nerfed yes but feat chains are a useful tool not provided by "you must be this tall to ride" type level based feats. Not just anyone should be able to take more advanced feats just because they happen to be level x.
D&D (2024) Feat Levels vs Feat Chains
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
Most classes seem to give you one feat per tier. So, I'm imagining we will see some feat chains that take a feat idea and scale it up each level bracket.
Like, imagine taking magic initiate every time til level 18 and getting a 9th level spell then. Or Savage Attacker getting progressively stronger each time.
Like, imagine taking magic initiate every time til level 18 and getting a 9th level spell then. Or Savage Attacker getting progressively stronger each time.
Why not? I mean once your in the high levels its hard to call them "just anyone". You're an utter badass, so why can't you learn some advanced feat? Afterall, its literally the one feat you get for that whole tier, why can't you just learn what you want as opposed to having to have started a chain 7 levels ago?
Nuance & depth, some stuff just needs to carry a bigger cost than other stuff even if they are similar in power in a side by side comparison. Some things should require more investment than others. Take PAM & sentinel. They might be ok individually at level X but if they each have a prior step or two in a feat chain it means that they aren't ok together until there is significantly more investment & a much higher level.
If a feat has a chance of becoming dramatically more powerful with a different feat combined they need a bigger investment than just one more feat choice to be taken together even if that larger investment makes taking them both together is not a worthy investment as a result.
Sure there could be some strange build where it's justified for a gm to be asked & decide waiving a prereq is reasonable because of x&y but that's not the same as "I simply chose to take PAM & sentinel together". The same kind of thing like feats made for full casters half casters & specific casters requiring X levels in $specificClass rather than just caster level X or the ability to cast level Y spells with some feats while others might be fine with just caster level X or the ability to cast Y level spells.
Relying on level X feats alone goes back to the same (dis)advantage for everything except all of the exceptions & attunement yes/no alone is good enough for anything maslow's hammer issues that plague 5e.
I'm not okay with feat taxes. Too few feats with a high chance of games ending before we get to the third tier means it's not worth it. If something is too powerful, just raise it up a tier. Or break the feat up.
3e style feat chains existed to delay abilities to a higher level. Now, we can just assign a level.
Now, feat chains might exist if the feats build off each other. Let's say ... There's a Virtuoso feat that builds off Musician. Virtuoso let's you use the Magician ability in 1 minute increments instead of 1 hour rests. Inspiration every fight. A third might heal or grant THP with Musician.
Feat chains to force a higher cost is bad in 5e.
3e style feat chains existed to delay abilities to a higher level. Now, we can just assign a level.
Now, feat chains might exist if the feats build off each other. Let's say ... There's a Virtuoso feat that builds off Musician. Virtuoso let's you use the Magician ability in 1 minute increments instead of 1 hour rests. Inspiration every fight. A third might heal or grant THP with Musician.
Feat chains to force a higher cost is bad in 5e.
Benjamin Olson
Hero
I think both chains and level pre-reqs are problematic, but acceptable when used sparingly to open up design space for options that, without such limitations, would not be viable.
glass
(he, him)
They could have just assigned a level then, too. And they probably should have done, although that is easy to say with the benefit of twenty years of hindsight, of course.
NaturalZero
Hero
I'm fine with level requirements but feat chains fly directly in the face of a system where you're intended to get very few feats. I've mentioned it in other threads but I think the best way to handle this is to make complimentary feats that don't lock you into a feat ladder.
Get access to fire spells with one feat, be better with fire damage with a separate feat. You don't need one to qualify for the other, your build can benefit on one or the other, and you still benefit from taking both. That's the best design - you benefit from taking neither feat, both feats, or either one.
Get access to fire spells with one feat, be better with fire damage with a separate feat. You don't need one to qualify for the other, your build can benefit on one or the other, and you still benefit from taking both. That's the best design - you benefit from taking neither feat, both feats, or either one.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing
This perception is a big part of the problem. If one feat on the chain is perceived as "better" than the others, some players will think that everything downstream is automatically "bad."
Leatherhead
Possibly a Idiot.
Feat Chains are basically outmoded design tech to be honest. Not only are there feat taxes but they lock you into a pre-defined tree which is the against the purpose of having a feat system to begin with: to customize your character.
Feat Levels are a serviceable replacement for them, for the most part.
But the dream solution is Feat Scaling: Where a feat automatically improves in power as you level up.
Feat Levels are a serviceable replacement for them, for the most part.
But the dream solution is Feat Scaling: Where a feat automatically improves in power as you level up.
Similar Threads
