OneDnD How to get option to have all feats available at 1st level?

Horwath

Hero
Right now there is not "Half-feats" available to take at 1st level.

One reason for this might be that you cannot combine the floating +2 ASI with +1 ASI from the feat and start with an 18 in your primary ability.

What if there is a rule that, if you take a half-feat as your 1st level feat option, you MUST take +1/+1/+1 ASI option.

that way, you max in any ability would be limited again to 17 and you would need your 4th level feat to be a half feat again. to have 18 in your ability.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
Why is taking a 2014 half-feat necessary at 1st level as part of your Background? What's wrong with just using whatever the list of 2014 Background Feats are going to be?

Seems to me we need to not think of the Background feats as "real feats" but rather what they are-- Background feats. And not all feats are going to be Background feats and shouldn't be considered Background feats.

Now that being said... if any individual DM wanted to open up the feat list to their players to let them take whatever feats they wanted as part of their Background creation... that's cool. That DM can certainly allow that. But there's no reason to suggest this needs to be or indeed even should be the standard in the game.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Why is taking a 2014 half-feat necessary at 1st level as part of your Background? What's wrong with just using whatever the list of 2014 Background Feats are going to be?

Seems to me we need to not think of the Background feats as "real feats" but rather what they are-- Background feats. And not all feats are going to be Background feats and shouldn't be considered Background feats.

If you're trying to establish from day 1 that you're a psionic user, some of the most key feats to strengthen that theme are half-feats. Like Telepathic and Telekinetic. In fact both feats feel like "born with this ability" and not having them early doesn't make as much sense as many other feats.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
If you're trying to establish from day 1 that you're a psionic user, some of the most key feats to strengthen that theme are half-feats. Like Telepathic and Telekinetic. In fact both feats feel like "born with this ability" and not having them early doesn't make as much sense as many other feats.
Okay... that makes sense. Good point. I will say though that it's not something that even characters today can really guarantee on as the only way you'd get those feats at 1st level was if you were a human. So even now other PCs have to just assume psionic ability is in the background of their character without actually having a set established mechanical rule the player can point to for their PC that says "Psionics-user". Thus Backgrounds feats do not necessarily have to make it now a reality just because they can.

That "Yeah, but" being said... I actually do agree that if we are putting feats into the game for all characters via Backgrounds... it does seem like an unnecessary block to not allow "character concept" feats like Telepathic or Telekinetic to be taken. I think that's very valid.

As far as how the rules would then have to go to allow that to be a reality? I guess @Horwath 's idea would be a good first step.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
Currently, the only way to start with 18 using point-buy is with the Custom Lineage. That's still possible, even without background feats. And I'm fine with that -- the custom lineage doesn't get as muhc as most races, and so a half-feat with a stat bump is reasonable, IMO.

So the question for me becomes, assuming Custom Lineage remains in play after 2024 (and I hope it does), should background feats be another way to accomplish that same end. Myself, I'd prefer they didn't. Custom Lineage allows some posibilities other races don't, and I am happy with thenm having something not generally available.

The OP fully covers the situation i think they are trying to avoid.
 

Haplo781

Legend
If you're trying to establish from day 1 that you're a psionic user, some of the most key feats to strengthen that theme are half-feats. Like Telepathic and Telekinetic. In fact both feats feel like "born with this ability" and not having them early doesn't make as much sense as many other feats.
They completely changed Alert and Healer, they can change those too.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Okay... that makes sense. Good point. I will say though that it's not something that even characters today can really guarantee on as the only way you'd get those feats at 1st level was if you were a human. So even now other PCs have to just assume psionic ability is in the background of their character without actually having a set established mechanical rule the player can point to for their PC that says "Psionics-user". Thus Backgrounds feats do not necessarily have to make it now a reality just because they can.

That "Yeah, but" being said... I actually do agree that if we are putting feats into the game for all characters via Backgrounds... it does seem like an unnecessary block to not allow "character concept" feats like Telepathic or Telekinetic to be taken. I think that's very valid.

As far as how the rules would then have to go to allow that to be a reality? I guess @Horwath 's idea would be a good first step.

I think both feats would be fine without the existing +1 to an ability score as a first level feat. They won't be strong, but I wouldn't call either weak. Maybe they will do that? If so, a Human under the new rules could be telepathic and telekinetic from day 1. Which is cool. Or they could combine both into one feat without the bonus to ability scores? That would look like:

Natural Psionic Feat said:
You learn the mage hand cantrip. You can cast it without verbal or somatic components, and you can make the spectral hand invisible. If you already know this spell, its range increases by 30 feet when you cast it. As a bonus action, you can try to telekinetically shove one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. When you do so, the target must succeed on a Strength saving throw (DC 8 + your proficiency bonus + the ability modifier chosen when you select this feat) or be moved 5 feet toward you or away from you. A creature can willingly fail this save.

You can speak telepathically to any creature you can see within 60 feet of you. Your telepathic utterances are in a language you know, and the creature understands you only if it knows that language. Your communication doesn’t give the creature the ability to respond to you telepathically. You can cast the detect thoughts spell, requiring no spell slot or components, and you must finish a long rest before you can cast it this way again. If you have spell slots of 2nd level or higher, you can cast this spell with them.

Your spellcasting ability for all spells gained by this feat is chosen by you when you obtain this feat.

Is that too strong for a first level feat?
 
Last edited:

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
If you're trying to establish from day 1 that you're a psionic user, some of the most key feats to strengthen that theme are half-feats. Like Telepathic and Telekinetic. In fact both feats feel like "born with this ability" and not having them early doesn't make as much sense as many other feats.
They can also be, "I'm level 4 and I've finally opened up my mind to be able to link to others to speak." Taking them later makes as much sense to me as being born with them. Two different PC stories that a player might want explore. Neither seems more likely than the other.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Okay... that makes sense. Good point. I will say though that it's not something that even characters today can really guarantee on as the only way you'd get those feats at 1st level was if you were a human. So even now other PCs have to just assume psionic ability is in the background of their character without actually having a set established mechanical rule the player can point to for their PC that says "Psionics-user". Thus Backgrounds feats do not necessarily have to make it now a reality just because they can.

That "Yeah, but" being said... I actually do agree that if we are putting feats into the game for all characters via Backgrounds... it does seem like an unnecessary block to not allow "character concept" feats like Telepathic or Telekinetic to be taken. I think that's very valid.

As far as how the rules would then have to go to allow that to be a reality? I guess @Horwath 's idea would be a good first step.
I'm sure you will be able to make up backgrounds just the same as you can now. If someone came to me and wanted Telepathic and had a unique background written up to explain it, I'd allow it.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I'm sure you will be able to make up backgrounds just the same as you can now. If someone came to me and wanted Telepathic and had a unique background written up to explain it, I'd allow it.
There's no doubt anyone could allow most feats for possible Background features... the question then just becomes like @Horwath asked... whether it could/should/would be allowed to have a +1 ASI feat in addition to the +2/+1 you'd get. And I don't know the answer myself.
 

The only thing that bugs me is the lack of a feat that is something like militia training.
Some weapon and armor proficiencies. To finally make the soldier background make sense.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
The only thing that bugs me is the lack of a feat that is something like militia training.
Some weapon and armor proficiencies. To finally make the soldier background make sense.
That feat concept makes sense from a narrative point of view... but mechanically I just don't know if having one is justified? Because any class that uses weapons and armor already will have proficiency in the weapons and armor they need. And the classes that don't have a fuller access to all the weapons... say the rogue and the monk... have class features that trigger off the specific proficiencies they already have and thus guarantee they wouldn't want to use different ones they might get from the feat. And for the classes that mainly cast spells but might use a weapon as well, they usually gain additional proficiencies in those weapons via their subclass and thus don't need a feat either.

That's always been the issue with weapon and armor proficiency feats... the classes that would want the weapons and armor you gain from them already have proficiency in them from their class. And the classes that don't have proficiency in them don't want to use them anyway.
 

That feat concept makes sense from a narrative point of view... but mechanically I just don't know if having one is justified? Because any class that uses weapons and armor already will have proficiency in the weapons and armor they need. And the classes that don't have a fuller access to all the weapons... say the rogue and the monk... have class features that trigger off the specific proficiencies they already have and thus guarantee they wouldn't want to use different ones they might get from the feat. And for the classes that mainly cast spells but might use a weapon as well, they usually gain additional proficiencies in those weapons via their subclass and thus don't need a feat either.

That's always been the issue with weapon and armor proficiency feats... the classes that would want the weapons and armor you gain from them already have proficiency in them from their class. And the classes that don't have proficiency in them don't want to use them anyway.

I see this problem too. I still want to have it. ;)
The question is, what extra benefit would be appropriate to attach it to that feat.
Maybe as a sub feature of savage attacker?
Giving some simple weapon proficiencies in combination with some extra damage.
Maybe something like parry (+prof bonus to armor as reaction) in combination with light armor proficiency? Would be good as a first level feat and getting more and more useful the more you level up.

Would make sense from story perspective and grows
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
The only thing that bugs me is the lack of a feat that is something like militia training.
Some weapon and armor proficiencies. To finally make the soldier background make sense.
There's a couple problems with this. One, you have to have the base of a prospective "solider feat" be something besides weapon/armor proficiencies, or no fighter type is going to take it, which is bad flavor for a soldier background. So, you need to add some weapon and armor proficiencies as essentially a ribbon to another mechanic. Two, if you make the armor proficiency too generous (like both light and medium armor), then every light armored caster class is going to be an ex-soldier, which isn't great either.

So a prospective background soldier feat should be something along the lines of
-Two martial weapons
-Light armor
-Some other martially focused benefit. Quick don/doff of armor? No movement penalties in armor? Dunno, spitballing here.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
That feat concept makes sense from a narrative point of view... but mechanically I just don't know if having one is justified? Because any class that uses weapons and armor already will have proficiency in the weapons and armor they need. And the classes that don't have a fuller access to all the weapons... say the rogue and the monk... have class features that trigger off the specific proficiencies they already have and thus guarantee they wouldn't want to use different ones they might get from the feat. And for the classes that mainly cast spells but might use a weapon as well, they usually gain additional proficiencies in those weapons via their subclass and thus don't need a feat either.

That's always been the issue with weapon and armor proficiency feats... the classes that would want the weapons and armor you gain from them already have proficiency in them from their class. And the classes that don't have proficiency in them don't want to use them anyway.
You mean that there is no first level feat to put half plate on your wizard or sorlock?.. Good! That would be much better than other first level feats and do nothing for martial classes. Likewise with adding longbow to a class with only shortbow or a crossbow
 


DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
One thing that I'd actually like to see in the revision would be a change to classes like Rogue and Monk that currently have abilities that only trigger using specific lists of weapons... rather than any weapon the class has proficiency in. This was one of the hiccups 5E had with not getting a chance to review and redesign the weapon charts prior to release... you had things like Rogues being given proficiency with longswords but never in a million years wanting to actually use one because Sneak Attack only could be used with finesse and ranged weapons. I think for simplicity's sake if nothing else... a class's list of weapons they can use with certain abilities should just match their proficiencies. If you are proficient with a weapon, you can use it for Sneak Attack, or you can use it for Martial Arts. Were you to do this... then absolutely, having a feat to gain more weapon proficiencies would be worthwhile for at least some classes.

Yes... the designers might have to take a little bit of time to review the balance on Rogues and Monks using larger martial weapons... but that's what this whole revision time is for-- to get these charts organized and working together well across all the classes and their abilities.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
There's no doubt anyone could allow most feats for possible Background features... the question then just becomes like @Horwath asked... whether it could/should/would be allowed to have a +1 ASI feat in addition to the +2/+1 you'd get. And I don't know the answer myself.
If taken as a level 1 feat I would say no. I don't recall seeing a level 1 feat that gave a +1 to a stat.
 



An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top