D&D General Path of Feats: a Superior Design than Subclasses

[Silam]

Let's not get bogged down in semantics, shall we? These are feats and you choose among many at different points on a path,
so some interactions will work better than others, as in they'll give you more power, more screen time, more ressources, and they're so many and so many potential interactions that it gets increasingly difficult to correctly balanced them all. That's the thing I've almost no interest in. I love the 5e architecture where there's not really a good option, at least theoretically (errors are still possible, obviously), only roughly equivalent ones. The more you add feats and decision points around feats, the more you'll drift from this theoretical equilibrium, IMO, and the more you have a game where system mastery is needed rather than a game every kid around could play as well.

Got it, so then what you dislike in "feat chains" is the feats, not the chains. The chains are a feature, not a bug.

I can see that argument. From a simplicity standpoint, chains (which subclasses are a form of) are less flexible and therefore simpler.

If simplicity is the goal, then yeah, these paths of feats are a straight negative, no doubt.

 

[Horwath]

I dislike feats in general and would certainly not deem them as "superior design" than sublcasses. Chains of feats are as old as 3E if not older (I'm sure we could find some in other games, video games especially) and they tend to skew the games towards character building and optimization, a trend I personnaly dislike. I like my class-based games to be class-based. Subclass was the right tool for the right job, IMO. Well, at least these "paths of feats" seem to avoid the ivory tower design of old. Still, the more you add that kind of stuff in the game, the more conversations around the game will be about the "best build", which I found super tiresome.

That said, I'm happy for those who like that kind of stuff. They could work as prestige classes of a kind, for the few games that go beyond level 11+.

subclasses are just feat chains that are preselected for you.

 

[BenjaminPey]

Preselected feats you automatically get when you level, all of them presented on the same page of the same book is very much NOT the same as feats you have to choose between one thousand others disseminated along fifty books while taking into account prerequisites for your future choices.

 

[Reynard]

So talent trees. Cool. That is definitely better than subclasses.

 

[Silam]

Preselected feats you automatically get when you level, all of them presented on the same page of the same book is very much NOT the same as feats you have to choose between one thousand others disseminated along fifty books while taking into account prerequisites for your future choices.

They’re not the same but they’re still quite similar…

Consider the PHB, which has 12 classes with ~4 subclasses each. These are 48 chains of features. Each of these chains is mutually-exclusive with the other 3 that belong to the same class (i.e., the Evoker chain has the prereq of "you cannot have the Illusionist, Diviner or Abjurer chain"). So each chain is compatible with 44 out of 47 other chains.

Once you pick a chain you are railroaded into it and need not make further choices as long as you keep progressing down that chain.

How many feats are there in the PHB? There are 43 general feats, which is one less than the 44 cited above …

 

[BenjaminPey]

So 1 choice among 48 possibilities from one side.
And 1 choice among 43 × 42 × 41 = 74046 possibilities from the other.

Sure. Quite similar. Same ballpark, really.
And that's just level 1-12.

 

[FrogReaver]

Here’s what feat chains do to the character building process.

You no longer can just read the feat list and think how X fits your character, you read the list and think well this feat would be cool for my character but I must meet the prereq feat…. *Looks at prereq, well that isn’t nearly as good or cool and I have to replace one of my other feats I wanted to take this so I can take the thing I really wanted. Is that worth it?

I’m not a fan of that process, especially the ideal implementation of taking something worse now for something better later.

 

[bedir than]

Feat chains were in 5e before the start i.e. in the 2012-2014 playtest at some point. I don't remember if they were called "themes".

And yes, they are a great concept. They don’t compete with subclasses though. Subclasses are class-specific augmentations of the base class concept, and feats are open to all. If any spellcaster can become a Lich, then making a Lich subclass just wouldn't work.

I wish they'd tried to the Strixhaven schools via the Feat Path method rather than subclasses and later the two-feat chain.

 

[Neonchameleon]

subclasses are just feat chains that are preselected for you.

With very rare exceptions you've got that backwards. Subclasses are what feat chains aspired to be. But feats neither have the power budget nor combo protection of subclasses and so can only ever half-ass the job unless you're running a classless system.

The Lich and Death Knight are closer to paragon paths or even epic destinies than standard subclasses admittedly.

And I don't understand how the fire-and-forget unbalanced nature of kits that often actively take away abilities so are hard to use or the contort-yourself-for-six-levels-to-enter prestige classes aren't just worse than the easy to enter and versatile subclasses. (And all else being equal simpler is an advantage).

 

[Remathilis]

I wish they'd tried to the Strixhaven schools via the Feat Path method rather than subclasses and later the two-feat chain.

This is WotC's first real experiment in chains going beyond two links. They mostly did origin + upgrade.

I think I might see an issue though with the fact you are not obligated to complete the path and thus you could be a part lich or semi death knight. Not sure how I feel about that yet.