Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
More time to play with feats
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MostlyHarmless42" data-source="post: 7285713" data-attributes="member: 6845520"><p>From out tables, we seem to end up with players all seeking to take feats at level 4 and 8, though we tend to have players who consider extra abilities and the things that feats come with as more interesting than straight bonuses. A couple characters have been exceptions to this (most single stat class characters like the wizards/warlock or caster druid/cleric builds), though even when they did choose to increase ability scores it was often to even out odd scores, or to up a secondary or even tertiary stat (usually con) to 16.</p><p></p><p>The game's difficulty is tentatively balanced around a character having a 14 in their primary, and I actually think this to be a good thing, as it allows unorthodox builds to be viable or newer players who can't optimize to still function and enjoy themselves, and for those who do up their stats to feel more powerful. </p><p></p><p>Realistically, there isn't any sort of "requirement" to up your stats at all, as even with a 14 stat, an attack will hit targets with average ac about 50% of the time (give or take 10%), it is the higher ac monsters where having a higher stat can really be felt, or when using weapons you aren't proficient in, etc. That said, it is likely to be more fun for players who start with a primary stat of 16 if possible, or a 15 that gets bumped somehow to 16 at level 4. I'd wager the only time you'd *have* to increase this is around level 12, where monsters having AC higher than 15 start becoming more and more common, at which point you'll be fine with an 18 in your primary stat. Possessing a 20 is by no means "required" and in all honestly nearly every build will be improved by making another score a second 18, or taking another feat over maxing out a 20, though there may be a few exceptions, and that's a matter of opinion.</p><p></p><p>Personally, what I've found seems to make the game more entertaining and to help character growth is to give players a feat at first level, one which *must* be a feat. It should ideally fit their character's concept rather than just being mechanically best, but again, who's to say "hitting very hard" (i.e. Heavy Weapon Master) isn't core to your character's identity. We do this at our table and it tends to have a couple results:</p><p>1) The players are slightly more powerful in the long run, though far from being game breaking OP in the longrun, and most if the power boost is at low levels, where the game could stand to have a couple more options to diversify character builds.</p><p></p><p>2) I've found it helps encourage players to take options that help flesh out their character, whether that means:</p><p>2a) they take what are normally considered "lackluster" feats because the extra feat allows them to do so, especially for builds that are MAD.</p><p>2b) It is just one more instance that forces a player to put some thought into their character beyond just "I am a fighter" or "I am a rogue". Backgrounds having traits, flaws, etc. help with this, but it is always nice to have one more mechanical reason.</p><p></p><p>3) Maybe it's just my players, but I've found granting a starting feat seems to increase racial diversity among the characters created. </p><p></p><p>We had a LOT of varient humans for a number of builds before trying this just because some builds (like crossbow users or warcaster for sword/board clerics and paladins) really almost need some feats, and being "forced" to take one at 4th level or take human varient if you really want another feat that that is more flavorful every time really kind of feels sort of boring and stifles the creativity I like to see at my table. Though these are just my thoughts.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MostlyHarmless42, post: 7285713, member: 6845520"] From out tables, we seem to end up with players all seeking to take feats at level 4 and 8, though we tend to have players who consider extra abilities and the things that feats come with as more interesting than straight bonuses. A couple characters have been exceptions to this (most single stat class characters like the wizards/warlock or caster druid/cleric builds), though even when they did choose to increase ability scores it was often to even out odd scores, or to up a secondary or even tertiary stat (usually con) to 16. The game's difficulty is tentatively balanced around a character having a 14 in their primary, and I actually think this to be a good thing, as it allows unorthodox builds to be viable or newer players who can't optimize to still function and enjoy themselves, and for those who do up their stats to feel more powerful. Realistically, there isn't any sort of "requirement" to up your stats at all, as even with a 14 stat, an attack will hit targets with average ac about 50% of the time (give or take 10%), it is the higher ac monsters where having a higher stat can really be felt, or when using weapons you aren't proficient in, etc. That said, it is likely to be more fun for players who start with a primary stat of 16 if possible, or a 15 that gets bumped somehow to 16 at level 4. I'd wager the only time you'd *have* to increase this is around level 12, where monsters having AC higher than 15 start becoming more and more common, at which point you'll be fine with an 18 in your primary stat. Possessing a 20 is by no means "required" and in all honestly nearly every build will be improved by making another score a second 18, or taking another feat over maxing out a 20, though there may be a few exceptions, and that's a matter of opinion. Personally, what I've found seems to make the game more entertaining and to help character growth is to give players a feat at first level, one which *must* be a feat. It should ideally fit their character's concept rather than just being mechanically best, but again, who's to say "hitting very hard" (i.e. Heavy Weapon Master) isn't core to your character's identity. We do this at our table and it tends to have a couple results: 1) The players are slightly more powerful in the long run, though far from being game breaking OP in the longrun, and most if the power boost is at low levels, where the game could stand to have a couple more options to diversify character builds. 2) I've found it helps encourage players to take options that help flesh out their character, whether that means: 2a) they take what are normally considered "lackluster" feats because the extra feat allows them to do so, especially for builds that are MAD. 2b) It is just one more instance that forces a player to put some thought into their character beyond just "I am a fighter" or "I am a rogue". Backgrounds having traits, flaws, etc. help with this, but it is always nice to have one more mechanical reason. 3) Maybe it's just my players, but I've found granting a starting feat seems to increase racial diversity among the characters created. We had a LOT of varient humans for a number of builds before trying this just because some builds (like crossbow users or warcaster for sword/board clerics and paladins) really almost need some feats, and being "forced" to take one at 4th level or take human varient if you really want another feat that that is more flavorful every time really kind of feels sort of boring and stifles the creativity I like to see at my table. Though these are just my thoughts. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
More time to play with feats
Top