D&D 5E Feat Workshop

[CapnZapp]

The hedging is because of the way Great Weapon Master and Great Weapon Fighting are worded. GWM has two points - one that applies to any melee weapon and the second applies only to heavy weapons you are proficient with. GWF applies to any melee weapon you are wielding in two hands (and also has either the two-handed or versatile property).

So that's three features with three different weapon requirements in two abilities with the name "Great Weapon" in them.

I'd like the (new) GWM feat to work with the same weapons the GWF style does, namely two-handed and versatile weapons. I know my original proposal said versatile or heavy, but I think lifting the text directly from GWF style works better so the new version would look like this:

You've learned to trade accuracy for momentum.

Before you make a melee attack with a melee weapon that you are wielding with two hands, you can choose to take disadvantage on the attack. If the attack hits, you add your proficiency bonus to the attack's damage. The weapon must have the two-handed or versatile property for you to gain this benefit.

As to allowing it to turn on an off per attack - that's taken directly from the existing GWM feat that allows you to do just that. I didn't feel the need to change it.

Okay, so you don't think it will be too powerful. Okay, simpler is better so, deal.

The bit about which weapons you can use:

I too want the feat work with versatile weapons and not only heavy weapons. The question then becomes:

Isn't it enough to specify melee and wield in two hands? Why specifically call out the properties?

That's what I was asking when I asked about the hedging. What corner cases does it prevent?

I mean, if the feat without your last sentence can be used together with a dagger you hold in both hands, then that is something we need to discuss.

Is it bad that you can use the feat with just any weapon you can hold in two hands?

I realize this might make it appear as if I'm making a big deal out of it. I'm not. I'm merely overexplaining since I felt you answered a different question than the one I thought I asked

 

[CapnZapp]

I think it veers to far from the base intent of Savage Attacker. I would suggest:

• When you roll a Hit Die to regain hit points, add a d6 to the number of hit points you regain.
• Once per turn [, on your turn,] you may reroll the damage dice of a melee attack.
• When you score a critical hit with a melee weapon attack, the target becomes frightened of you until the end of its next turn.

That way we have feats that appeal to the more spike damage classes like the Rogue and Paladin. (While not being too bad because they'd have to reroll the good with the bad. It basically puts them closer to the average, on both ends.)

I see.

But now you're back to the re-roll. Rerolling damage for a single attack is most often underwhelming, while it might even be overpowered for a high level rogue.

Other than that, we would have to clean up the phrasing. It appears you mean all damage dice of an attack, including any riders. Can't remember offhand if we have such an existing ability whose language we can reuse. Also we would need to specify two more things: do you reroll all or some dice? do you keep the new roll or do you get to choose to use either new or old?

For a fighter you would rarely see more than d12+d8 (magical weapon with bonus elemental damage die).

The average damage increase of 2D8, take the highest is 5.81 up from 4.5, which is +1.3
The average damage increase of 2D12, take the highest is 8.49 up from 6.5, which is +2

In total +3.3. Hardly worthwhile. And that's with a rather rare bonus damage die!

Remember, a level 11 fighter gains +3 just from a Strength ASI. More than +3 in fact, since the higher Strength doesn't just add to damage, it imrpoves your hit chance too.

For a high-level rogue, on the other hand, you might see 8d6 at circa 15th level.

The average damage increase of 2D6, take the highest is 4.47 up from 3.5, which is +1

If you could reroll each d6 in isolation, picking the best result for each die, this would give you +8 which would be nice.

But, obviously, you're not really suggesting that. You're suggesting that you reroll all 8d6 and pick the new result.

I don't need to do the calculations to tell this will be a lower benefit.

I don't need to do calculations either to realize that if you must take the new result, the benefits are even lower, since now you should only use it when you roll lower than average by definition.

I'm not telling you this to dump on your proposal Yunru. I'm telling you this to explain that the reroll idea doesn't work. The dice are simply too small. (Small as in the low number of faces). Really, the reroll isn't starting to work well until you reach twenty faces. Which, not coincidentally is why the advantage mechanism works - it is a d20 reroll!

