D&D 5E Martials should just get free feats

It wasnt as much of a issue TSR editions, because doing the impossible had very real downsides, from longer xp progression, to being basically very hard to use in combat, and the fact even casting a spell could be a pain.
end game (say 13-20th+) wizards were telling reality to go sit in the corner while they played... but it ALWAYS FELT both unsafe and about to slip out of control any moment.
And saves scaled more as "just nope" for the PCs and not with the casters at all... (I often found 'high level campaings' of 21+ where multi characters made any save on a 5 or higher and some on a 3 or higher)
3e and 5e removed too many of those guard rails
3e just removed all risk from it, increased their resources, and the game has simply never recovered
100%
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Shadowedeyes

Adventurer
The subway analogy isn't very good, for a number of reasons I think.

On the topic, I'm not entirely sold on the extra feats for martials. I think they could use something, because spellcasters have gotten more and more powerful as editions have moved on, dipping down in 4e, and not quite hitting the 3e level with 5e casters, but still moving up again. Fighters, as a specific example, are basically good at one or two things, but spellcasters can often be about as good at those things.
 

FallenRX

Adventurer
The subway analogy isn't very good, for a number of reasons I think.

On the topic, I'm not entirely sold on the extra feats for martials. I think they could use something, because spellcasters have gotten more and more powerful as editions have moved on, dipping down in 4e, and not quite hitting the 3e level with 5e casters, but still moving up again. Fighters, as a specific example, are basically good at one or two things, but spellcasters can often be about as good at those things.
I like feats because it is a system that is...just in the game and supported.
And its flexible you can do a lot with feats and give them a lot of powerful options, and it makes them just really good at something.

Its not a perfect fix, no i agree,but i think its a better fix then most others, because it doesnt introduce a whole new subsystem, nor step on the toes of something that exists
 
Last edited:

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
That;s my problem with all non 4e D&D in a nut shell.

if 1 sub type of the classes can do things others find impossible, but the others can't do things that type find impossible what is the point of those other classes.

now I have learned to like a lot of 5e, but the caster supremacy that returned (but to a smaller extent) from 3e is not one of it
Well, you'll have to blame pretty much every fantasy story for that, because that's how magic works. Its why its so hard to balance Jedi and not-Jedi.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
It wasnt as much of a issue TSR editions, because doing the impossible had very real downsides, from longer xp progression, to being basically very hard to use in combat, and the fact even casting a spell could be a pain.

3e just removed all risk from it, increased their resources, and the game has simply never recovered
Yup. TSR editions had this right IMO.
 

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
The subway analogy isn't very good, for a number of reasons I think.
Then ditch the analogy and keep the argument.

You may choose any one of thirteen classes as your first level. These classes are not, in any way, presented as being more or less powerful than one another. Indeed, much the opposite--every class's entry sells its position, both weaknesses and strengths. The designers' words, outside the text of the books themselves, have indicated that they care about these options being commensurate with one another.

Why am I paying the same amount of game resources to get less?

On the topic, I'm not entirely sold on the extra feats for martials. I think they could use something, because spellcasters have gotten more and more powerful as editions have moved on, dipping down in 4e, and not quite hitting the 3e level with 5e casters, but still moving up again. Fighters, as a specific example, are basically good at one or two things, but spellcasters can often be about as good at those things.
In reply to both this and some other things (about more fundamental reworks), there is one simple answer.

This is a fix anyone can implement, with little to no design work required, that addresses the gap in a clear and active way. What "design" work is required is only in the form of (potentially) limiting the list of valid feats, should some feat or other prove too powerful (as "too weak" is not likely to be much of a concern.) It may not fix the whole issue; it may have some rough edges; it may be a bit of a blunt instrument. What is more relevant is whether it makes enough of a difference to matter, and whether it is sufficiently easy to implement as a patch over the existing rules, rather than tearing out those rules and rearranging their guts.
 

On the topic, I'm not entirely sold on the extra feats for martials
yeah people are so busy argueing IF martials need anything we forgot to help with the point..
I like feats because it is a system that is...just in the game and supported.
And its flexible you can do a lot with feats and give them a lot of powerful options, and it makes them just really good at something.
if feats were half as well supported as they were in 3e or 4e I would 100% agree... it seems to me that there are too few feats.
but I want to give this a try
Ive been experimenting with a house rule for my 5e game where i give martials a free feat that doesnt increase ASIs at 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th level(17th level has an option to trade out the feat for an Epic Boon).
lets imagine a 9th level fighter... this is when they are are (by raw) the worst, they have not gotten there 3rd attack and they do not have much other then hp to speak of.


Okay so lets make a quick champion (RAW) the arrya is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8
So lets say I am a dex build... I will fight with a rapier(refluff as elven longsword) and longbow I am making a 2014phb half elf with the high elf (so I can get a cantrip) as my race.

So I am putting 10 into str 15 and +1 into dex 13 and +1 into con 8 into int 14 into wis and 12 into cha that gets +2
I get action surge and second wind each 1/sr indomintable 1/long rest
defensive figtingg style gives me +1 AC
I get 3 normal ASI plus your 2 feats
I am taking prestidigitation at will
I make 2 attacks per attack action and I crit on a 19+
I add half prof to str dex and can checks (including skills) that I don't add prof too...
I am going to up my dex to 18 with 1 ASI, take defensive duelist with another, then fey touched for detect magic and misty step each 1/ day and I get to boost my int to a 9.
Your two bonus are easy... lucky and shadow touched for invisability and disguise self and boosting that int to a 10.


So I end up with Str 10 Dex 18 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 14 CHa 14
1 cantrip at will 2 2nd level spells at 1/day 2 1st level spells at 1/day +1 to my AC add prof to 1 hit as reaction as well 3 luck pts for rerolls 1 indomitable for rerolls and action surge and second wind.... I have 9d10HD so about 70hp most likely an AC 18 with +4 against 1 target as a reaction.
I attack twice with a 1d8+4 and attack with a +8 to hit.


now lets make a hexblade warlorck.

also a half elf, this time no house rule boosts
at level 9 I have 2 5th level spell slots (short rest) 9 spells kknown between 1st and 5th I have 2 attacks for 1d8+5 and my attacks are at +9 my save DCs are also at 17 and my AC is 17 and my HD is 9d8
its much closer then I thought...
 




Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top