniper seems to be even more popular, especially Spell Sniper (Warlock) for Sorcerers and sometimes Bards/Paladins to get Eldritch Blast plus doubled attack spell range and ignored cover.

That last one is reflected in the above DnDBeyond stats.... In DnDBeyond, the feat is coded as "Spell Sniper (Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock)". In the stats chart, they've just shortened it to "Spell Sniper (Bard)", but "Spell Sniper (Warlock)" would almost certainly be more accurate for its most common use. (Bards don't even have an eligible attack cantrip on their spell list that can be taken with Spell Sniper anyway...)


I continue to be baffled by why so many Monks take Mobile.

It may not seem like it's worthwhile on paper, but trust me, it works very well in practice. (Especially in Tier 1 and lower Tier 2 play, where most D&D takes places.)

Free Disengage is a powerful tool for Strikers like Monks and Rogues, provided there's one or more Tanks to hold the front line. If there's one or more Tanks in the party, especially if they're augmented by additional "stickiness" from stuff like the Conquest Paladin's immobilization or the Sentinel feat, then Monks and Rogues can flit in and out of combat to get their hits in without lingering on the front lines, and monsters have more difficulty pursuing them past the front line of tanks on their turn.

And extra movement is always nice, especially on an already ridiculously fast class like a Monk.

Dodging costs Bonus Action and Ki. Disengaging usually costs Bonus Action and Ki. But Mobile allows you to Disengage for free. And still having the Bonus Action Dodge as another option is nice. Nothing says you always have to Disengage, or you always have to Dodge. There are situations in which you'll want to stick around and Dodge, but typically more situations in which you'll want to Disengage from the front lines.

Stun is an especially great ability, but it also costs Ki. And you won't want to be burning Ki on it in every encounter. You especially don't want to be burning 3-4 Ki points in one round to Stun the Big Bad as well as his several minions milling around. And Stun isn't guaranteed. The attack may not hit, and the Stun may not stick.

Whereas Mobile works even if your only attempt an attack. Hitting/Missing/Save DC doesn't affect Mobile's Disengage. So you can run in, stun the toughest bad guy with an attack or two, toss a couple attacks or even stun attempts at the other mooks around him that are threatening you with OAs, then duck back out. Even if every single one of your attacks that round miss, or the Stuns don't stick, you're still able to freely Disengage.

Also, Stun doesn't come online until Level 5, and even once it does, your Ki is very limited at Level 5ish. Keep in mind that most play is at lower levels, where Stun either isn't available, or is used sparingly due to minimal Ki and significant competition for that minimal Ki.

+2 to Dex or Wis for a Monk is a huge deal.

On that we agree.

Mobile is most noticeably great on Variant Human Monks at lower levels. But it's still useful on higher level Monks. However, you're right that you usually wouldn't prioritize it over bumping DEX or WIS, especially if either one or both are still at 14/16ish.
 
Last edited:

ad_hoc

(they/them)
Free Disengage is a powerful tool for Strikers like Monks and Rogues

It's not free. They must use 1 attack per creature.

, provided there's one or more Tanks to hold the front line.

D&D is a skirmishing game. There are an average of 4 characters per party.

That's not a line.

Sure, if the DM just has monsters only attack the heavily armoured characters then, yes, okay. But in that case it's an easy game right so it doesn't matter?

I think the biggest thing people are skimming over when it comes to Mobile is that it is an entire feat. That's a huge deal. It's a big cost for such minor benefits.

If it was a half feat I could see an argument for it...

If I'm taking a feat I want something that will either shore up a weakness of my character or let me do something new. I don't want to invalidate abilities I already have to have slightly better ones.
 

ad_hoc

(they/them)
Also, Stun doesn't come online until Level 5, and even once it does, your Ki is very limited at Level 5ish. Keep in mind that most play is at lower levels, where Stun either isn't available, or is used sparingly due to minimal Ki and significant competition for that minimal Ki.

