D&D 5E Need opinions about a few feats

[DEFCON 1]

As a DM with a player who has the Sentinel feat... I can say that it only comes up on occasion, but oftentimes for me can be quite irritating. I think I can get my BBEG out of harm's way, when the pally then rolls up and stops him in his tracks. Which is great for the player and the party, because it does exactly what you'd want a feat to do-- create a situation that only occurs occasionally so it's still exciting when it can happen... while at the same time make the DM's face drop when he realizes what's going on. That's been PRICELESS for them. And quite probably more fun for them than whatever story might've come out of the BBEG ducking out and them having to go chasing after it. In that regard, the player really feels like he got his money worth by taking it.

It also just means that as a DM you either need to accept that occasionally a BBEG ain't going to get away... or that you have to remember Sentinel when encounter building if you really want to make sure there's a possible escape route for the enemy even if Sentinel comes into play.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Another key thing to remember about Sentinel is that it's expanded OA function only works against the disengage action. IE, you get OAs as normal and you get OAs against those using the disengage action. If there's another ability in play that prevents OAs, such as the mobility feat or flyby attack, Sentinel doesn't work against those.

(I've also ruled that it doesn't work on things that are immune to being restrained. Makes no sense that you can stop an air elemental in whirlwind mode dead in it's tracks with your pointy stick. This is for flavor purposes only, and not because the feat is overpowered.)

Still, even with that, it's a useful feat, not overpowered, and give the player a bit of control over the battlefield. It works as advertised, and it's not overpowered.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Shendorion]

Sentinel's combat value is adjustable by the DM - it has a greater impact in fights against a small number of powerful monsters than it does in ones against large numbers of individually weaker opponents (or one boss villain with a number of weak minions). A well made Sentinel can lock down one monster at a time, but only one, and if it's the most powerful creature on the battlefield, has to be prepared to withstand its focused attention. Use that to make awesome encounters.

Martial Adept won't obviate your Battle Master; in fact, he's the best candidate for taking the feat! The Battle Master's class features are powered by superiority dice, so the benefit of giving him more of them goes up as he gains levels.

 

[Istbor]

Generally, I would side with allowing the feats. I am not prone to stepping on a players toes if he wants a concept and it is supported officially by the game through feats, classes or races.

Surprisingly, my group which certainly contains at least one power gamer, has pretty much ignored most of the more 'troublesome' feats.

Now that I think about it, the only feats I have seen taken are Dual wielder, Alert, and Crossbow Expert. Usually the party seems content with bumping up stats.

 

[Kithas]

OTOH, I've had trouble coming up with a version that is both simple mechanically, but also isn't too powerful, within the 5e paradigm. At this point, I've been pretty much given up on the concept. Anyone have any luck with this?

*For those wondering, it's not because he's casting darkness or anything. I'm trying to build to a RP concept.

Personally if I was your dm I would allow 10' blindsight with no other vision senses. Talk to your dm, something interesting and limiting like that is usually well accepted.

Surprisingly, my group which certainly contains at least one power gamer, has pretty much ignored most of the more 'troublesome' feats.

Now that I think about it, the only feats I have seen taken are Dual wielder, Alert, and Crossbow Expert. Usually the party seems content with bumping up stats.

Crossbow expert is usually considered one of the 'troublesome feats'

 

[Istbor]

Personally if I was your dm I would allow 10' blindsight with no other vision senses. Talk to your dm, something interesting and limiting like that is usually well accepted.


Crossbow expert is usually considered one of the 'troublesome feats'

Well I did say most.

 

[mellored]

Just to compare GWM with +2 Str... average damage per attack.

50% chance to hit...
Baseline: 2d6+3 * .5 = 5 damage
GWM: 2d6+3+10 * .25 = 5 damage
+2 Str: 2d6+4 * .55 = 6.05 damage

60%
base = 6
GWM = 7
Str = 7.15

65%
base = 6.5
GWM = 8
Str = 7.7

70%
baseline = 7 damage
GWM = 9 damage
+2 Str = 8.25

*Didn't include great weapon fighting style, which helps Str a bit more. Since you deal none on a miss.

So GWM does more against low AC targets, less against high AC ones. Otherwise it's on par with +2 Str.

 

[mellored]

I think it is best to allow feats on a case by case basis. I flat out don't allow GWM, SS or Lucky.

GWM is fine. No more powerful then +2 Str.

Sharpshooter is a bit of a different story. Since archery style already boost your accuracy by 10%, you're already in the 65% chance to hit range.


That said, i change it to +6/-3 for both. To flatten it out a bit.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Okay guys thanks for the feedback I'll allow them.

And I was wondering maybe my rule interpretation of Darkness is wrong. For me you get no disadvantage or advantages because you can't see the one who attacks you (advatnage for him) but he can't see you so he also gets a disadvantages. So in the end Darkness do almost nothing except against a few humans with low perception. Am I ruling the spell correctly?

You're ruling the spell correctly, but it does do a number of more subtle things like prevent opportunity attacks and a lot of spells. (You only get an opportunity attack against things you can see.)

Sentinel is surprisingly good on a Moon Druid.