Rebalancing Feats - input appreciated

JValeur

Visitor
I've attempted to rebalance the feats in the Player's Handbook. Some of them were too strong, some too weak, and others inappropriately interpreted. I've tried to keep the changes as simple as possible, as to not complicate the rules more than possible. I've included notes under each feat and written a rating (after my change) that I think is appropriate - bear in mind, though, that some feats are situational (ie. worthless in some builds, key in others). I think this is a start in rebalancing the feats - but there's still some lacking. Any input and suggestions are appreciated.

Complete feats PDF attached.
View attachment Feats.pdf

CHANGELOG- VERSION 1.0 - Blue is correction - Green is improvement - Red is nerfed


Alert
No changes. Already decently strong.

Athlete
Added advantage against exhaustion caused by strenous activity, because this needed some improvement,

Actor
No changes. Still weak, I feel. Input appreciated.

Charger
Added scaling damage to the attack, or knock prone to the shove. Feels this makes this feat more worthwhile.

Crossbow Expert
Added 'made with a crossbow' to second feature, to avoid abuse (applying it to spell attacks or other ranged attacks).


Defensive Duelist
Added a riposte attack, if the bonus causes your foe to miss you. This makes the feat more worthwhile, in my opinion.


Dual Wielder
You now make your off-hand attack as a part of your attack action. You are still limited to one off-hand attack per round (unless you use Action surge, in which case you can now make two). This makes TWF more viable at higher levels (which it needed), and even better for a rogue (possibly an issue).

Dungeon Delver
No change, already strong.

Durable
Added advantage on death saving throws. Still weakish, but this brings it up a nudge.


Elemental Adept
Added a reactionary damage resistance. I hate doing this, because I think that the way 5E is doing it (vulnerability/resistance) is really good, and this adds unnecessary complexity. But straight resistance is too strong, I think.

Grappler
Second feature removed as per the errata, but added an opportunity to grapple larger foes at a disadvantage. This makes the feat worth a grab, for the dedicated grappler.

Great Weapon Master
Changed -5/+10 to -3/+6. This reigns in the feats power level slightly, while not completely devaluing it. I feel this is a needed balancing act.

Healer
No changes, but could use a buff, I think. Input appreciated.

Heavily Armored
No changes, but could use a buff, I think. Input appreciated.

Heavy Armor Master
No changes, already strong.

Inspiring Leader
No changes, already strong.

Keen Mind
Added advantage on Intelligence (Investigation) checks that require attention to detail. Slight improvement, but probably still a weak feat.


Lightly Armored
No changes, but still kinda weak.

Linguist
Added advantage on Insight checks to understand unknown languages. Still kinda weak though.

Lucky
No changes, already really good.

Mage Slayer
No changes, decent for a specific build, I think.

Magic Initiate
No changes, already strong.

Martial Adept
Increased the number of dice from 1 to 2, to make this more worthwhile.


Medium Armor Master
No changes, already decent.

Mobile
No changes, already decent.

Moderately Armored
No changes, but still kinda weak. Input appreciated.

Mounted Combatant
No changes, situational but good.

Observant
No changes, already good.

Polearm Master
Now includes spears as well (because if you include quarterstaves, you really should include spears!) Also fixed in accordance with Crawford ruling, to only allow OA's from the polearm.

Resilient
No changes, already strong.

Ritual Caster
No changes, already strong.

Savage Attacker
Added a Strength bonus. This makes the feat more par for the course.

Sentinel
Added check if the creature is larger than you. Please, no more stopping dragons with ease.


Sharpshooter
Changed -5/+10 to -3/+6 proficiency. Same reasoning as GWM.


Shield Master
No changes, already decent.


Skilled
Changed a lot. You now get a bonus to an ability score, and proficiency/expertise in a single skill, instead of proficiency in three skills. I feel that people would very rarely feel the need for 3 proficiencies, so this feat gets overlooked because people feel parts of it is a waste ("eh.. I want stealth, and I guess I'll take acrobatics and.. uh.. Persuasion too.."). This way, I think it's less wasteful.


Skulker
No changes, already good.

Spell Sniper
No changes, already decent.

Tavern Brawl
No changes, good for the dedicated grappler, if not much else.

Tough
No changes, already strong.

War Caster
No changes, already decent.

