OneDnD Expert Classes - Feats Discussion


log in or register to remove this ad



Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
Huh. I wasn’t thinking of persuading the audience of anything specific, just getting them to be positively disposed toward you.

I can see how, if you are trying to have fewer skills, those could be combined through a very broad definition of “persuade”. But then you’ve got the seasoned negotiator and the polished stage performer using the same skill. It’s like athletics covering swimming, climbing, running, and jumping, as if being good at one makes you good at all three.

On the other hand, four CHA skills and one STR skill seems wrong.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
Many feats offer clear improvements -- it's a really good sign. Here's ten where I think the fixes are solid improvements, even if many are ordinary-level feats.

* Weapon training. A better name, and finally has a use.

* Spell Sniper. Very good. I wish they had kept the free cantrip. I'd prefer that to the ASI. Also I think a clarification is needed: for the prerequisite is any spellcasting allowed (e.g. elves with a spellcasting ability) or is it the spellcasting class feature only?

* Skulker. Now is a very solid choice for rogues. Losing the penalty to vision is an interesting choice; I know for some that was the strongest part of the feat, but 10' of blindsight is solid. I am one with the Force and the Force is with me.

* Lightly Armored. This is a reasonable conflating two earlier feats.

* Keen Mind. Excellent re-thinking.

* Durable. I like it. Tying it to the bonus action is clear.

* Dual Wielder. Top Marks. I love the re-write. Sure, it's awkward but it finally does what the feat should be doing.

* Defensive Duelist. I was initially nonplussed by the change, but the more I think about it, the more it seems good (a slight reduction to the central importance of Dexterity, and a good way to ease of of an initial 13 Dex score. (e.g. for a strength-based rogue)

* Crossbow Expert. The redundancy with Sharpshooter (and the repetition of "firing into melee" reduces the liklihood slightly that players will want to nab both. I'm not sure it's needed, but it's a fair re-write.

* Athlete. Another solid re-write. Advantage on jumps is overall helpful (whatever they do with the jump rules), and getting a climb speed is nice. (Generally I like having movement and swimming speeds because in play it means that characters don't need to make a roll for normal movement, as they do without a stated speed. I would like the glossary to spell that out, but I doubt anyone thinks it's important enough.)
 



Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
I dislike Ritual Caster changes. I LIKED a single class barbarian taking Ritual Caster to be a shaman. Or a rogue with Ritual Caster to help find magic treasure or traps. Or the Fighter, just to irritate the wizard.

This is ....Meh.
No, more blech.
I think this is a complaint that they might listen to if presented (clearly, and often enough) in the feedback. I agree with you 100%.
 

cbwjm

Legend
I dislike Ritual Caster changes. I LIKED a single class barbarian taking Ritual Caster to be a shaman. Or a rogue with Ritual Caster to help find magic treasure or traps. Or the Fighter, just to irritate the wizard.

This is ....Meh.
No, more blech.
I liked the thought of the ritual book where anyone who has the feat can hunt down more rituals to add to it, which it sounds like the oneDND feat gets rid of completely The only change I'd make to the current ritual caster feat is that you can add all rituals rather than just a single class.
 


I dislike Ritual Caster changes. I LIKED a single class barbarian taking Ritual Caster to be a shaman. Or a rogue with Ritual Caster to help find magic treasure or traps. Or the Fighter, just to irritate the wizard.

This is ....Meh.
No, more blech.
One of my favourite characters to DM for ever was a 4E Fighter who had the 4E Ritual Caster Feat. I agree that this is just dreadful btw, but I do hope they'll listen to feedback on it.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
This is fascinating because it's like they've gone from not wanting you to take Feats to REALLY preferring that you take Feats instead of ASIs, which is, y'know, quite a difference.
Except they haven't quite succeeded in making feats a preferable option. If it were up to me, I would remove ASIs entirely except for half feats.
 

