D&D 5E Feats AND Ability increases?

[Xeviat]

I really miss feats. I hardly take them since I personally value ability increases more than most feats. I'm strongly considering taking away the +1 ability score part of feats but also giving a feat progression so characters can have their ability score adjustments and get to pick feats too.

Yeah, it will make characters more powerful, but I can always add more monsters. But I was to see if it passes a sniff test first:

If all feats were "half feats" (I don't know if they are in 2024) and lost their ability bonuses, but instead everyone got +2 score at multiple of 4 levels, what feats would you end up taking all the time? Should the ability adjustment be part of the class progression, or should the feat?

Thanks for your ideas.

 

[CreamCloud0]

i think i'd rather just add a floating +1 to all feats across the board, full feats functionally become half-feats and half-feats have the full +2 ASI bump, and remove taking an ASI as an option, seeing as half-feats supposedly had weaker feat abilities the +1 was there to balance them out but removing the ASI part of them and putting them on the same resource cost as a full feat would make them less cost efficient.

 

[ezo]

If all feats were "half feats" (I don't know if they are in 2024) and lost their ability bonuses, but instead everyone got +2 score at multiple of 4 levels, what feats would you end up taking all the time? Should the ability adjustment be part of the class progression, or should the feat?

Thanks for your ideas.

Stuff like this is always a bit difficult for me to help with since I don't like power bumps, but given that isn't a concern for you I'll do what I can.

The same feats people take already, which are generally considered the "strongest", already don't have any ASI.

I would just allow a simple +1 ASI every odd character level (beginning at 3rd), but the ASI levels (for class: 4,8,12,16,19) MUST be used to take a feat.

Other than fighters or rogues, the 5 ASI levels for class equates to +10 score increases. This allows a +9 score increase (3,5,7,...17,19) over all. Even if the PC takes all half-feats, it is only a +4 score total increase (from +10 to +14). Along with this the PC will benefit from five feats.

If the PC takes feats without ASIs, the total score increase would be less (as low as the +9 for the odd levels).

For the levels most people play at, at worst you'd have a +2 increase in scores over RAW.

Over all, I think this would allow the ASI progress you feel is essential, yet include feat selections for that "extra something" you feel you're missing out on.

 

[ezo]

i think i'd rather just add a floating +1 to all feats across the board, full feats functionally become half-feats and half-feats have the full +2 ASI bump, and remove taking an ASI as an option, seeing as half-feats supposedly had weaker feat abilities the +1 was there to balance them out but removing the ASI part of them and putting them on the same resource cost as a full feat would make them less cost efficient.

I think this would also work fairly easily. The only downside IMO is the overload of gain at the ASI levels (effectively another +1 ASI per ASI), which is why I suggested spreading them out a bit more.

If @Xeviat doesn't mind that "overload" at the ASI levels, this is a very easy way to do it and would probably be the way I'd go as well.

 

[mellored]

Alternatively you can ban +2 as an option.

If you feel eveyone would be weaker, then then you can use less monsters.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think this would also work fairly easily. The only downside IMO is the overload of gain at the ASI levels (effectively another +1 ASI per ASI), which is why I suggested spreading them out a bit more.

If @Xeviat doesn't mind that "overload" at the ASI levels, this is a very easy way to do it and would probably be the way I'd go as well.

i mean, my suggestion was meant to be instead of separate ASI+feat progression rather than on top of their suggestion, so if a player took a +2 half-feat at every possible level that would still only result in exactly the same number of ASI as if a player never took any feats under standard rules, only this time they'd now have feat abilities too.

 

[dave2008]

Alternatively you can ban +2 as an option.

If you feel eveyone would be weaker, then then you can use less monsters.

That is what we have done for the past 7-8 years. No +2 ASI, only feats. It works great with 5e, better than with ASI IMO.

 

[ezo]

i mean, my suggestion was meant to be instead of separate ASI+feat progression rather than on top of their suggestion, so if a player took a +2 half-feat at every possible level that would still only result in exactly the same number of ASI as if a player never took any feats under standard rules, only this time they'd now have feat abilities too.

Right. But that means at the ASI levels they are getting the +2 ASI and a half-feat, effectively what would be weighed at a "+3 ASI". IMO that is a bit much for the ASI levels, which is why I spread it out as a separate progression on the odd levels.

Your concept has less empahsis on ASI (mininmum +5 if all full-feats taken, maximum +10 if all half-feats taken), while mine keeps the RAW maximum +10 as the minimum (well +9...) if all full-feats, and up to +14 if half-feats.

It just depends on how much @Xeviat wants to keep the importance on ASI, which from the OP I figured was high.

Alternatively you can ban +2 as an option.

If you feel eveyone would be weaker, then then you can use less monsters.

That is what we have done for the past 7-8 years. No +2 ASI, only feats. It works great with 5e, better than with ASI IMO.

This pretty much goes against the OP though. They know it is a bump in over all power, and are willing to add more monsters, not less.

The point was to keep full ASI somehow with adding feats (sans ASI effectively).

 

[dave2008]

This pretty much goes against the OP though. They know it is a bump in over all power, and are willing to add more monsters, not less.

Yes, I respond to a specific post, not the OP.

The point was to keep full ASI somehow with adding feats (sans ASI effectively).

Yes, but the OP did start with saying* they wanted more feats but didn't use them because they took ASI +2 instead. So a potential solution is to remove the +2 ASI and just use feats if you want to use more feats. The +2 ASI is not needed in 5e.

*"I really miss feats. I hardly take them since I personally value ability increases more than most feats"

 

[ezo]

Yes, I respond to a specific post, not the OP.

Which is why I included your response along with that post. No need to become defensive about it.

Yes, but the OP did start with saying* they wanted more feats but didn't use them because they took ASI +2 instead. So a potential solution is to remove the +2 ASI and just use feats if you want to use more feats. The +2 ASI is not needed in 5e.

*"I really miss feats. I hardly take them since I personally value ability increases more than most feats"

But that hinders their desire for ASI because they personally value ablility increases more than feats. Not allowing +2 ASIs means at best your game has +5 ability inceases in general.

Any "solution" for them will not involve less power (by decreasing their potential ASI) as they stated they know their own idea would make things more powerful:

Yeah, it will make characters more powerful, but I can always add more monsters.