Five new feats: Please critique

[Kobold Stew]

Nets are weird, and (I think) not really viable with the limit of one attack total per round. A feat that allowed net-and-trident fighting would be cool, but they've made it hard to use either weapon. Dual wielder should allow a net-and-trident attack, but it doesn't because of the limit. Perhaps:

* When you attack with a trident in one hand and hit, you may use your reaction to make another attack with a net in the other hand.

[If it needs a limit, I'd suggest CHA bonus/short rest, minimum 1]

 

[transcendantviewer]

I would say...
Pit Champion
You are well versed in combat, both inside the ring and out. You receive the following benefits.

• On your turn, you may choose a target. As a Bonus Action, you may make your choice of an Intimidation or Persuasion Check, opposed by the target's Insight Check. The target rolls their insight check at Advantage if they are hostile towards you. If you succeed on this check, you may choose to either gain advantage on all attacks you make against the target before the end of your next turn or persuade them to surrender.
• In combat, when you take the attack action with a trident, you may use your bonus action to make an attack with a net.

 

[spinozajack]

I like them.

I have no suggestions for the last three but the undead hunter just doesn't quite sit right.

I like the concept but I think my issue with the undead hunter is that the abilities need some explanation. Maybe it just needs some flavor. I understand the advantage to saves vs paralysis. You've been bitten and survived so many times that you are building up a tolerance. The bonus AC sorta makes sense you've fought against swarms and have learned tactics to make you safer in that situation.

But the radiant damage kinda confuses me. How have you gained the ability to do radiant damage? Do you just treat it as radiant damage or is it actual radiant damage?

I also didn't understand how radiant damage could be added. If you're a level 1 human variant fighter, with no special access to magic, how does radiant magic suddenly appear on your 15gp sword you just bought?

Plus, even if that were really useful like in a super heavy undead campaign, it's only useful until you gain some other way to deal radiant damage. I think a straight + something to damage to undead would be better. Do a lot of undead have damage resistance? Maybe bypassing that would be a good thing. I also would like to see more feats that use the proficiency bonus to some effect, possibly as a bonus to damage. I believe a +prof bonus to damage to undead would be good, and fun. Plus it increases as you gain levels.

Perhaps getting radiant damage is fine because some other feats grant things like spellcasting and cantrips, but I'd like to see some explanation to how it works. I think avoiding hits from undead hordes is good, but saves vs paralysis are not the only saves you need to be good at. I would say advantage on saves vs any effects from an undead you have encountered or studied before.

The others seem ok but I would also prefer a mace master to deal 1d10 damage instead of 1d6 + 1d4, and negate damage resistance to bludgeoning damage. Although it would be very similar to the undead slayer and for similar characters.

I think a feat for a bonus attack with a -2 penalty to all your attacks would be good.

 

[spinozajack]

Couple of quick thoughts:

Dagger Master
I agress the attribute increase should be STR or DEX. I also agree that turning a 1 into 10 doesn't sit right. Why should rolling a Fumble suddenly get you an Average hit roll when a 2-9 doesn't? Doesn't make any mechanical sense. Something more balanced would be allowing a 1 to be re-rolled once per short rest, OR simply state that a 1 is not considred a Fumble (effectively being the same as rolling a 2).

Mace/Maul Master
Advantage vs. Natural Armor doesn't make sense to me. In most cases I can think of natural armor would actually be best against blunt and slashing weapons. Simarly against heavy armor (with the exception of helms). Piercing weapons would be the type to do the best against these armors. However, overall, Mace and Maul Mastery just kind of fall flat for me. If anything I would combine the two into a single feat that affects all bludgeoning weapons more akin to Great Weapon Master than Crossbow Master. The question you need to ask is what makes these weapons "special"? For instance polearms' trick is they have two end to fight with. What are blunt weapons best at? Why would you choose one over other weapon types? Historically blunt weapons were either more commonly available weapon types or were specfically designed for the purpse of impact. Against heavy armor specifically they were designed as helm/skull crushers or if really excelling in their use, busting up the joints in armor. That said, I'd focus on a single feat for use with all "clubbing" style weapons which for D&D terms is basically any blunt weapon. Maybe something like:
* Increase STR by 1 to max 20.
* On your turn, when you score a critical hit with a blunt melee weapon, the target is also stunned until the end of its next turn in addition to the effects of a normal critical hit.