Except they haven't quite succeeded in making feats a preferable option. If it were up to me, I would remove ASIs entirely except for half feats.
I'm not sure they haven't. The way D&Done works you're always going to start with a 16 or a 17 in your primary stat and if people race to level 3 (as they should) a 17 is preferable. This means that (for a non-monk) your 4th level feat isn't going to be the ASI because a +1 is basically as good as a +2 when your prime stat is 17.

This means that the only real question is whether you're going to get a feat or a full ASI for your second feat. If you take the ASI you spend until your next feat arguably ahead - but are permanently behind from your third feat. For a rogue or a fighter the answer is "Hell no" as you're only there for two levels. For a melee weapon user (barbarian, paladin, or two weapon ranger) I think the answer is also no - there are too many good melee feats.

For a caster I think it depends on game style. Warcaster is the only thing that comes close to being a must-have - or possibly Spell Sniper for a warlock. But Ritual Caster is good and there are plenty of fun feats.
 

Yeah, it's definitely better, but really they should just clean up the choice at 8th level. It is really only a problem achieving the first 20, in whatever stat affects accuracy for your class. After that, you're either upping defense (which you could well do with a different Armor Proficiency or Save Proficiency feat) or improving skills. Those are both comparable effects to what you get out of feats, so it's a fairly reasonable exchange.

Just making +1 to your primary attribute a class ability at say 6th level would be perfect.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
The Keen Mind feat lets you quick study.

Does Study even do anything in combat?

Is it supposed to give the user monster stats?

Which stats are you supposed to give out on a high rolls
?

Observant let's you Quiick Search. That includes Medicine.

Are you supposed to give out HP info in combat or just generally how wounded the target is wounded?

Does that mean you can't tell how hurt a foe is without taking the Search action?


Oh man. This is a DM Discussion on itself.
 


Amrûnril

Adventurer
I'm actually almost as disappointed by what Ritual Caster gains as by what it loses.

While the Quick Ritual feature may compensate power-wise for the inability to learn new rituals, it really doesn't fit the sort of character I'd want to create with this feat: someone who lacks a spellcasting adventurer's capacity for time-sensitive magic but who can manage a few spells if given time to sit down with a book or pray/meditate. I could imagine this sort of character being common in a lot of settings, but it's not supported rules-wise if learning rituals comes as a package deal with the ability to cast them quickly.

I wonder if the developers' reasoning here is the same as with Healer. Make a feat that gives characters a new ability attractive to characters that already have that ability. As in that case, I think this is a mistake here. Characters learning new ritual magic and characters looking to exhance the ritual portion of their existing magic would both be better served by dedicated feats than by a single feat trying to do two things at once.

I liked the thought of the ritual book where anyone who has the feat can hunt down more rituals to add to it, which it sounds like the oneDND feat gets rid of completely The only change I'd make to the current ritual caster feat is that you can add all rituals rather than just a single class.
That might be a bit much for a single feat, but I'd at least make it repeatable to choose multiple classes.


Some shorter thoughs on other feats:

Keen Mind/Observant: The previous iterations of these feats were niche but they definitely had appeal for some players. The new versions actually seem more DM dependent, in that they codify moving an action to a bonus action, while leaving what that action can actually accomplish undefined.

Lightly Armored: Glad to see this improved. The 2014 armor proficiency feats seemed like a perfect example of the sort of feat chain the developers were trying to move away from. And with the changes to dwarves, it's nice to have an option to add armor proficiencies at level one.

Heavily Armored: But then this stays exactly the same, despite a +1 ASI becoming a default part of feats, rather than a balancing mechanism for weaker ones.

Resilient: I feel like this should be repeatable for different saves.

Spell Sniper/Sharpshooter: If the developers want feats to support ranged attacks in melee combat, they should design feats around that focus, not tack an ability onto feats focused on long range combat.

Weapon Training: The improvement from four weapon types to all martial weapons is welcome, though it does create an amusing scenario where a wizard who takes it can proficiently use any martial weapon but is still limited to a subset of simple ones.
 

