Level Up (A5E) Feats, Feats, & More Feats!

[Sansang]

The problem, if you want, is that the pair of feats explained here in fact do not build up on any specific class features, so the restriction feels artificial and without a specific purpose (or could be better reframed as Dual Wielding fighting style and ability to cast 2nd level spells). The flip side of the coin is that removing those arbitrary restriction is a very easy day 1 house rule.

I absolutely agree, also because the requirements as written makes the sinergy feat a lv8 feat minimum, which is seems really late and indirectly pose yet one another requirement indirectly on the character to be at least lv8 to be taken. The problem with houserules is that, I mean, they shouldn't be necessary if you know what I mean.

Only Synergy feats have class prequisites. They are designed specifically for multiclass characters.

That's great to know! Sorry if I ask but are there some other requirements like between feats themselves (feat trees), stats, or whatnot?

 

[Morrus]

That's great to know! Sorry if I ask but are there some other requirements like between feats themselves (feat trees), stats, or whatnot?

There’s just the standard 5E style feats and the half dozen or so new synergy feat trees.

 

[Morrus]

There's some interesting history behind the development of synergy feats.

Originally we were thinking along the lines of multiclass archetypes. Like, "What's a ninja? A fighter/rogue of some kind". It was hard to make that work elegantly though. In the end multiclass archetypes became multiclass feats (which we later decided to call synergy feats).

 

[Timespike]

I absolutely agree, also because the requirements as written makes the sinergy feat a lv8 feat minimum, which is seems really late and indirectly pose yet one another requirement indirectly on the character to be at least lv8 to be taken. The problem with houserules is that, I mean, they shouldn't be necessary if you know what I mean.


That's great to know! Sorry if I ask but are there some other requirements like between feats themselves (feat trees), stats, or whatnot?

Well, there are the normal requirements for multiclassing, and you have to have an open ASI/feat slot for them. So you can get your first one at level 7 (when you take your 4th level of whichever class. The second and third feats for synergy feat trees only have the prior feat(s) in the tree as requirements, otherwise, it's pretty basic feat stuff. And as always in any type of 5e feats are optional. You can snag just the first feat of a synergy feat tree and leave the other two, or just pick up the first two and ignore the third, etc.

 

[King Brad]

Well, there are the normal requirements for multiclassing, and you have to have an open ASI/feat slot for them. So you can get your first one at level 7 (when you take your 4th level of whichever class.

You kept the ability score requirements for multi-classing? Not to be overly negative, but those have never served a purpose. I know I don't have to follow them, but I have never gotten why those existed.

 

[This Effin’ GM]

i love this idea.

class prereqs? Great. Reward people for making specific choices, open up an new concept that was previously relegated to college of swords bard (unless you wanted warcaster and to skip any spell with a material component. Or wield a staff but having to nab duel weapon master feat. Or whatever). This reminds me a lot of that 3.5 dagger fighting mage.

Because I can’t imagine that they are gonna release this one set of books and never ever touch level up again. We will see more feats and more synergy concepts over time. And we all know house ruling exists. And we all know there is limited book space.

so to me this isn’t “here’s what you get” this is “here’s an idea that we will revisit with more ideas based on demand”. I wouldn’t be surprised if they have already workshopped synergy feats for every class combo they can think of.

 

[Timespike]

i love this idea.

class prereqs? Great. Reward people for making specific choices, open up an new concept that was previously relegated to college of swords bard (unless you wanted warcaster and to skip any spell with a material component. Or wield a staff but having to nab duel weapon master feat. Or whatever). This reminds me a lot of that 3.5 dagger fighting mage.

Because I can’t imagine that they are gonna release this one set of books and never ever touch level up again. We will see more feats and more synergy concepts over time. And we all know house ruling exists. And we all know there is limited book space.

so to me this isn’t “here’s what you get” this is “here’s an idea that we will revisit with more ideas based on demand”. I wouldn’t be surprised if they have already workshopped synergy feats for every class combo they can think of.

Feats are surprisingly space-hungry, too. As someone with a product called "Multiclass Feats" up on DTRPG that's literally just 66 feats, a cover, a short table of contents, an intro, some art, and the OGL, I can attest to this! My little supplement clocks in at 30 pages. Adding the Marshal class pushes up the number of combinations to 78, and making it three-feat chains instead one-off single feats means you've got a total of 234 (and that's assuming you only do one chain for each combo, which is already not the case in Level Up; there's a melee fighter/wizard chain and a ranged one). That's roughly 100 pages of content if you try to nail down all of the combos in one go.

That's great for a supplement, but I certainly don't blame the Level Up management for picking a handful of the most iconic combos for the core book and saving the rest for later.

 

[Stalker0]

Well, there are the normal requirements for multiclassing, and you have to have an open ASI/feat slot for them. So you can get your first one at level 7 (when you take your 4th level of whichever class. The second and third feats for synergy feat trees only have the prior feat(s) in the tree as requirements, otherwise, it's pretty basic feat stuff. And as always in any type of 5e feats are optional. You can snag just the first feat of a synergy feat tree and leave the other two, or just pick up the first two and ignore the third, etc.

So technically you can get both feats by 8th.

the first at 7th, when you hit 4th level fighter or wizard.

the second at 8th, if you go 4th level in the one you didn’t pick at 7th.

the 3rd at 10th, when you hit 6th level fighter (I don’t remember if the LU fighter gets a feat then or if that’s just the O5e one)

 

[lichmaster]

You kept the ability score requirements for multi-classing? Not to be overly negative, but those have never served a purpose. I know I don't have to follow them, but I have never gotten why those existed.

I think it's to avoid the wild multiclass dipping you had in 3.5. The lack of ability scores requirements, combined with the basic mechanic of gaining +x on saves, bab and whatnot, allowed to create absurd but OP combinations (by dipping appropriately you could have far better saves than any other class without sacrificing too much).

Besides, it kinda makes sense that you shouldn't be a Wizard if your Int score is 8... There shouldn't be multiclass ability score requirements IMO, but class ability score requirements, like in 2E. The problem with this is that you may restrict too much the concept of a class, so you'd have to multiple alternative requirements, probably negating the point entirely.

 

[King Brad]

I think it's to avoid the wild multiclass dipping you had in 3.5. The lack of ability scores requirements, combined with the basic mechanic of gaining +x on saves, bab and whatnot, allowed to create absurd but OP combinations (by dipping appropriately you could have far better saves than any other class without sacrificing too much).

Besides, it kinda makes sense that you shouldn't be a Wizard if your Int score is 8... There shouldn't be multiclass ability score requirements IMO, but class ability score requirements, like in 2E. The problem with this is that you may restrict too much the concept of a class, so you'd have to multiple alternative requirements, probably negating the point entirely.

My problem stems from the fact that there's nothing that stops you from being a wizard with 8 int at level 1. But you somehow can be too dumb to stop being a wizard? Also, by putting those requirements, you're only stopping people from playing sub-parly, which I never felt was on the designers.

But I also understand that like the synergy requirements, its up to the game designer to use the rules to conjure their vision of how the game looks and feels. At the end of the day, it's all D&D so one rule here or there that I don't agree with isn't gonna make me get the pitchforks out .