Rebalancing Feats

[Ashkelon]

I love the idea of feats. As a player, I want to choose feats over ability score increases. As a GM, I want players to choose feats over ability score increases. I find feats more flavorful and more mechanically interesting than ability score increases. The problem is, certain feats are not balanced very well. Some are grossly more powerful than others. On top of that, a +2 to an ability score is generally more potent than all but the most powerful feats. I want feats to be more tuned toward character customization, and less toward character optimization. I don't want the situation we have now, where certain feats are so overpowering that they feel "mandatory". I want to reduce the power of those overpowered feats, but also bring up the power of less powerful feats so every option is more balanced.

To that end, I propose the following changes be made to the following feats:

Charger: also increases your Strength by +1.
Defensive Duelist: also increases your Dexterity by +1.
Elemental Adept: also increases your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma by +1.
Grappler:also increases your Str by +1.
Great Weapon Master: no longer allows you to take -5 to hit for +10 to damage, but increases your Strength by +1.
Inspiring Leader: also increases your Charisma by +1.
Medium Armor Master: also increases your Dexterity by +1.
Polearm Master: no longer allows you to make an attack as a bonus action, but increases your Strength by +1.
Sharpshooter: no longer allows you to take -5 to hit for +10 to damage, but increases your Dexterity by +1.
Skilled: also increases an ability score of your choice by +1.

Additionally, to make feats and ability score increases more equal, when you choose to take an ability score increase, you cannot choose the +2 to a single score option.


[sblock=original impossible-to-read post]I love the idea of feats. As a player, I want to choose feats over ability score increases. As a GM, I want players to choose feats over ability score increases. I find feats more flavorful and more mechanically interesting than ability score increases. The problem is, certain feats are not balanced very well. Some are grossly more powerful than others. On top of that, a +2 to an ability score is generally more potent than all but the most powerful feats. I want feats to be more tuned toward character customization, and less toward character optimization. I don't want the situation we have now, where certain feats are so overpowering that they feel "mandatory". I want to reduce the power of those overpowered feats, but also bring up the power of less powerful feats so every option is more balanced.

To that end, I propose the following changes be made to the following feats:

Charger: also increases your Strength by +1.
Defensive Duelist: also increases your Dexterity by +1.
Elemental Adept: also increases your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma by +1.
Grappler:also increases your Str by +1.
Great Weapon Master: no longer allows you to take -5 to hit for +10 to damage, but increases your Strength by +1.
Inspiring Leader: also increases your Charisma by +1.
Medium Armor Master: also increases your Dexterity by +1.
Polearm Master: no longer allows you to make an attack as a bonus action, but increases your Strength by +1.
Sharpshooter: no longer allows you to take -5 to hit for +10 to damage, but increases your Dexterity by +1.
Skilled: also increases an ability score of your choice by +1.

Additionally, to make feats and ability score increases more equal, when you choose to take an ability score increase, you cannot choose the +2 to a single score option.[/sblock]

 

[SilverfireSage]

Just a quick question, how do you find an ability score increase to be vastly better but then say feats are more flavorful and more mechanically interesting? There's a lot of power in something being cooler than something else, and I haven't found the feats to be that weak in any of my playing. And with a couple of those (Great Weapon Master and Polearm Master) you're kind of taking what makes those feats special and destroying them. I really don't think they need this much of a buff.

Keep in mind that feats are generally there for the fighter to differentiate themselves in combat later on in levels, as they get far more ability score increases than anyone else. Having them this buffed along with their extra abilities will make fighters vastly more powerful than they are right now.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

You might find it easier simply to keep feats as they are and to give all characters a bonus feat at character creation (two for variant humans) perhaps with the caveat that they can't get more than +2 in any single attribute through combining their feat and attribute increases.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

Also I would not remove features from feats in exchange for the +1. I would allow both because the way you are doing it actually removes a lot of utility from the martial feats later on given that the people who are using them will still be getting to 20... but now will have fewer options on how to use them. You might as well give them the +1 and the optional bonus attack or bonus damage.

 

[Ashkelon]

Just a quick question, how do you find an ability score increase to be vastly better but then say feats are more flavorful and more mechanically interesting? There's a lot of power in something being cooler than something else, and I haven't found the feats to be that weak in any of my playing. And with a couple of those (Great Weapon Master and Polearm Master) you're kind of taking what makes those feats special and destroying them. I really don't think they need this much of a buff.

You misunderstand me. A +2 ability boost is way more powerful than most feats. Certain feats though are way more powerful than other feats. Particularly, feats that grant bonus action attacks and feats that allow you to take -5 to hit for +10 damage are far more potent than other feats. In an attempt to rebalance feats and ability score boosts, I upgraded some feats, weakened others, and changed ability boosts so that you cannot take the +2 to one score option.

Keep in mind that feats are generally there for the fighter to differentiate themselves in combat later on in levels, as they get far more ability score increases than anyone else. Having them this buffed along with their extra abilities will make fighters vastly more powerful than they are right now.

