D&D 5E PH(B) Tavern Brawler Feat

[Paraxis]

I think it does a bit more than that.

Looking at the description of Improvised weapons in 5b (p. 46), you get your proficiency bonus if the improvised weapon looks like a weapon, but not if it doesn't (wagon wheel, dead goblin).

So the feat is giving the player:

* stat bonus to Str or Con (good for odd numbers)
* proficiency in unarmed strikes for Rogues and Wizards (so sneak attack with fists now possible, which frankly by itself makes taking the feat worthwhile!), and damage ~ dagger.
* proficiency bonus to ANY improvised weapon (which in turn should authorize the DM to be less forgiving with creative justifications, etc.)
* bonus grapple action.

Is it mechanically optimal? Probably not, but the idea of a brawling rogue half-orc is pretty appealing to me.

Rogues can only sneak attack with finesse weapons so no sneak attacking with unarmed strikes.

This feat would never get used as a primary form of combat, if you want to be an unarmed fighter you play a monk, since it won't get used very often it is not worth spending a feat on. If the feat doesn't come up almost every round of combat it is not a good investment.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Every time I read responses to a part of the game like this where people immediately dismiss it based solely on min/maxing and not on how it could apply in various in-game scenarios, I die a little inside.

I remember when the tagline to D&D was, "Products of Your Imagination"

 

[Kobold Stew]

Rogues can only sneak attack with finesse weapons so no sneak attacking with unarmed strikes.

This feat would never get used as a primary form of combat, if you want to be an unarmed fighter you play a monk, since it won't get used very often it is not worth spending a feat on. If the feat doesn't come up almost every round of combat it is not a good investment.

You're right -- I was simply mistaken.

 

[Paraxis]

Every time I read responses to a part of the game like this where people immediately dismiss it based solely on min/maxing and not on how it could apply in various in-game scenarios, I die a little inside.

I remember when the tagline to D&D was, "Products of Your Imagination"

The problem is they could make the game so that feats like these did both, let people come up with creative ways to use it in various in game scenarios and be an effective choice for optimizing your character, and they didn't.

As it stands I am perfectly happy just describing my tavern fighting fighter that way and use the normal rules for unarmed strikes and improvised weapons, the number of times it will come up in play is so very small, and take a feat that lets me do my job as an adventurer saving the lives of my companions and myself, something that will work in a fight against a dragon not some mook in a bar.

 

[evilbob]

I do think that mixing in stat boosts into feats is a bit boring. It kind of feels like they couldn't think of a good enough feat, so they propped it up with a stat boost.

That is exactly what they did. One of the recent articles mentioned that all feats are equal (or the goal is that they are close to) a +2 in a stat. Some feats are weaker, so they are +1 to a stat and whatever comes out to be about +1 in a stat. I believe we will be seeing many feats that are +1 to stat and something else. The interesting point here is that the bonus to the stat is more restricted as well, since you can only choose two stats instead of any.

Someone who starts with (or somehow ends up with) an odd primary stat could easily stand to pick something like this up, since the +2 isn't worth it to them and the bonus "stuff" is just gravy.

 

[Rune]

I think I will houserule this feat to allow the bonus action to be spent on trip or push, as well.

I might also boost improv weapon damage.

 

[jadrax]

I can't believe they got rid of the alcohol tolerance, though!

They also got rid of the Intoxicated condition.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Unless they change unarmed strikes to be light weapons this is a pointless feat, it gives you no real advantage over using a weapon, it is only for fluff not for any type of mechanical effectiveness or optimization. I would always choose another feat or a +2 to strength or +1 strength +1 other ability score over this feat.

Now if you could use your unarmed strike as a light weapon so that you could make an offhand attack that could provoke a grapple that would be useful.

You're only sacrificing a +1 to an ability score. One might have a character who can't really benefit from that extra +1, but can enjoy benefiting from the additional features added by this feat. And the ability to grapple as a bonus action is useful for a monk, who can attack with his full normal damage.

The bonus grapple action and bonus to Str or Con are the main parts of the feat, I think. The rest just makes you more versatile in a brawl.

Yes. My assessment of this feat is that it is appealing for anyone who wants to play that sort of character, (and since you are only giving up half of your ability score increase, it doesn't have to compete with a +2), and less appealing for anyone who isn't interested in playing that sort of character.

Which makes it about perfect for a feat.

 

[Evenglare]

They also got rid of the Intoxicated condition.

Well in that case.... 5e dropped.

 

[Sacrosanct]

If the feat doesn't come up almost every round of combat it is not a good investment.

As it stands I am perfectly happy just describing my tavern fighting fighter that way and use the normal rules for unarmed strikes and improvised weapons, the number of times it will come up in play is so very small, and take a feat that lets me do my job as an adventurer saving the lives of my companions and myself, something that will work in a fight against a dragon not some mook in a bar.

Firstly, here is the imagination thing I was talking about. Just because it says, "Tavern Brawler", you need to realize it's not just applicable fighting mooks in a bar. Think outside of the box. For example, this feat just screams traditional ninja, as ninja were reknown for being able to fight with "regular" tools. Taken prisoner? Need to sneak in without weapons? There's a huge list of things that can happen in game that a feat like this could be advantageous.

Secondly, and this refers to the actual quotes above. They seem contradictory, unless you spend more time in combat fighting dragons than you do "regular mooks". I think for most people, that's not the case. Also, and maybe this is the way you worded it, but there's a lot more to a game than combat. If a feat isn't used in every other round of combat, that hardly makes it worthless. Especially if it impacts the other two pillars of the game.