D&D (2024) Expert Classes - Feats Discussion

[Amrûnril]

My favorite thing about the new feat design is that you don’t have to choose between optimal (ASI) and fun (feat). Force that choice anyway? No thanks.

The idea (as I understand it) is that at level 1 you can choose a level 1 feat (which doesn't include an ASI) or a level 4 feat (with the ASI removed). Similarly, at level 4, you could choose a level 4 feat (with a built in ASI) or a level 1 feat (with an ASI added). In either case, there's no new feat vs. ASI choice, just a broader range of feats to choose from.

I think it would be more elegant to simply combine the two lists and make the ASI part of the general rules rather than the individual feats, but this is a good workaround if the devs choose not to do that.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

My favorite thing about the new feat design is that you don’t have to choose between optimal (ASI) and fun (feat). Force that choice anyway? No thanks.

Ok. I clarify.

If you take a 4th level feat instead of 1st level feat at level 1, you don't get the +1 to an ability score.

I can see how my first post was misleading. I did not type it out correctly...

 

[DEFCON 1]

One thing I noticed that makes another feat not good is Actor.

Actor gives you two functionalities (beyond the stat bump that all feats give):

• Advantage on Charisma (Performance) checks when disguised as someone else
• Voice and sound mimicry

Here's the issue though... by the new rules of Tool Proficiency, anyone who is proficient in both Disguise Kit and Performance would be gaining Advantage on their checks to impersonate someone already. Which means that this feat is breaking that rule that Jeremy was talking in the first packet's release about wanting feats that make someone who already does something... make them even better at it (as opposed to the feat being superfluous). In this particular case though... half the Actor feat is superfluous for a character who already was designed to be an actor.

I think this feat needs a different or additional ability beyond the Advantage on Performance checks, because that ability just duplicates what an "actor" PC would already have taken from their Tool and Skill choice.

 

[Haplo781]

One thing I noticed that makes another feat not good is Actor.

Actor gives you two functionalities (beyond the stat bump that all feats give):

• Advantage on Charisma (Performance) checks when disguised as someone else
• Voice and sound mimicry

Here's the issue though... by the new rules of Tool Proficiency, anyone who is proficient in both Disguise Kit and Performance would be gaining Advantage on their checks to impersonate someone already. Which means that this feat is breaking that rule that Jeremy was talking in the first packet's release about wanting feats that make someone who already does something... make them even better at it (as opposed to the feat being superfluous). In this particular case though... half the Actor feat is superfluous for a character who already was designed to be an actor.

I think this feat needs a different or additional ability beyond the Advantage on Performance checks, because that ability just duplicates what an "actor" PC would already have taken from their Tool and Skill choice.

It's also terrible even if you aren't already getting advantage. Too narrow.

Rename it to Performer,. Have it grant proficiency in disguise kits or an instrument and expertise in performance. It would be... Less bad, but still kind of a trap, because Performance is a bad skill that should be folded into Deception.

 

[Gorck]

Performance is a bad skill that should be folded into Deception.

Why on earth would you fold Performance into Deception? There are planty of instances where you would use Performance without actually attempting to deceive someone.

 

[Haplo781]

Why on earth would you fold Performance into Deception? There are planty of instances where you would use Performance without actually attempting to deceive someone.

Like?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Like?

Entertainment?

 

[Haplo781]

Entertainment?

So you really need a skill check for that?

 

[Bill Zebub]

So you really need a skill check for that?

Depends on the stakes.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I also think you could lose performance. It is usually either persuasion or deception. Very rarely intimidation.