These changes are a net decrease in power for fighters, not an increase. Removing the bonus action attack options and the -5 to hit for +10 damage reduces the damage of weapon users at the highest levels of optimization. Remember ability scores are capped at 20. And because players cannot take a +2 bonus to a score, their primary attributes will increase much more slowly.

 

[Ashkelon]

You might find it easier simply to keep feats as they are and to give all characters a bonus feat at character creation (two for variant humans) perhaps with the caveat that they can't get more than +2 in any single attribute through combining their feat and attribute increases.

That doesn't really fix the problem with certain options being overpowered. The weapon specialization feats (Polearm Master, Great Weapon Master, Crossbow Expert, and Sharpshooter) are far more powerful than other combat feats. +2 to an ability score is far more powerful than other feats. Certain feats are just plain underpowered.

I'm trying to make ability boosts (+1 to two scores), weapon specialization feats (GWM, PM, SS, CE, etc), the combat feats (Armor Mastery, Charger, Defensive Duelist, Etc), and the noncombat feats all more balanced against one another. I don't like that certain feats are basically mandatory for optimization. I would much rather have optimization lowered across the board with all feats being more universally equal.

 

[SilverfireSage]

You misunderstand me. A +2 ability boost is way more powerful than most feats. Certain feats though are way more powerful than other feats. Particularly, feats that grant bonus action attacks and feats that allow you to take -5 to hit for +10 damage are far more potent than other feats. In an attempt to rebalance feats and ability score boosts, I upgraded some feats, weakened others, and changed ability boosts so that you cannot take the +2 to one score option.

These changes are a net decrease in power for fighters, not an increase. Removing the bonus action attack options and the -5 to hit for +10 damage reduces the damage of weapon users at the highest levels of optimization. Remember ability scores are capped at 20. And because players cannot take a +2 bonus to a score, their primary attributes will increase much more slowly.

My point is that they don't really need balancing. Most of the feats are aimed exactly towards fighters, and the others seem to be reasonably good depending on how you want your character. The reverse seems to have happened in your dealing with feats, in that there would be absolutely no point to picking the ability score increases if you can pick a feat and get it, while also getting another ability. I'm fine with most classes thinking that their ability scores are the best thing to make better. Heck, the game pushes that on you right away by including the feats in the optional section. But after a fighter gets his 2 primary scores up, he's going to want some other options, and feats give him that.

I guess I need to know, why do you think that ability score increases are so much better? Is an extra +1 on charisma checks better than, say, getting advantage on Deception and Performance? You say that you don't like how certain feats are basically mandatory for optimization, but they aren't for optimization in the first place. They're for specialization.

 

[Wrathamon]

+2 to an ability score is far more powerful than other feats. Certain feats are just plain underpowered.

How are you determining this?

 

[Ashkelon]

My point is that they don't really need balancing. Most of the feats are aimed exactly towards fighters, and the others seem to be reasonably good depending on how you want your character. The reverse seems to have happened in your dealing with feats, in that there would be absolutely no point to picking the ability score increases if you can pick a feat and get it, while also getting another ability. I'm fine with most classes thinking that their ability scores are the best thing to make better. Heck, the game pushes that on you right away by including the feats in the optional section. But after a fighter gets his 2 primary scores up, he's going to want some other options, and feats give him that.

I guess I need to know, why do you think that ability score increases are so much better? Is an extra +1 on charisma checks better than, say, getting advantage on Deception and Performance? You say that you don't like how certain feats are basically mandatory for optimization, but they aren't for optimization in the first place. They're for specialization.

I primarily mean for classes primary attributes.

For a sorcerer, warlock, or bard +2 to charisma is significantly better than +1 charisma and advantage on Performance and Deception only while disguised as another person.

Also, I am actually quite alright if people don't choose the +1 to two different ability scores as often as they choose feats. As I said before, I find feats to be more interesting than ability boosts, which is why I am making this rebalance in the first place. I would much rather players choose feats like Actor or Inspiring Leader than simply focusing on maximizing their primary attribute and then taking the most optimized DPR feats.

 

[SilverfireSage]

I primarily mean for classes primary attributes.

For a sorcerer, warlock, or bard +2 to charisma is significantly better than +1 charisma and advantage on Performance and Deception only while disguised as another person.

Unless the player wants to make a character that's really good at disguising and bluffing people. Remember, feats are for optimizing, they're for specializing. That person is now going to be vastly better at those things than a character who doesn't have them, and only somewhat less powerful in other regards (a +1 vs a +2 isn't that huge a difference).

Also, I am actually quite alright if people don't choose the +1 to two different ability scores as often as they choose feats. As I said before, I find feats to be more interesting than ability boosts, which is why I am making this rebalance in the first place. I would much rather players choose feats like Actor or Inspiring Leader than simply focusing on maximizing their primary attribute and then taking the most optimized DPR feats.

Then why take away some of the most powerful parts of those feats? Taking away the damage portion of great weapon master makes it far worse, and destroys the very point of that feat. I still feel like you're vastly overvaluing a +1 to an ability score.