Undead Hunter
This doesn't feel quite right to me either. Advantage vs paralyzation doesn't speak undead to me. Yes Some undead paralyze but its only a select few. Also the AC bonus doesn't make sense to me. I can understand the concept but only for against mook undead and this ability isn't undead specific, its against ALL foes which is technically too powerful, almost a feat unto itself IMHO. Looking at the Mage Slayer, the feat is useful for more than just "mages" true, but its effectively been boiled down to the concept that what a mage slayer needs is effects against magic because that what makes a "mage". So the question becomes "what makes undead uniquely different from other foes"? Well basically that is the Undead Type as its really the only common element to all undead. What else is pretty common and that could be used to create feat specific abilities?
* Overcome an undead's DR/immunity from nonmagical weapons, thus your melee attacks act as magical
* Gaining advantage on Saving Throw rolls vs undead attacks
* Doing additional Radiant damage on attacks (as undead arent immune)
Or model after mage slayer...
* When an undead creature within 5 feet of you uses an attack action, you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against that creature


JMHO. YMMV.

I totally agree about the Mace. Historically, maces were often used to whack people over the head when they were wearing helmets because the concussions would make the knights dazed and easier to kill afterwards. A few good whacks to the head and you're down.

In light of that, I would say a mace wielder, on a critical hit, should daze (not stun) the opponent (con save), if you can reach the head obviously. When whacking away at heavy armored opponents, you deal 1d10 damage with maces. That would be the broadly applicable and thematically appropriate part.

A maul would instead of daze, stun. (con save). +1 to hit is worth more than +2 to damage in this game, so I would give maul masters +1 to hit heavy armored opponents.

 

[Vicar In A Tutu]

I totally agree about the Mace. Historically, maces were often used to whack people over the head when they were wearing helmets because the concussions would make the knights dazed and easier to kill afterwards. A few good whacks to the head and you're down.

In light of that, I would say a mace wielder, on a critical hit, should daze (not stun) the opponent (con save), if you can reach the head obviously. When whacking away at heavy armored opponents, you deal 1d10 damage with maces. That would be the broadly applicable and thematically appropriate part.

A maul would instead of daze, stun. (con save). +1 to hit is worth more than +2 to damage in this game, so I would give maul masters +1 to hit heavy armored opponents.

Daze? I don't think there is a dazed condition in 5E like there was in 4E.

 

[Vicar In A Tutu]

New feat:

BACK AGAINST THE WALL

You become terrifying when the odds are stacked against you. When you have half your hit points or less remaining, you have advantage on damage rolls in melee combat.

 

[transcendantviewer]

Vicar, how does one gain Advantage on Damage rolls? I can understand something like Savage Attacker, but you should really explain it a bit better so it's more obvious what you mean. Advantage only applies to d20 rolls. If you mean something like what Savage Attacker does, it would be best to rewrite it as...
Back Against The Wall
When the odds stack against you, you are at your best.
Whenever you begin your turn with half your maximum hit points or fewer, all damage rolls you make until the start of your next turn are rolled twice and you may choose which result to take.

 

[Vicar In A Tutu]

Vicar, how does one gain Advantage on Damage rolls? I can understand something like Savage Attacker, but you should really explain it a bit better so it's more obvious what you mean. Advantage only applies to d20 rolls. If you mean something like what Savage Attacker does, it would be best to rewrite it as...
Back Against The Wall
When the odds stack against you, you are at your best.
Whenever you begin your turn with half your maximum hit points or fewer, all damage rolls you make until the start of your next turn are rolled twice and you may choose which result to take.

Sorry about the laziness on my part, instead of saying roll twice I just said Advantage, even though you are correct: It just applies on d20 rolls. Anyway, your write up matches my intentions 100%. Do you think it would be a worthwhile feat? Too weak? Too strong?

 

[transcendantviewer]

I think it needs a bit of testing. It has the opportunity to be very potent, but I would say that it's not really that powerful, just about on-par with Savage Attacker. On that note, I would actually rule that both can be used simultaneously, should someone have both this feat and Savage Attacker (Roll damage for a single attack 3 times and take their choice of result).