While this math is approximately correct, its also why we play 3-5 combat encounters between rests, or 36-60 attacks. So getting those 4 extra hits in means less than if you are only making 24 attacks.
The issue isn't with the feats, its the adventuring day, and every build assumes frequent short rests to make sure those builds don't run out of resources. If you make your players have more encounters and random encounter then more then to "burst" feats and features lose value while feats and features with staying power gain in value. That's a DM and group issue, and frankly an assumption in published material that you can just rest wherever and whenever you want and the DM wont bother. That WILL NOT happen with any good DM.
POTA specifically put in some places where it might be safe to rest. The DM has to add some in and make sure the environment and creatures act appropriately. In the Caves of Chaos the denizens might not look for you, in the Hobgoblin caves run as a military camp full of lawful creatures your resting players will encounter search parties, patrols, etc to keep them on their toes.
I had no issues with any of the feats I always put the blame on the GM's then I get told that i am telling them how to play. While 5e is not perfect I think to many on this form have over analyze about them yet feat are optional; what ever this has been a dead horse argument beaten to death there are plenty of options I am old school d&d and 1e guy so I have no arguments over edition wars which is were I see most the arguments about the feats come from especially from people that mainly did 3 to 4 were they had rules for every little thing from my understanding. With 5e that is not the case and so we get in these over analysis when there are plenty of options available for DM's that do not like the feats.
Last edited: