D&D 5E If "Extra Attack" Was A Feat, What Would Its Prerequisites Be?

[CreamCloud0]

Sorry, sorry! I'm getting distracted by all the off-topics and hyperbole. Couldn't see the forest for the feat-trees.

but would you be able to clear the forest faster using your axe's extra attack or fireballing them once a day?

 

[DEFCON 1]

If this is a house rule for your game, then make it a feat with a level 8 pre-req and test it out. No harm, no foul.

All this talk about taking stuff away from Fighters, or caster supremacy and all that stuff that people are bringing up only matter if this was to be a universal new rule that WotC introduced to the game. But it's not. It's your rule for your table.

If you think your Rogue player isn't doing enough damage in Tier 2 and you want him to get three light weapon attacks a round rather than just two... then let him get the feat at 8th level and see how it plays. Me personally, I wouldn't have much issue with it (although I also don't have a problem with Rogue damage in the game currently, so I wouldn't need the feat in mine.)

 

[mellored]

• I wouldn't give full spellcasting to a fighter for just a feat either. That's why this feat does nothing of the sort.

The fact that it scales to 4 attack is kinda close to a full caster.

At least half caster.

 

[CleverNickName]

The fact that it scales to 4 attack is kinda close to a full caster.

At least half caster.

It doesn't scale, though. The first draft did, but I quickly revised it a dozen pages ago.

 

[ECMO3]

Also, consider fireball is an area effect spell, where the fighter's attacks may only be against one target or divided among multiple targets, instead of that damage to all targets.

It can also be used against any target within range or reach without damaging allies.

 

[ECMO3]

You have to commit to 6 levels of bard and a subclass to get those. You can't just use an ASI.

I think this is what we are trying to fix. Make it easier to get for a PC who is not a martial and does not want to take a subclass designed for that.

I look at someone playing a Sorcerer specifically, because there are no good Gish subclass options for that class.

Also it is just not going to be broken. My 4th level caster with extra attack is not all of a sudden OP and my 12th level full caster with extra attack is probably actually weaker than the other full caster in the party who got warcaster, Fey Touched, or another spell-casting aligned feat instead.

In terms of relative power increase I think Magic Initiate-Warlock with Hex, Eldritch Blast and Minor IIlusion on a strength-based Fighter or Paladin does more for the character build than an extra attack feat would do for most full casters.

 

[mellored]

It doesn't scale, though. The first draft did, but I quickly revised it a dozen pages ago.

Sorry, Too many pages too quickly, so I missed it.

Works fine if it doesn't scale IMO.

 

[RoughCoronet0]

Based on everyone's feedback so far, here's my latest version.

Extra Attack​

Prerequisites: 5th level, proficiency with one martial weapon​

When you use the Attack action on your turn, you attack twice instead of once.​

What changed?

• Removed the scaling with level
• Only triggers "when you use the Attack action." Can't be used with spellcasting, can't be used as part of a Reaction or Bonus action.
• "you attack twice instead of once." Thus, if you are already making two or more attacks, this feat does not confer any benefit.

I think this is fine personally, though my group uses some pretty potent feats so I know a lot of the concerns most would have wouldn't apply to myself. I think having a second feat that chains with this, available at 11th/12th level that increases the number attacks to three instead of two might be a neat idea too.

 

[Shardstone]

This thread helped me realize that Martials should all be making a number of attacks equal to their PB at every level. Then Fighter gets the ability to spend attacks on Maneuvers instead of having Superiority dice (sacrifice one attack to use Tripping Attack, for example; replace the superiority die used for the maneuver with a scaling 1d6 -> 1d12).

Every martial making 6 attacks a turn at 17th level is what I dream of. 4 attacks at 9th level bb. Now martials MATTER in combat.

 

[mellored]

This thread helped me realize that Martials should all be making a number of attacks equal to their PB at every level. Then Fighter gets the ability to spend attacks on Maneuvers instead of having Superiority dice (sacrifice one attack to use Tripping Attack, for example; replace the superiority die used for the maneuver with a scaling 1d6 -> 1d12).

Every martial making 6 attacks a turn at 17th level is what I dream of. 4 attacks at 9th level bb. Now martials MATTER in combat.

Too much rolling IMO.

Do 2x weapon damage or something instead.