D&D 5E No Feats Allowed?

[The Grassy Gnoll]

I allow feats but so far only one was taken - Alert - and in all other chances, ASI was chosen.

They're not optimisers though.

But does it work? Yep.

Would Feats change the fact they are all, regardless of what class it says on their character sheets, clerics of the dice god, Wilwh'eat'on, the number of which beast is 1? Nope.

 

[Aribar]

A featless game would get me to play something besides a Variant Human and I'd exclusively stick to the full caster classes like Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, or Wizard so I'd have interesting things to do.

 

[Savevsdeath]

A featless game would get me to play something besides a Variant Human and I'd exclusively stick to the full caster classes like Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, or Wizard so I'd have interesting things to do.

This, definitely. Without feats the fighty classes become far less atrtractive. As i stated before, Fighter is completely off the table, and Ranger might be too. I'd still consider a Paladin, but other than that it'd be all caster classes for me, and definitely no humans because standard human is just bad.

 

[Lanefan]

If you can only play human, and there's no actual racial benefits being selected from, would that count?

No Humans either...I said *all* races, remember?

Lanefan

 

[feartheminotaur]

Most of the time I've seen it it's been for guidance plus bless, or eldritch blast plus hex; I did see a human wild sorcerer take it for mage armor. It's not "optimal" and I wouldn't say it should be banned, I included it since I've seen PCs with it at several sessions.

Lucky, btw, is the feat I've seen taken the most.

 

[brehobit]

Eh, as others have noted
A) Most people don't take feats until 12th level, so other than alt humans it doesn't matter much
B) Except fighters. Fighters get hit hard. Once STR or DEX are maxed, increasing other stats doesn't help all that much. I'd not play a fighter above level 7 in such a game. If I was, I'd multi-class out at that point.
C) It does get min-maxers to play something other than alt human.

But yeah, it's doable.

 

[Unwise]

In my experience, Strength based classes become more rare under such rules. Polearm Mastery and GWM gave significant reasons to play a Strength based guy over a Dex based one if you were pursuing melee damage. Str based guys also care less about their main stat that Dex guys do. To them it is +1 to hit and damage. To Dex based guy it is also +1AC and +1 Initiative. In my experience, Dex based guys tended to up to 20 first before looking at feats, whereas Str based guys tended to get Sentinel, PM, GWM, or Shield Mastery before moving on to stats.

If I were in such a game, I would look at playing a class that is well served by very high stats, like Monk who relies on two stats for their AC and had little incentive to use feats anyway.

 

[Flamestrike]

Most of the time I've seen it it's been for guidance plus bless, or eldritch blast plus hex; I did see a human wild sorcerer take it for mage armor. It's not "optimal" and I wouldn't say it should be banned, I included it since I've seen PCs with it at several sessions.

Lucky, btw, is the feat I've seen taken the most.

All of which (including lucky) are OK options that rapidly loose oomph in 5E's longer expected (6-8 encounter/ 2 short rest) AD's. Having a +2 to an ASI gets you +1 to hit and damage (or your spell saves) all day long, no questions asked.

If you're running single encounter AD's (or even 1-3 encoutner AD's) then these feats become much more attractive.

 

[AxisofJedi]

And Races TwoSix!!! Now it just got real

 

[Zardnaar]

It won't be a long term thing if we try featless.