I know people (not saying you did this) say "but when I roll a 1 I get to reroll". What these people are forgetting all the times they roll a 9, or a 11, or a 12. In these cases the feature provides absolutely no benefit. The average still remains the same, a very modest increase.

Compare a feature that said "you can choose to take maximum damage" or one that said "you can choose to take average damage".

Both these do similar things to what the reroll does, only with much more reliable and therefore powerful results.

That is why I abandoned the reroll and instead experimented with adding a bonus die.

But I will remain open to suggestions.

 

[Yunru]

I see.

But now you're back to the re-roll. Rerolling damage for a single attack is most often underwhelming, while it might even be overpowered for a high level rogue.

Other than that, we would have to clean up the phrasing. It appears you mean all damage dice of an attack, including any riders. Can't remember offhand if we have such an existing ability whose language we can reuse. Also we would need to specify two more things: do you reroll all or some dice? do you keep the new roll or do you get to choose to use either new or old?

For a fighter you would rarely see more than d12+d8 (magical weapon with bonus elemental damage die).

The average damage increase of 2D8, take the highest is 5.81 up from 4.5, which is +1.3
The average damage increase of 2D12, take the highest is 8.49 up from 6.5, which is +2

In total +3.3. Hardly worthwhile. And that's with a rather rare bonus damage die!

Remember, a level 11 fighter gains +3 just from a Strength ASI. More than +3 in fact, since the higher Strength doesn't just add to damage, it imrpoves your hit chance too.

For a high-level rogue, on the other hand, you might see 8d6 at circa 15th level.

The average damage increase of 2D6, take the highest is 4.47 up from 3.5, which is +1

If you could reroll each d6 in isolation, picking the best result for each die, this would give you +8 which would be nice.

But, obviously, you're not really suggesting that. You're suggesting that you reroll all 8d6 and pick the new result.

I don't need to do the calculations to tell this will be a lower benefit.

I don't need to do calculations either to realize that if you must take the new result, the benefits are even lower, since now you should only use it when you roll lower than average by definition.

I'm not telling you this to dump on your proposal Yunru. I'm telling you this to explain that the reroll idea doesn't work. The dice are simply too small. (Small as in the low number of faces). Really, the reroll isn't starting to work well until you reach twenty faces. Which, not coincidentally is why the advantage mechanism works - it is a d20 reroll!

I know people (not saying you did this) say "but when I roll a 1 I get to reroll". What these people are forgetting all the times they roll a 9, or a 11, or a 12. In these cases the feature provides absolutely no benefit. The average still remains the same, a very modest increase.

Compare a feature that said "you can choose to take maximum damage" or one that said "you can choose to take average damage".

Both these do similar things to what the reroll does, only with much more reliable and therefore powerful results.

That is why I abandoned the reroll and instead experimented with adding a bonus die.

But I will remain open to suggestions.

You're right, and I meant to make a mistake. I originally intended to make it act kinda like advantage, take the higher, but failed to communicate that. Even then, that'd probably be too weak in isolation, but you solved that by rolling durable into it.

 

[CapnZapp]

PS. Should probably add that the more important reason advantage etc works is that it doesn't operate on the numeric difference.

That is, if you gain advantage to an attack (or skill, or save etc) you don't gain the three or four points. The bonus (increasing your shot at success by +15%, say) needs to be multiplied by the actual benefit of that success: for an attack the entire average damage. For skills etc even better: success instead of failure.

Just adding this because even a d20 reroll wouldn't mean much if all that was at stake was the numeric average increase: two or three points or somesuch.

 

[CapnZapp]

You're right, and I meant to make a mistake. I originally intended to make it act kinda like advantage, take the higher, but failed to communicate that. Even then, that'd probably be too weak in isolation, but you solved that by rolling durable into it.

So if I understand you correctly you're fine with the low utility of the reroll because the feat gives you more?

I can buy that. I guess I just got fixated on the reroll because you started talking about sticking to the original feat.

Let's soak it for a while to see if other suggestions materialize.