Weapons Master
Increased to all martial weapons, because this feature needs less restrictions, not more. In an ideal world, I think this should be combined with the armor feats in a way that would make them more useful. I'll think on it.
 
Last edited:

Xeviat

Explorer
I'll digest at home. I'm very interested in helping. My first thought is that skill feats could be removed and added into the proficiency progression, allowing everyone to learn new tricks with their skills. But that's only if you want a big change.
 

JValeur

Visitor
I'll digest at home. I'm very interested in helping. My first thought is that skill feats could be removed and added into the proficiency progression, allowing everyone to learn new tricks with their skills. But that's only if you want a big change.
Great! I'm going for small changes initially, because I actually want (and have, to a degree) to implement these feats as houserules in my campaign. I feel that 5E is a great ruleset, but it has some balance issues on items and feats in particular (where some items/feats are either must-haves or completely obsolete), so I'm trying to fix those, in the least invasive way I can. I'm excited to see your ideas though - even if they include a complete overhaul ;)
 

CapnZapp

Hero
Stopped at Actor. How can you rate a stat bump feat only 1/5?

What I would do is use a more rational rating system:

Each stat bump ("half feat") is rated at 2,5 stars. This way, a feat that is neither weaker nor stronger than taking no feat at all is 5 stars. The few feats that are consistently rated better than taking a +2 bonus will then get higher ratings than 5. Only feats with no ability increase that also provide worthless other stuff can and will be rated lower than 2,5 stars (*cough* savage attacker *cough*).

By this system, Actor is at least 2,5 stars. You might rate the deception and mimicry only half a star, but I've seen it in action and would rate it at 1 star. This places Actor at 3,5 stars; a much more reasonable rating.

Likewise, Tavern Brawler is essential to any grappling build. Rating it 1 star only means "I have no idea how to optimize grappling". Rate it 2,5 stars if you will, but never lower since you do get a +1 stat bump. Myself, I'd add half a star for the flexibility (the feat works both for Strength builds and Con builds), and then a full star to the rating, since I know how valuable the feat is to those builds that need it: 4 stars. The fact it is worthless (meaning 2,5 stars; you do get the stat bump) to people not interested in grappling is irrelevant.

Great Weapon Master (and Sharpshooter) on the other hand is probably a 6 star feat, to make a comparison. While is it grating to see +10 damage at low levels, it is actually with higher level it truly becomes unbalanced. (At low levels you gain the impressive and frankly verisimilitude-shattering ability to deal twice as much damage as anyone else; but it is at higher levels the actual game becomes unbalanced, since it is only here your actual DPR shoots through the roof. At low levels, you miss too often for GWM to break your DPR compared to others).

As regards to Skilled, you have made changes, but you either never wrote why or that part has gotten lost by now. I can't provide meaningful feedback unless you tell us why you're not happy with a particular feat; why you make the changes you make.

Regards,
 

JValeur

Visitor
Stopped at Actor. How can you rate a stat bump feat only 1/5?

What I would do is use a more rational rating system:

Each stat bump ("half feat") is rated at 2,5 stars. This way, a feat that is neither weaker nor stronger than taking no feat at all is 5 stars. The few feats that are consistently rated better than taking a +2 bonus will then get higher ratings than 5. Only feats with no ability increase that also provide worthless other stuff can and will be rated lower than 2,5 stars (*cough* savage attacker *cough*).

By this system, Actor is at least 2,5 stars. You might rate the deception and mimicry only half a star, but I've seen it in action and would rate it at 1 star. This places Actor at 3,5 stars; a much more reasonable rating.

Likewise, Tavern Brawler is essential to any grappling build. Rating it 1 star only means "I have no idea how to optimize grappling". Rate it 2,5 stars if you will, but never lower since you do get a +1 stat bump. Myself, I'd add half a star for the flexibility (the feat works both for Strength builds and Con builds), and then a full star to the rating, since I know how valuable the feat is to those builds that need it: 4 stars. The fact it is worthless (meaning 2,5 stars; you do get the stat bump) to people not interested in grappling is irrelevant.
Good points, and I can see that some of my ratings might be off. But they are only guidemarks - it's the changes that are the point here, not putting a rating on the feats. I'm not trying to create a rating system, I'm trying to look at the feats and ask myself - is this feat worth taking? And in that regard, I don't really think actor is a valuable feat. I could be wrong though - I haven't seen it in action. I wasn't aware of the grapple build with Tavern Brawler, so of course, that would change things.

But, I would value your input more on the changes - or suggestion to changes - than at the ratings. You can ignore the ratings, if you wish :).

Great Weapon Master (and Sharpshooter) on the other hand is probably a 6 star feat, to make a comparison. While is it grating to see +10 damage at low levels, it is actually with higher level it truly becomes unbalanced. (At low levels you gain the impressive and frankly verisimilitude-shattering ability to deal twice as much damage as anyone else; but it is at higher levels the actual game becomes unbalanced, since it is only here your actual DPR shoots through the roof. At low levels, you miss too often for GWM to break your DPR compared to others).

As regards to Skilled, you have made changes, but you either never wrote why or that part has gotten lost by now. I can't provide meaningful feedback unless you tell us why you're not happy with a particular feat; why you make the changes you make.

Regards,
I still think GWM and Sharpshooter are really strong (and must-haves for some builds), but I think the change I've made is a step towards making them a little less so.

Skilled was changed, because while I can see players want to get another one or two proficiencies, I don't think many players will feel the need for 3 new skills. An ability bonus, a skill proficiency (or expertise) makes more sense to me, both in a gamesense and narratively.

I'll make sure to update my reasoning on each feat, for easier reading.

Thanks for your input.
 

dave2008

Hero
I'm not trying to create a rating system, I'm trying to look at the feats and ask myself - is this feat worth taking? And in that regard, I don't really think actor is a valuable feat. I could be wrong though - I haven't seen it in action.
I think you are missing something here though. How can you (or more importantly someone reading your analysis/changes), properly determine how to balance something if you do not have it correctly rated. If you rate something a (1) and you do x,y, & z to make it a (3) that sounds good. However, if it should have been initially rated a (4), you have just made it a (6), which is not so good. Thus, I agree with CapnZapp, a more thought rating system can be vary valuable when your trying to balance something and your soliciting input from others.
 

JValeur

Visitor
I think you are missing something here though. How can you (or more importantly someone reading your analysis/changes), properly determine how to balance something if you do not have it correctly rated. If you rate something a (1) and you do x,y, & z to make it a (3) that sounds good. However, if it should have been initially rated a (4), you have just made it a (6), which is not so good. Thus, I agree with CapnZapp, a more thought rating system can be vary valuable when your trying to balance something and your soliciting input from others.
I can see the point you're making and I do appreciate comments on the current balance of the feats. I've also taken CapnZapps comments into account. But, since my goal is not to rate everything correctly, but to balance it correctly, I would appreciate input on not only my (subjective) ratings (that were also based on ratings from others, who had evaluated the feats) but on the changes I've made :)
 

dave2008

Hero
I can see the point you're making and I do appreciate comments on the current balance of the feats. I've also taken CapnZapps comments into account. But, since my goal is not to rate everything correctly, but to balance it correctly, I would appreciate input on not only my (subjective) ratings (that were also based on ratings from others, who had evaluated the feats) but on the changes I've made :)
Understood, but it makes it a lot harder to balance something if your ratings are not well thought out and balanced. I'm suggesting you will get better results if you do spend the time get a decent rating system.

Now regarding Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter. I like your adjustment thematically; however, I think you misunderstand when it is unbalanced. Because of bounded accuracy this feat is much more unbalanced at higher levels, when the -5 to hit is not much of a penalty, but the +10 damage is huge when you multiply it X4 (or X8 w/ action surge). Yours is an improvement (-6 vs -5), but you have also upped the damage by 8/16.

I guess the bigger questions is what is the balancing point. Do you want all feats to be a rank 5 or are you trying to make then a rank 3? Do we bring the low ones up or the strong ones down? Of course these should be balanced around ability score bonuses, so each each should be as good as +1 to hit and +1 to damage. If that is the metric (it is by default, but it is unclear in your post as you completely discount the +1 feats), then the weak ones need a buff and the strong ones a nerf.
 

JValeur

Visitor
Understood, but it makes it a lot harder to balance something if your ratings are not well thought out and balanced. I'm suggesting you will get better results if you do spend the time get a decent rating system.

Now regarding Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter. I like your adjustment thematically; however, I think you misunderstand when it is unbalanced. Because of bounded accuracy this feat is much more unbalanced at higher levels, when the -5 to hit is not much of a penalty, but the +10 damage is huge when you multiply it X4 (or X8 w/ action surge). Yours is an improvement (-6 vs -5), but you have also upped the damage by 8/16.

I guess the bigger questions is what is the balancing point. Do you want all feats to be a rank 5 or are you trying to make then a rank 3? Do we bring the low ones up or the strong ones down? Of course these should be balanced around ability score bonuses, so each each should be as good as +1 to hit and +1 to damage. If that is the metric (it is by default, but it is unclear in your post as you completely discount the +1 feats), then the weak ones need a buff and the strong ones a nerf.
I agree. I shouldn't have posted those ratings - they weren't well enough thought out, and took attention from the real purpose.

You are right about GWM and Sharpshooter. I had not witnessed them at high level play, and was seeing only the consequences at low-mid level play. I've changed it from proficiency to -3/+6, which seems to be a more appropriate fix.

My intention is to make all feats worthwhile, have no feats that are must-haves or abusable, and to put a stop to the too powerful ones. I think this list I've posted is closer, although I can see some feats very rarely being picked up.

I've uploaded my work so far as a color-coded PDF, with a changelog below.
 
Firstly, I have a problem that you altered Crossbow Expert. Even the Sage Advice said that it was supposed to work with any ranged attack roll, even spells. Second, Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter are meant to feel strong. It's a high-risk/high-reward mechanic for a reason. Even with Advantage, you're virtually removing your attack roll modifiers. That's why it's so lethal. They want to hit hard when they connect in exchange for hitting less often. That's their choice. Thirdly, Martial Adept is meant to have only one Superiority Die because a Fighter only has 6 at level 15 and starts with 4. The feat is meant to let other characters feel stronger without making the Fighter feel inadequate. I can say for sure I don't want a Battle Master Fighter getting another two Superiority Dice each day. Especially when they get them all back after a Short or Long Rest. I thoroughly agree that Grappler needs some modifications, since it can currently be completely negated by just grappling the target, and then knocking them prone. The rest I'm okay with.
 

JValeur

Visitor
Firstly, I have a problem that you altered Crossbow Expert. Even the Sage Advice said that it was supposed to work with any ranged attack roll, even spells.
I am aware of that, but I think it's nonsensical. It's called Crossbow Expert, for crying out loud. If there's a void for not having disadvantage in close quarters while ranged, I'd rather have an entirely new feat for that. 'Point Blank Combatant' or similarly, like 3.5. But is the option really necessary - isn't it okay, that melee people get this small advantage over ranged?

Second, Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter are meant to feel strong. It's a high-risk/high-reward mechanic for a reason. Even with Advantage, you're virtually removing your attack roll modifiers. That's why it's so lethal. They want to hit hard when they connect in exchange for hitting less often. That's their choice.
Literally everywhere I've read, the feat is called very strong, or too strong. Reducing it by a small margin brings GWF more in line with TWF and S + B. They're still making the same choice, and the concept of the feat hasn't been altered - the impact has just been reduced by 40%.

Thirdly, Martial Adept is meant to have only one Superiority Die because a Fighter only has 6 at level 15 and starts with 4. The feat is meant to let other characters feel stronger without making the Fighter feel inadequate. I can say for sure I don't want a Battle Master Fighter getting another two Superiority Dice each day. Especially when they get them all back after a Short or Long Rest.
I can see your point here. Two dice may be too many. I still think the feat is too weak without a change, however. What about raising the die type to a D8?

I thoroughly agree that Grappler needs some modifications, since it can currently be completely negated by just grappling the target, and then knocking them prone. The rest I'm okay with.
Thanks for your input, man! Awesome to get a second pair of eyes on it! :)
 
As far as I can tell, none of the feats are unbalanced or too strong or too weak, they just help in different ways. The only feat that I'd say is actually too weak is Grappler, since it's basically useless. The others are designed this way for a reason. If they were truly a problem, they'd have been erattad when it came out. Plus, as a DM, you're free to make changes to the game however you see fit. I don't edit the base game, merely expand upon it. The only thing I've ever altered was the Grappler Feat, and even that was just to preserve the spirit of the feat. The only reason people complain about Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master is because they allow their players access to their abilities far too often. How often would you take that -5 if you didn't have Advantage? You wouldn't. So, if you don't have Advantage, you won't see that +10 too often. Problem solved. The issue with them isn't the power of the feat, its the DM failing to respond to them. Make your players feel strong every now and again, yes, but don't let them break your game.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
A recent thread about Healer being too strong and Durable being too weak has me wanting to bump this thread for more breadth.
 

Xeviat

Explorer
I know I said I'd come back to this "yesterday" 4 years ago ... But I will when I'm back at my computer.

I'm curious that you thought Healer might need a buff.
 

Xeviat

Explorer
Okay, so I'm finally at a computer so I can type a bit better than on my phone.

I'm going to start with the assumption that feats should be worth +2 to an ability score. The problem is not all ability scores are really equal, nor are all ability scores equal for every character (Con is useful for everyone, Dex is useful for most, Wis is pretty useful because of the ubiquity of Wis saves ...). Every ability score comes with Bonus to hit/DCs and sometimes damage, but not every character can tap into these. Okay, well that's fine. We can still use that to say that, since Con is +1 hp/level and +1 con save (and some random con checks or round timers), it's fair to say that +1 hp/level is worth half a feat and thus Toughness is an okay feat (not the best, no one's going to do a backflip to take it, and I'd argue that it's slightly weak since Con also improves HD rolls, but that's kind of part of another discussion).

One problem is the inclusion of combat feats among non-combat feats. I really think the game could have benefited strongly with separating these. Alternatively, combat feats could have been about the creation of options rather than strict power gains (like learning new cantrips or spells, and trade off maneuvers for weapon combat). Maybe we can save that for 6th Edition.

CHANGELOG- VERSION 1.0 - Blue is correction - Green is improvement - Red is nerfed
Athlete
Added advantage against exhaustion caused by strenous activity, because this needed some improvement,


I probably would have baked a bunch of those effects into skill checks. Then I'd just lump this into an Expertise feat where you get +1 to an ability score and training or expertise in a skill.

Actor
No changes. Still weak, I feel. Input appreciated.
I don't this this is weak, just highly situational. I don't play intrigue focused games (I don't think the system is good for it). But, again, the mimicry could be a skill check and advantage could be replaced with expertise for that earlier feat idea.

Charger
Added scaling damage to the attack, or knock prone to the shove. Feels this makes this feat more worthwhile.


Definitely needs scaling. A prone on the shove would be nice too; +5 feet really doesn't feel like much (I think the amount you shove someone should already be a function of your opposed strength check).

Crossbow Expert
Added 'made with a crossbow' to second feature, to avoid abuse (applying it to spell attacks or other ranged attacks).


I see where you're coming from, but I don't see a spellcaster spending a whole feat to get that one effect. Limit this feat, but add in a feat to get this (I'm really surprised it's not part of warcaster).

Defensive Duelist
Added a riposte attack, if the bonus causes your foe to miss you. This makes the feat more worthwhile, in my opinion.


You felt this feat was weak? It feels like a situational, at-will, nerfed Shield spell. My only issue with it is that it doesn't synergize with the rogue's Uncanny Dodge, and they're the class I would most expect to pick up this feat.

Dual Wielder
You now make your off-hand attack as a part of your attack action. You are still limited to one off-hand attack per round (unless you use Action surge, in which case you can now make two). This makes TWF more viable at higher levels (which it needed), and even better for a rogue (possibly an issue).


So, I'm a big hater on the current way TWFing works. This fix still only amounts to +1 to damage per attack and +1 AC. Yes, not costing a bonus action would help a lot of builds, so that's where it's real strength would lie (as it would stack with action surge, be usable with martial arts, be usable with cunning action, be usable alongside rage and bonus action spells ...). I'd prefer to not fix TWFing with a feat, though, and I really want to see TWFing not cost a bonus action since the other styles don't.

Durable
Added advantage on death saving throws. Still weakish, but this brings it up a nudge.


I've been convinced to just get rid of it, and to have Toughness also heal +2 HP on every HD rolled. That way Toughness is more equivalent to half of Constitution, and no more feat that does nearly nothing for some characters (and a ton for others).

Elemental Adept
Added a reactionary damage resistance. I hate doing this, because I think that the way 5E is doing it (vulnerability/resistance) is really good, and this adds unnecessary complexity. But straight resistance is too strong, I think.


Xanathar's has a feat, "Infernal constitution" that grants +1 Con, and 2 resistances, and advantage on saves against being poisoned. I don't think they value resistance quite so much. Armor of Resistance is a rare item, though, so maybe this is just racial feats having more oomph. Reaction resistance is part of the Absorb Elements spell, but you've weakened it considerably.

Grappler
Second feature removed as per the errata, but added an opportunity to grapple larger foes at a disadvantage. This makes the feat worth a grab, for the dedicated grappler.


I don't think anyone is going to succeed on grabbing a large creature if they have disadvantage; large creatures tend to have higher strength. With the right tools, regular people can grab and hold still large animals (lassoing or holding the reins of a horse, for instance), so I'd be happy with the feat letting people grab large creatures (maybe not pin them, I don't know, beowulf wrestled grendle).

Great Weapon Master
Changed -5/+10 to -3/+6. This reigns in the feats power level slightly, while not completely devaluing it. I feel this is a needed balancing act.


+10 damage is way too much at first level and I've seen that happen twice with human barbarians. It feels like too much damage at 5th level with Extra Attack too. So I agree with you. I want to see it tied in with Proficiency bonus though; give up your proficiency bonus to hit and apply double your proficiency bonus to damage.

Healer
No changes, but could use a buff, I think. Input appreciated.
God, it could use a nerf. Over the course of a day, if you only used it on yourself, this feat offers more HP than Toughness does, and we established that toughness is a relatively balanced, if boring, feat. And you can use it on the whole party. I'd make it take longer than a round and buff the raw healer's kit and just accept that the healer's kit is part of the adventuring resources so they can actually get through those 6 to 8 medium encounters per day. =)

Heavily Armored
No changes, but could use a buff, I think. Input appreciated.
No buff, I think it's fine. It's +1 AC for someone with a Dex 14 and Medium armor, and more if you have lower Dex. Plus it's a half feat. +1 AC feels like half a feat to me (don't look at me Dex, you're an overpowered stat but it's only okay because medium and heavy armor characters don't use you as much).

Keen Mind
Added advantage on Intelligence (Investigation) checks that require attention to detail. Slight improvement, but probably still a weak feat.


Again, make these functions of skill checks and introduce that Expertise feat.

Lightly Armored
No changes, but still kinda weak.
This is +2 AC (studded leather) for characters without armor proficiency. This is the wizard, right? The wizard could spend a spell slot on Mage Armor, and Elven Chain isn't super rare. It's boring, but it fits into my view of feat balance.

Linguist
Added advantage on Insight checks to understand unknown languages. Still kinda weak though.


Considering you can learn languages in downtime now, that comprehend languages is a first level ritual spell, I'd be more than happy to let the "Linguist" character know basically all the languages (like all the languages of the PC races) and checks to learn rarer languages.

Magic Initiate
No changes, already strong.
I actually would like to sit down and investigate this. Spell Sniper shows that learning a cantrip isn't worth a full feat. If the 1st level spell 1/day is worth a half a feat, I really don't think it is. Look at the healer feat vs. Magic Initiate with cure wounds. Look at the value of using that spell slot for Smite (not sure if you could, but just to get an idea of how much power this feat is giving); that's +2d8 damage, per day. You've already said that you thought Martial Adept needs an extra die. If baseline hit chances are around 65%, then +1 to hit is about a 8% increase in damage, on every attack across a day. Damage scales with level.

Magic Initiate needs a buff. At minimum, it should be a slot that is regained on a short or long rest. At best, the slot should grow in size based on your level. I can sit down and do the math on it later, it's on my to do list.

Martial Adept
Increased the number of dice from 1 to 2, to make this more worthwhile.


I agree this needs to be looked at. I think the Fighter gets too many dice at 3rd level compared to what the Eldritch Knight gets, and I think class abilities at a level should be worth around a feat because of the way the MC system works (which is a reason I don't like Extra Attack being part of class progressions), but my Battle Master rewrite has 2 dice at 3rd level so I think that would be fine for a feat (plus it's smaller and it teaches less maneuvers).

