D&D 5E [Homebrew] More, lesser feats

[Blue]

What if 5e had more feats, but not as powerful?

This is a combination of several things. The recent UA with all of the new half feats made me realize that having half-feats that didn't give me the +1 ability I wanted (either already maxed or just not what I want now) was less than satisfying for a precious feat slot. But I wouldn't mind lesser feats if I had more slots.

Add in the work of others like [MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION] and [MENTION=6801299]Horwath[/MENTION] here to convert the existing feats to half feats.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?512166-Half-Feat-Conversion-PHB
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...g-all-feats-into-quot-half-feat-quot-category

(Not that these don't have specific ability scores added to them. Just to keep in-line with the standard form and be compatible with new sources like the UA skill feats article, they would each need to have a +1 to a specific ability score part added - though that would be ignored much of the time so it's not a big deal.)

And lastly, and sort of leastly but not unimportant, my biggest complaint about multiclassing is how easy it is to accidentally make a bad character by missing ASIs and power cut-offs.

So, let's have more feat slots. The parts come together rather simply.

1. All feats converted to half feats. In the threads above, power of feats that weren't already half-feats has been roughly halved, though some of the weaker ones were brought to half-standard.
2. At class levels 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19 when you normally get an ASI, you instead get +1 to an ability score or a half-feat without the ability score boost.
3. Any other class levels that would grant an ASI grant a full +2 or feat (including it's ability score boost).
4. At character levels 2,6,10,14,18 you gain a choice of either a +1 to an ability score or a half-feat without it's ability score boost.

(Variant human I leave for the DM to choose if they get a full feat or a feat-without-ability-boost. I personally would go for the latter but I don't want to derail the thread if debate breaks out.)

The results are:

• Doubles the number of ASI/feats while cutting their power in about half, for about the same progression.
• Classes that gain extra ASI/feats gain the full advantage instead of being nerfed.
• Multiclass can still fall behind if they don't pay attention, but it's harder to accidentally screw up too bad.
• Increased customization. First feat at 2nd level to start customizing your character a bit earlier. More choices to either go for a defining feat or a ability score boost.

So, what do you think? Does it meet the goals? How to improve it? Would you play it? Would you run with it?

 

[Tony Vargas]

What if 5e had more feats, but not as powerful?

It'd be a problematic set of PrC rules and a couple hundred books away from being PF (OK PF w/BA)?

And lastly, and sort of leastly but not unimportant, my biggest complaint about multiclassing is how easy it is to accidentally make a bad character by missing ASIs and power cut-offs.

Sorry to immediately go off on a tangent, but that's an interesting point. One thing 5e did right in adapting 3.x's MCing was making MC-ing full-caster levels workable. One thing it did wrong was to repeat the mistake 3.x did with casters with Extra Attack and ASIs, even though 3.0 had initially gotten BAB stacking and stat-bumps right. Slightly bizarre.

 

[Blue]

Sorry to immediately go off on a tangent, but that's an interesting point. One thing 5e did right in adapting 3.x's MCing was making MC-ing full-caster levels workable. One thing it did wrong was to repeat the mistake 3.x did with casters with Extra Attack and ASIs, even though 3.0 had initially gotten BAB stacking and stat-bumps right. Slightly bizarre.

I'd love to discuss 5e multiclassing. There's so much that not only do I feel they got right, but that is the opposite the the reaction that people fresh from 3.x have. I think we have enough similarity (probably a very high %) to have common ground, and enough differences to bring each other new viewpoints. But let's do it in another thread so to keep this one on target. If you start one, mention me and I'll chime in.

 

[Horwath]

Hi,

As I mentioned im my topic, I would add one feat(half feat by current standards) at 1st level.

That way character can have a more personal touch right from the start.

Also bonus feats at 5th,9th,13th and 17th character level(not tied with class) go nicely with proficiency modifier boost.

That way all characters get +10 to their abilites(12 for rogues, 14 for fighters) that can be traded one-for-one for feats(current half feats level of power).

And mandatory 5 feats. Gaining +10 ability scores is maybe more powerfull than taking feats, but feats give flavor to the character and bring it to life.

Now you have mandatory 1 or 2 feats that you almost MUST take for any character concept and there is little left for so called 2nd tier of feats. That are fun but not so impactfull on combat.

 

[Gadget]

Sounds like...3e? No thanks.