Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7088644" data-attributes="member: 6801845">I would like to have a simple discussion about these feats without all the hyperbole that infected the other thread.  Probably not possible.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />  If you haven't already, you can see the pdf at <a href="http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UA-SkillFeats.pdf" target="_blank">UA-SkillFeats.pdf</a>Assumption 0: Just to get it out of the way, obviously I can modify rules as a DM to suit my style, but at a certain point you go from having a different ruling to house rules.  As written in the Unearthed Arcana article, I think these feats in particular need to be redone.  Please assume for this thread that you do not want to implement house rules or rulings that contradict the wording of the feat. This is playtest material, I'd like to discuss issues and changes to the playtest.With that out of the way, let me know what you think.The issues I have with Diplomat and Menacing are the following.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">IMHO, charmed and frightened supernatural conditions and should not be the result of a skill check. An NPC may find you charming, or be frightened of you.  I may even borrow from those conditions - but I want more flexibility to deal with results than the conditions allow.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Many, if not most, players will expect to follow the wording of the text which is very mechanical.  "If you do X you get a contested skill check.  If you succeed Y condition is imposed on the target".</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A PC is far more likely to win an opposed skill check than a target failing a save. Based on a quick check of stats from a spreadsheet I downloaded,  creatures in the MM have a +1 to their insight check. At a certain point, depending on the build, a PC is guaranteed to win every skill check against the vast majority of creatures.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">In addition, certain monsters have counters to spells.  Either the capability to literally cast Counterspell, magic resistance, legendary saves.  No such mechanic applies to contested skill checks.</li> </ul>Now for some details.DiplomatAbbreviated Version: If you spend 1 minute talking to someone make a Persuasion vs Insight check. If your check succeeds the target is charmed by you.This feat reduces the role of the DM to adjudicate results of role playing.  As a DM if I think the players are doing a good job they don't need (and I do not want) a feat to get advantage on skill checks.  I want advantage to be a reward for good RP, planning and story.  I want to be able to give disadvantage in certain situations and not have such an easy counter.The feat also need to be fixed for an obvious loophole.  Once charmed, nothing other than getting away from the source of the charm can break the condition.I see other issues as well.  There's no indication that you can't try the check over and over again, or that the target realizes they were charmed.  Does it work like the charm person spells in that the target considers the source a friendly ally, or is it just a bonus on future skill checks and not attacking?If it's fixed, it's not horrible but I still don't like the mechanical nature.MenacingAbbreviated Version: Replace one attack to make an Intimidation vs Insight check. If your check succeeds, the target is frightened until the end of your next turn.Frightened means the target cannot approach the source of the fear and has disadvantage on all attacks and ability checks.  Frightening a melee based humanoid can basically remove them from combat for the round.  Since the condition lasts until the end of your next turn, once you've frightened a target it will be easier to frighten the next round because they will have disadvantage on their Insight check.In addition, it only takes an attack action.  A valor bard gets two attacks, a fighter eventually gets four (more if they use an action surge). Other than number of attacks, there is no limit.It's not going to have a huge effect if used against spell casters or humanoids with good ranged attacks, but the majority of humanoids seem to rely on melee attacks or have only less effective ranged attacks.The biggest issue that I see is that once again takes a lot of RP aspects out of the game.  If I've set up a the BBEG as someone who should never be intimidated by the PCs, this gets around it. It's one thing to be affected by a magic spell or supernatural ability, it's another to be frightened because the fighter called you a ninny.IMHO the DM should be the arbiter of whether an NPC can be intimidated (whether or not they are immune to fear) and what the results of being intimidated is.StealthyAbbreviated Version: If you are hidden, you can move up to 10 feet in the open without revealing yourself if you end the move in a position where you’re not clearly visible.An honorable mention does have to go to the stealthy feat.  I'm pretty lenient when it comes to stealth, but this feat means for any span of 10 feet that has hiding spots on either side you can escape notice no matter what.  Demon with truesight staring down the well lit corridor with no obstruction and absolutely nothing to hide behind?  Have to walk right in front of the demon's nose close enough to feel his abyssally bad breath on your neck? No problem, I'm Stealthy!  Not game breaking but certainly versimilitude breaking and not necessary.</blockquote>

Verification