 

[CapnZapp]

Grappler

Add the ability to shove a creature in any direction?
While grappling can share a space with your opponent?
Don't take disadvantage to attacks when you're prone?
Deal damage on a shove, prone, and increased unarmed damage to the target of your grapple?

When I re-did some feats, I combined Grappler with Tavern Brawler and then edited. This is what I came up with and which two of my players have. Granted, they are not power-gamers by any stretch, so if there's an abuse here, they have not found it and I have not seen it. But I imagine it'd be the controller aspect that would probably need to be toned down if anything (probably the double-prof bonus I gave it.)

BRAWLER
- You are proficient with improvised weapons and unarmed strikes.
- Your unarmed strikes and improvised weapon attacks use a d4 for damage.
- When you hit a creature with an unarmed strike or improvised weapon on your turn, you can use a Bonus action to make an unarmed strike or attempt to grapple the target.
- Whenever you make a STR (Athletics) check to grapple a creature or escape a grapple, you are considered proficient in the Athletics skill and add double your proficiency bonus to the check.
- You have Advantage on attack rolls against a creature you are grappling.
- You can use your Action to try to pin a creature grappled by you-- make another grapple check and if successful both you and your target are Restrained until the grapple ends.

Grappler - I like the idea of the feat removing disadvantage on a melee attack if you are prone.

Keep advantage on attacks against grappled opponents, it's nice, even if it's not a draw factor because of prone.
Maybe grant advantage on grapple checks, both making and you escaping.
The restrain function wouldn't be too bad if it didn't take an action and restrain you as well. Maybe have it take an attack (like prone and grabbing in the first place) and only restrain them (or maybe restrain them and drop your speed to 0)?

I don't have anything new at this time; just collecting everything grapplerish

 

[Blue]

I don't actually have any immediate ideas, and have focused on the other ones for now.

Feel free to make suggestions

Should this grant more swashbucklery benefits? Perhaps bring "Athletics" up to par with "Acrobatics" (as understood by 3rd Edition). Or merely beef up the existing ones?

I can see a muscle-bound lumberjack as also having Athlete - I wouldn't say it's a willowy-quick type feat only. That said I'm perfectly happy with part of it being "You may use STR or DEX when making an Athletics check" much liek a monk can use either for unarmed attacks.

How about:

• +1 to STR or DEX
• You may spend your reaction to get advantage on STR, DEX or CON saving throws that don't directly involve taking damage.
• Stand from prone using only 5' of movement (yes, this is from the original - I like the "kip up".)
• You may make a STR or DEX check as a bonus action.
• During a short rest you may remove one level of exhaustion. Once you do this you may not use this again until you have completed a long rest.*
• Climb and Swim speeds are not halved.
• Lifting and carrying capacity is doubled.

* If you want something that scales instead, instead of once per long rest, make it cost 2 HD cumulative per use, resetting at a long rest.

The concept of the advantage on saves is to actively resist getting pushed, etc. You could remove the "damage" part so you can actively dive out of the way of fireballs, btu that overlaps with class features of classes likely to have this.

I know you mentioned wanting a real climb or swim speed, but really I don't see Athlete as allowing things like ignoring disadvantage during underwater combat, which a real swim speed would give you.

 

[Blue]

Great Weapon Master
When making a melee attack using a weapon in both hands, you may decide to trade accuracy for momentum. You can take disadvantage on two-handed attacks until the end of your round. If you do, you add your proficiency bonus to damage of each of these attacks.
...
As my observation to this - with disadvantage, you can't close the gap which effectively means the -5 penalty stays even if you gain advantage to negate the disadvantage. The difference is that now we've balanced the feat on the assumption you always get advantage, instead of the core assumption which is naively balanced on the initial scenario (and thus is abusable, which is the reason power gamers find it too good)

1. Before it was on a per-attack and now it's until-end-of-round. Why the change? Especially considering that you could attack, move, bonus action, and then attack an entirely different opponent if you have extra attack so it doesn't really fit the in-game narrative.

2. I like how you opened up weapons. This works on versatile in two hands as well as bows and the light and heavy crossbows. (That it works on ranged is intentional, correct?)

