Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7284954" data-attributes="member: 71699">It wasn't my intent to complain in that way. I was unpacking each option with the aim of seeing what could work.I guess I believe that it is possible to make a defensive one-handed weapon feat that serves fighters, gishes and rogues. That said, I can see that it could be an easier design task to serve each one separately, which makes one think about something like this in Sage Advice -"When designing a feat with a narrow use, we consider adding at least one element that can benefit a character more broadly—a bit of mastery that your character brings from one situation to another. The second benefit of Crossbow Expert is such an element, as is the first benefit of Great Weapon Master."So I guess he's envisioning that Crossbow Expert will be used by a gish... maybe an Arcane Trickster, War Caster or an MC of some sort?Back on topic, who does the feat need to serve? We have at present<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Great Weapon Master serving Great Weapon Fighting Barbarians and Champions</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Sharpshooter serving Archery Fighters and Rangers, and Rogues</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Crossbow Expert probably targeted at Rogues, but also serving Archery Fighters and Rangers, and players who enjoy the sword-and-hand-crossbow archetype</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Shield Master serving sword-and-board Fighters and Paladins, and Fighter-Rogue MCs and such</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Polearm Master serving Paladins</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Warcaster serving fighting Clerics, Bladesingers, probably War Wizards</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Resilient and Tough rounding out any class</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Alert probably serving Assassins most, and Rogues and lighter armored characters generally</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mobile serving Monks well, and probably any kiting class e.g. archers</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Lucky serving Bards and Rogues probably more than other archetypes</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Dual Wielder serving players who enjoy the archetype</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mage Slayer serving... well, there should be an archetype there but we haven't seen it work well yet</li> </ul>That's not a complete list, or even wholly correct I'm sure. My point though is that we can see feats serving collections of archetypes with a fairly clear purpose. Aside from the absence of a mechanically good Dual Wielder and Mage Slayer feat, most of these game effects are pretty good. What seems to be missing is a feat that doubles-down on a defensive fighting style, specifically with a non-dual-wielding one-handed weapon. Consider this from UABlade Mastery (Unearthed Arcana 6 June 2016)You master the shortsword, longsword, scimitar, rapier, and greatsword. You gain the following benefits when using any of them:You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls you make with the weapon.On your turn, you can use your reaction to assume a parrying stance, provided you have the weapon in hand. Doing so grants a +1 bonus to your AC until the start of your next turn or until you're not holding the weapon.When you make an opportunity attack with the weapon, you have advantage on the attack roll.Again unnecessarily narrow: why the disregard for Battleaxes, Flails, War picks and Morningstars? Aside from that the feat seems conflicted. Half the named weapons point to a Dexterity melee characters, who gets +1 to attack rolls and damage and AC, and other stuff, by taking +2 to the ability score. So for many characters only the last line of the feat has any meaning. It's better for Strength melee characters... so that must be who it is aimed at. It's like the designers are saying they want to see some Strength melee characters using one-handed weapons... or Greatswords... I'm really not sure what they're trying to achieve there? On your turn you can gain +1 AC at the cost of the reaction you need to use the one part of the feat that is better than just taking +2 Dex!?Anyway, you can sense that there is design space around one-handed weapons waiting to be filled. With the finesse rider, Defensive Duelist seems targeted at Rogues and possibly Bladesingers (silly ACs incoming) or other gishes. Maybe the correct thing to do is assume that every Strength melee character who uses a one-handed weapon has got a shield and will take Shield Master? So they're covered.EDIT I meant to state here clearly that you could well be right, and multiple feats are needed. For me the starting point design-wise is to state the jobs to be done: who needs to be served?In which case, I land on the focus of the feat being more for Rogues and Rogue MCs - light melee characters who won't be holding the line but could use some help defensively because to do damage they need to get in close. I believe designing around the reaction broadens the feat more. I feel that there can be interesting choices for players in feats that can play into their other features the way that Polearm Master plays well into Smite, or Shield Master through generating advantage plays into Sneak Attack for Fighter-Rogues. For me, each part of the feat should have relevance. I think of it this way<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Using my reaction to increase my AC is interesting because if I start with high AC (sword-and-board, Bladesinger, maybe War Caster) then it is very efficient, or if I start with lower AC (Rogues) it could often be clutch</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Needing the reaction stops it getting crazy - no Defensive Duelist + Shield for example</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Returning the reaction to me once between my turns gets interesting because that opens up Riposte, Sentinel, subsequent Shields, Uncanny Dodges etc - it makes the feat a lot stronger, and more takeable because it supports rather than conflicts with other things I want to do</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Merging with (an improved) Savage Attacker gives me back the point of damage I otherwise lost (by not taking the ASI) so my trade is fairer (initiative, attack modifier and skills, for a decent AC buff and a point or two more damage)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Broadening (no Dex requirement, wider range of weapons) is just broadening</li> </ol></blockquote>

Verification