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

[mellored]

Feats are not supposed to give class features.

Eldritch Adept says otherwise.

Also, Extra attack isn't really a class feature. No more than Misty Step is, and you can grab that with a feat.

 

[TwoSix]

I understand what you are saying.

What I am saying is that it lowers the effective trade-off of gaining Extra Attack for certain optimal builds, and I think that should be taken into account. The Paladin 2/Sorcerer 18 build I mentioned earlier, for example. Extra Attack is a fairly huge improvement for this build, but it normally comes at the cost of having to do P5/S15, which means no access to 9th level spells (a sizable trade-off). A P2/S18 being able to take a feat to get Extra Attack is a significant improvement to an already potent build.

It's your game. Obviously, do what you want; it doesn't impact me. You asked for feedback on a forum though, so I'm just trying to provide you with the best, honest feedback that I can.

IMO, granting Extra Attack for a single feat is too good (not for builds where it's an underpowered option, but rather for builds where it's an overpowered option). I think that gating it behind a weak feat is a more balanced approach, in that it then effectively costs 2 ASIs. If you disagree or don't think this applies to your table (because your players don't optimize or you just don't care) feel free to disregard.

Theoretically, they could also houserule Paladin smite as once per turn. Or gate multiple paladin smites per turn behind paladin levels. (one smite per attack isn't gained until Paladin 5)

Outside of Paladin2/Caster X, I can't think of a full caster build that would benefit from this more than, say, Bladesinger already does.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Theoretically, they could also houserule Paladin smite as once per turn. Or gate multiple paladin smites per turn behind paladin levels. (one smite per attack isn't gained until Paladin 5)

Outside of Paladin2/Caster X, I can't think of a full caster build that would benefit from this more than, say, Bladesinger already does.

You can house rule whatever you want.

Unless the OP says that they're house ruling paladin smite to be 1/turn, I'm not going to take that into account in my response.

Yes, P2/SX may be the most optimal use case for this. I'm not a hard core optimizer (I like to occasionally read up on what's out there, but when I play I don't really optimize whatsoever) though, so I don't know. If TreantMonk hopped into this thread and confirmed that that's the only OP use case, then I'd say it's fine to make it cost 1 ASI as long as you house rule smite to 1/turn, but I still wouldn't like the encroachment on niche protection (unless you're going to take this all the way and make similar feats to grant full or near-full casting, and whatnot).

 

[NotAYakk]

I mean, if I wanted to retool extra attack, I'd start a bit lower.

Barbarians get Power Blow. They deal +[W] damage with their weapon, and can make an unarmed or improvised weapon attack as well. (damage increases by another +[W] at 9, 13 and 17).

Paladins get Holy Sword. Their weapon deals +2d8 radiant damage and they cannot be disarmed, and they have advantage on targets that have harmed one of their allies.

Fighters get Combat Dominance. They have melee advantage on targets who haven't attacked them (or made them make a save) since end of their last turn, and make 2 attacks instead of 1.

Rangers get Endless Hunt. Hunter's Mark no longer requires concentration or a spell slot. They can cast True Strike as a bonus action. When they cast a Ranger spell as an action or a bonus action, they can also make a 1 handed melee, thrown or ranged weapon attack on a creature. Each time the Ranger hits a creature under Hunter's Mark, the bonus damage on that target increases by 1d6.

Monks get an extra Bonus Action at level 5.

Rogues replace Uncanny Dodge with Disruptive Strike; as a reaction to an attack hitting, make an attack on the attacker. If your reaction attack hits, the triggering attack must be repeated with disadvantage, and damage it deals is halved if it still hits.

...

Once that kind of reworking is done, 'extra attack' for a feat is no longer in play. Instead, feats that work with the class might exist.

Like, ones that boost the Cleric's +1d8 damage once/turn.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

One Warlock invocation is seen as being equivalent to a basic (no-level-prerequisite) feat. Likewise, one feat is seen as equivalent to a no-level-prerequisite Warlock invocation. Hence, there's a certain equivalency there. It's not quite equivalent, due to the enforced limitations, but it's a starting point.

There is an invocation in 5.5e, which gives Extra Attack. It requires a specific class (Warlock) to be 5th level. It becomes 2x Extra Attack (that is, attack three times) at Warlock 11, without needing to invest another invocation. It's Thirsting Blade, and that's all it does.

To me, this says that the baseline feat requiring 5th level is fine, regardless of multiclassing. However, if you wanted to allow higher amounts, I would add...

Improved Extra Attack
Prerequisite: Extra Attack feat, character level 12, 11 levels in at least one single class
When you use the Attack action, you may attack three times instead of only once.

This is less powerful than Thirsting Blade (since it requires two feats, not just one), and requires a high degree of focus. You'll have given up two of the three feats usually available to your character at this level, and you have to have nothing more than a one-level dip to make it work--or wait until even higher levels than 12.

It'd probably still be a little wonky in terms of power, because now you can have Extra Attack on a Rogue. But 5e doesn't really care that much about balance to begin with, and thus helps non-spellcasters far more than it helps spellcasters.

Except the feat that grants the warlock invocation of extra attack has a pre-req of "pact of the blade".

 

[TwoSix]

You can house rule whatever you want.

Unless the OP says that they're house ruling paladin smite to be 1/turn, I'm not going to take that into account in my response.

Fair. I'm a fan of fairly radical experimentation with the 5e chassis; suggesting other changes because of knockoff effects from a central change seems fairly lightweight and obvious to my mind.

Yes, P2/SX may be the most optimal use case for this. I'm not a hard core optimizer (I like to occasionally read up on what's out there, but when I play I don't really optimize whatsoever) though, so I don't know. If TreantMonk hopped into this thread and confirmed that that's the only OP use case, then I'd say it's fine to make it cost 1 ASI as long as you house rule smite to 1/turn, but I still wouldn't like the encroachment on niche protection (unless you're going to take this all the way and make similar feats to grant full or near-full casting, and whatnot).

For house rule threads, I generally feel like mentioning niche protection is something to observe, but not to flag as a criticism. "Niche protection" is ultimately an aesthetic concern, not a gameplay one.

 

[mellored]

Indeed. Saying that granting Extra Attack to a random Sorceror is fine, doesn't take into account when they take a Hexblade dip and cast Shadow Blade or Necrotic Shroud.

Hexblades can already use Extra attack with Shadowblade.

Not sure how multiclassing sorcerer changes much, except your -1 spell level and -2 to Cha.


Shadowblade and Spirit Shroud are balanced around having 2 attacks (i.e. for the sword bard).

I.e. Spiritual Shroud + Rapier will do 4d8+6 (24).

Spiritual Guardian + firebolt will do 3d8+2d10 (24.5 +some on an save + allies can push)

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Except the feat that grants the warlock invocation of extra attack has a pre-req of "pact of the blade".

shrug The premise of the thread was that this will be handed out as a feat, and thus we should articulate how we would do it.

I would not, if I were in charge, do this myself. I am simply adhering to the spirit of the question as it was asked.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Hexblades can already use Extra attack with Shadowblade.

Yes, using one of their very few slots, concentration, their subclass selection and an invocation. That's a lot of cost and opportunity cost.

 

[FrogReaver]

Theoretically, they could also houserule Paladin smite as once per turn. Or gate multiple paladin smites per turn behind paladin levels. (one smite per attack isn't gained until Paladin 5)

Outside of Paladin2/Caster X, I can't think of a full caster build that would benefit from this more than, say, Bladesinger already does.

Any table that uses rolled stats or higher arrays/pointbuys.