Lightly Armored: Glad to see this improved. The 2014 armor proficiency feats seemed like a perfect example of the sort of feat chain the developers were trying to move away from. And with the changes to dwarves, it's nice to have an option to add armor proficiencies at level one.

Heavily Armored: But then this stays exactly the same, despite a +1 ASI becoming a default part of feats, rather than a balancing mechanism for weaker ones.

Resilient: I feel like this should be repeatable for different saves.

Spell Sniper/Sharpshooter: If the developers want feats to support ranged attacks in melee combat, they should design feats around that focus, not tack an ability onto feats focused on long range combat.

Weapon Training: The improvement from four weapon types to all martial weapons is welcome, though it does create an amusing scenario where a wizard who takes it can proficiently use any martial weapon but is still limited to a subset of simple ones.

I think, I'd prefer militia training that gives light armor and all simple weapons (and a little extra). Medium armor + shield for armored mages is quite a lot for a level 1 feat and probably noone else really neads this.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
I'm actually almost as disappointed by what Ritual Caster gains as by what it loses.

While the Quick Ritual feature may compensate power-wise for the inability to learn new rituals, it really doesn't fit the sort of character I'd want to create with this feat: someone who lacks a spellcasting adventurer's capacity for time-sensitive magic but who can manage a few spells if given time to sit down with a book or pray/meditate. I could imagine this sort of character being common in a lot of settings, but it's not supported rules-wise if learning rituals comes as a package deal with the ability to cast them quickly.

I wonder if the developers' reasoning here is the same as with Healer. Make a feat that gives characters a new ability attractive to characters that already have that ability. As in that case, I think this is a mistake here. Characters learning new ritual magic and characters looking to exhance the ritual portion of their existing magic would both be better served by dedicated feats than by a single feat trying to do two things at once.


That might be a bit much for a single feat, but I'd at least make it repeatable to choose multiple classes.


Some shorter thoughs on other feats:

Keen Mind/Observant: The previous iterations of these feats were niche but they definitely had appeal for some players. The new versions actually seem more DM dependent, in that they codify moving an action to a bonus action, while leaving what that action can actually accomplish undefined.

Lightly Armored: Glad to see this improved. The 2014 armor proficiency feats seemed like a perfect example of the sort of feat chain the developers were trying to move away from. And with the changes to dwarves, it's nice to have an option to add armor proficiencies at level one.

Heavily Armored: But then this stays exactly the same, despite a +1 ASI becoming a default part of feats, rather than a balancing mechanism for weaker ones.

Resilient: I feel like this should be repeatable for different saves.

Spell Sniper/Sharpshooter: If the developers want feats to support ranged attacks in melee combat, they should design feats around that focus, not tack an ability onto feats focused on long range combat.

Weapon Training: The improvement from four weapon types to all martial weapons is welcome, though it does create an amusing scenario where a wizard who takes it can proficiently use any martial weapon but is still limited to a subset of simple ones.
Yes. To me, the whole point of ritual casting is to represent the kind of character you're describing.
 

Amrûnril

Adventurer
I think, I'd prefer militia training that gives light armor and all simple weapons (and a little extra). Medium armor + shield for armored mages is quite a lot for a level 1 feat and probably noone else really neads this.

I guess I'm thinking about this from the perspective of wanting heavy armor training to be reasonably accessible, to give more characters the option of prioritizing strength over dexterity. Spellcasters are probably the more common use case, though.

As I think more about this, maybe it's actually the higher levels of armor training that should be easier to get, since light armor is a +2 AC boost to anyone, while medium and heavy armor combined only add 1 AC over what a dexterity-based attacker can get "for free". I do wonder if it's really necessary for heavier armors to have both strength requirements and additional training requirements. Perhaps these could be re-written as alternatives. Plate armor for instance, might have a requirement of "Heavy Armor Training OR any Armor Training with 17 or higher strength".
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top