3. If you already have disadvantage, you will always use this since there is no penalty.

 

[Blue]

Heavily/Moderately/Lightly Armored and Weapons Master
These feats used to offer absurdly expensive proficiencies compared to simple multi-classing. Or even picking the right race!

All these four feats are replaced with Martial Training:

Martial Training

• Increase your Strength or Dexterity score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
• Then, pick three out of the following five options:

# Proficiency with light armor
# Proficiency with medium armor
# Proficiency with heavy armor
# Proficiency with shields
# Proficiency with three weapons of your choice (you may pick this more than once, picking three more weapon proficiencies each time)​

A wizard can spend one feat and not have to worry about Dex or mage armor ever again? No, that's too much.

A rogue wants to pick up a thematic weapon (or to use that Oathbow they just found) and needs to learn two other completely unused choices? That's too little, back to the original trap feats.

I don't have a good suggestion, but feats are supposed to balance ASIs. Taking one feat for medium armor and shield and +1 to Dex will grant you a lot more AC than +2 to Dex from an ASI.

Part of me wants to move proficiency training to the same downtime activity as tool training. Of course, I think that's a crazy amount of downtime for some campaigns but that's a different story.

 

[Blue]

Sharpshooter

• Add 1 to your Dexterity score, to a maximum of 20.
• You can take careful aim, even in the midst of battle. If you spend your bonus action, you gain advantage on your ranged attacks during the rest of your round.

1. +1 to dex replaces the bonus damage thing, just like +1 to str replaces it for the gwm feat (now renamed Cleave)
2. note how this advantage can be used to negate range disadvantage and/or to offset cover penalties WHILE STILL ensuring you have a reason to seek out short range and no cover (because there you gain actual advantage.
3. the way sharpshooter can't be stacked with other ways to gain advantage is quite intentional

If we compare this to dual wield (perhaps the first available way to use your bonus action), we see that instead of making two d20 rolls (two attacks) you make two d20 rolls (one attack with advantage). So that's a draw.

Once you gain extra attack, the feat becomes better. But, crucially, it always eats your bonus action, so it never becomes a free lunch - you can't stack it with other build strategies that also use the bonus action.

Is this perhaps still too attractive? Advantage on short range is awfully good.

My first though is seems like a feat-tax for ranged rogues to always get sneak attack. But really, it's a corner case that you won't have an ally adjacent so it's not that good.

Second thought was that it talks about ranged attacks and not ranged weapon attacks. Is the intent you can use this with spells? I'd say no since that brings up that spells don't have defined range categories.

From a design viewpoint, I don't like half-feats as combat feats. Maybe that they become too easy a choice at 4th level. (Or that optimizing for a +2 prime ability race get a lot more (max starting 17 point buy) than a +1 race so it encourages more twinking.) That may be just me.

Different classes have different bonus-action economy. This fits some classes a lot better than others, something I'm not too thrilled about.

Bows have a looong short range compared to movement. I'd prefer if ranged attackers want to get more bonuses that they are within range that they can be rushed.

I do like a feat to enable "the Legolas maneuver" of shooting close-up that used to be part of Crossbow expert. Actually, I would like if crossbows are useful for those with extra attack and don't mind overloading.

How about this to incorporate my thoughts above:

• You can take careful aim, even in a battle. If no opponents are adjacent to you, when you take the Attack action you gain advantage on ranged attacks within 30' until the end of the turn. [More powerful that it doesn't take a bonus action, less powerful that it drastically reduces range down to single move to engage. Triggers off Attack action in case there are things like the SCAG cantrips in future products, or if there is some way to get a ranged attack of opportunity]
• If you are adjacent to an opponent you do not suffer disadvantage on ranged attack rolls. [Note you don't have advantage because of the no-foes-adjacent of the first part]
• As long as you don't move during the turn you may ignore the loading property. [Giving some love to the crossbow for giving up movement. Though this weakens the first since you can't close with a foe to get within 30' for the first ability.]

Without the +1 half-feat, I don't think this is too powerful. Yes, you can get advantage IF you go to get-engaged-in-melee range.