I don't think that's true. The game is designed to level very quickly to 5 where it then slows down drastically.

Levels 1-4 are the apprentice tier. The game starts proper at level 5.

Choosing a feat based on what your character is going to do for a couple sessions is very short sighted.

Also, only 4% of characters in this data set are Variant Humans. Most of the Monks taking Mobile are doing so at level 4 or 8.

At least I see why people think it's good now. I think it sounds much better than it really is in an actual dynamic game.
 
Last edited:

RogueJK

It's not "Rouge"... That's makeup.
I don't think that's true. The game is designed to level very quickly to 5 where it then slows down drastically.

Levels 1-4 are the apprentice tier. The game starts proper at level 5.

Choosing a feat based on what your character is going to do for a couple sessions is very short sighted.

D&D Beyond's statistics that they publish regularly show that the majority of characters are Levels 1-4 (~63%), and almost all characters are Level 10 or under (~90%).


Only ~5% of play is Tier 3 (11-16) and another ~5% play is Tier 4 (17-20). There's discussion in other threads about the reasons for this, from campaign/storyline burnout, to groups falling apart due to real life scheduling conflicts, to the dearth of high level modules, etc.

Granted, that's based solely on players who utilize D&D Beyond, since that's a digital database with easily accessible stats to pull from. But one can extrapolate that a similar breakdown would be true in D&D play in general.

So building a fun and effective character for low to moderate level play would seem to be a pretty safe bet. (Especially compared to something like one of the various complex, feat-heavy, multiclass builds that don't come online until Level 9/12/15/20/etc.) And a Variant Human Mobile Monk is a very fun and effective character in Tier 1 and Tier 2 play, making you even more effective at your usual Monk stuff while also allowing you to reserve even more of your limited Ki for stuff like Stuns and cool subclass abilities.

Besides, dynamic feats like Mobile that let you set up cool, cinematic combat actions like running across the battlefield into the midst of a mob, tossing out a whirlwind of punches and kicks, then scooting away unscathed back to the other side of the battlefield are way more fun in actual play than something more mechanical like Tough that gets you some extra numbers on your character sheet.

At least I see why people think it's good now. I think it sounds much better than it really is in an actual dynamic game.

Dunno what to tell you... I've seen it put to good use by a number of other players, and even used it effectively myself on a Monk character.

You're right that sometimes things work out differently in actual play than they would appear on paper or in white room theorizing, but that's true from multiple angles... Sometimes what you might see to just be middlingly effective on paper works out to be quite handy in actual play.
 
Last edited:

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I am going another direction.

XP slows down exponentially with levels, and gritty rests, means that it takes a long calendar and play time to gain levels. The McGuffins grant a substantial boost to 1 PC, and grant everyone in the party a level, when acquired (this effect, which works on NPCs too, is part of the reason there is a race to get the McGuffins).

The model I have is 1 long rest for level 2 (so 2 weeks), x2 for each level afterwards; so level X takes 2^(X)-2 weeks of adventuring give or take.

Level 6 is just over a year. Level 11 is 30 years of adventuring or intense training. Level 16 is 1000 years of adventuring or intense training.

Which then provides limits on world building (the elves are higher level by a tad). Rare external ways to "cheat" become how you can break this limit (becoming a lich, for example), and the PC party in phase 1 is offered a trail of 13 things that each give a +1 level to a party-ish-sized group and a ridiculous boost to one person (max 1 per person).

If they pull off most of them (phase 2) they'll become the most powerful mortals in the world. Which leads to phase 3; what the 13 omens unlock.
Nice. I'm not going quite so extreme; short rests are overnight, long rests are 3 nights in a safe/civilized environment. Leveling up takes a season (just about 70 days in my campaign world).

The real capper on high level characters is simply finding features to level up with.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
My first take away is that if about 50% of characters in the 8-11 range have a feat then most games by far must allow feats.

My 2nd takeaway is that certain feats are more likely to be banned than others - which may actually impact the numbers we are seeing on there.
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top