Moderately Armored
No changes, but still kinda weak. Input appreciated.
I think it's fine. For low Dex characters, it's an AC boost, plus you get a shield which is even more of an AC boost.

Polearm Master
Now includes spears as well (because if you include quarterstaves, you really should include spears!) Also fixed in accordance with Crawford ruling, to only allow OA's from the polearm.


I would probably also require that quarterstaff and spear should only work when they're being wielded two-handed. Holding a spear in one hand and whacking someone with the backside of it is stupid, and if you're going to allow that then I want to be able to skull bash people with my sword pommel as a bonus action.

Savage Attacker
Added a Strength bonus. This makes the feat more par for the course.


I feel like it's still not that much, but it definitely helps.

Sentinel
Added check if the creature is larger than you. Please, no more stopping dragons with ease.


I don't think the feat is overpowered, but a check seems fair for this. Like, imagine a fighter hitting the tarasque with an OA and it stops ...

Sharpshooter
Changed -5/+10 to -3/+6 proficiency. Same reasoning as GWM.


I vote -Prof/+2xProf. But, I don't like that it can be done with hand crossbows. Power Attack used to be - to hit/+ to damage, and the damage was doubled for two-handed. That kind of goes for stacking GWM on top of Polearm Master's bonus action. I don't like it.

Skilled
Changed a lot. You now get a bonus to an ability score, and proficiency/expertise in a single skill, instead of proficiency in three skills. I feel that people would very rarely feel the need for 3 proficiencies, so this feat gets overlooked because people feel parts of it is a waste ("eh.. I want stealth, and I guess I'll take acrobatics and.. uh.. Persuasion too.."). This way, I think it's less wasteful.


I'm with you. Are you saying proficiency and expertise, or "or"?

Weapons Master
Increased to all martial weapons, because this feature needs less restrictions, not more. In an ideal world, I think this should be combined with the armor feats in a way that would make them more useful. I'll think on it.
What, pair simple weapons with light armor and pair martial weapons with heavy armor? (Medium gets shields)?

Since I cannot think of any class, except maaaaaybe the cleric, who don't have martial weapons who would gain benefit from martial weapons, and have abilities that use weapons (so life, maybe nature if they didn't pick up shillelagh, and trickery), I'm not concerned with mixing these. Martial weapons are, for the most part, +1 damage over their simple counterparts. If you only have 1 attack, I'm not concerned with this, and everyone with extra attack already has martial weapons or doesn't need them (monk).

Hope those thoughts help!
 

Yaarel

Adventurer
I consider balancing options a high priority. I appreciate those who think about these carefully.



‘Situational’ is ‘less useful’, because it is less frequent, and in that sense ‘weak’.

Regarding frequency:

An ability that is used every encounter is useful.

About once per adventure is ‘less useful’.

And less than that sucks.
 

Xeviat

Explorer
I consider balancing options a high priority. I appreciate those who think about these carefully.



‘Situational’ is ‘less useful’, because it is less frequent, and in that sense ‘weak’.

Regarding frequency:

An ability that is used every encounter is useful.

About once per adventure is ‘less useful’.

And less than that sucks.

I agree! That's a really good way to put it all together. Those weird situational skill uses and new uses for skills should just be options in the skills.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Oof. Skilled is one of the most frequently taken feats in my group, and it would drop off dramatically if it were changed to proficiency and expertise in a single skill. I wouldn't even have vaguely considered it for any of the character's I've taken it on.

Only on a Bard can I imagine not seeing it as worthwhile. No class gets enough skills, IMO.
 

Stalker0

Adventurer
Just noting, two of my players have taken Actor in different games. Still consider it one of the coolest and best feats in the game.

The ability to perfectly mimic voices is an incredible power in the right hands.
 

Immoralkickass

Explorer
Savage Attacker still sucks. The problem is not only with the once per turn, and limiting to melee weapon attacks only. It also forces you to reroll ALL the damage dice.

A half-orc fighter who crits with his greataxe will roll 3d12. If his result was 1-1-12, you bet he'd reroll for sure. But the result of the reroll could be 2-2-1. Even if 2/3 dice got an increase, its still a decrease in total damage.
 

Advertisement

Top