D&D General Subclass and Feat Path thoughts (+)

[Silam]

My basic issue with the "thematic feat path" concept is that feats come so rarely in 5e that it feels almost just as constrained as taking a subclass (and is battling with taking an often much needed ASI).

This is a bummer, but also an opportunity.

It is seen as normal to reach 20 in your main stat by level 20. With a stat at 15 from point buy and a +2 from a background, that means you can start at 17 and need just 1.5 ASIs or 3 half-feats. If you were frugal with point buy and/or you slammed the wall of sucky backgrounds at a table that didn’t allow custom ones, you may be further away from the goal of a 20. Then there are MAD builds who would ideally end up with 2 x 20s, which is 3.5 ASIs or a whopping 7 half-feats if starting from the optimal 16 and 17 (often difficult with PHB backgrounds).

Why am I saying this is an opportunity, rather than a major bummer?

Because it means the ceiling for acceptable power creep in new feats is still fairly high above the status quo.

Consider that a +1 bump to a stat mod provides +1 to attack/damage/DCs, one save, a few skills, and maybe other mechanics (AC, init, feature usage / day…). It’s a lot, and that’s why we want those stats at 20. But in terms of creating new feats, it means (roughly speaking) that if a feat gave a +1 to ALL of that it would be balanced! (That’s not quite true because if you had a stat at 20 and tacked on that hypothetical feat on top then you’d get effectively to 22, and let’s say that’s too much…).

But what it means is that half feats and especially full feats can afford to be more powerful than the current crop of available feats without utterly breaking the game. There is slack in the system. If a collection of many good full feats are competitive with ASIs, then a player might not mind letting their build finish level 20 with a main stat of 18 or maybe even 16. If they do choose to have their main stat at +4 or even +3 rather than +5, then that is a fairly big nerf, and it can justify getting a big boost from cool feats in exchange.

A bunch of things buried alphabetically in the feats section which someone has to sort out by crossrefrencing prerequisites, etc. does not have the same impact. Which is all to say that feat chains are for players who want to put some work in, and that the most evocative or widely appealing ideas should probably not be buried in feat chains. Partly this is just an issue of presentation, of course.

Emphasis mine. This is key. Presenting feats well and not just alphabetically is critical for adoption.

 

[CreamCloud0]

One of the worst things about the current incarnation of feats is just how little they tend to scale, they’re a one-and-done power bump in one particular specific way, i take magic Initiate and i get two cantrips and a once-a-day first level spell, wow, so impressive, my 17th level assassin rogue still only knows how to cast Disguise Self once a day despite knowing and casting it repeatedly since 4th level.

So yeah, that’s something I think would need to be fixed for properly expressing character concepts through feat selection.

I had similar thoughts about why i liked PB/day scaled features, people said they were bad because you could hypothetically dip and pick one up and significantly benefit from it without ever investing anything else in that class, but that was a good thing in my book, i might only have one level in, say, cleric, but I’m not a first level character, i can have 19 levels worth of experience being ‘just a first level cleric’, and that experience should show.

 

[jmartkdr2]

If one wanted to make really strong use of feat paths, it might be good to offer subclasses of nothing but feats: ie your fighter subclass is Warrior, and all of your subclass features are either feats of extra Fighting Styles (maybe some masteries) - this makes is a lot easier to dive into a feat path (to be the dragonborn-iest dragonborn yo can be, or whatever)

I can see a slight worry of "what if someone picks all generic options?" but as log as Bob the Human Fighter holds his own then that character being boring to play is on Bob's player.

Although Fighters are probably the worst example class - a full caster with bonus feats can go in some really interesting directions, especially if niche magic tends to be available via feat paths.

 

[Maxperson]

Another thought is that the feats in a themed path need to be at least good enough to contend with choosing an ASI (as all feats should) or the feat path becomes merely a ribbon.

Two things. First, ASI's are overrated in 5e. A +1 doesn't mean as much as it used to when treadmills existed. Second, if the UA is any indication, the paths include a +1 to a stat, so it's half of an ASI increase in addition to what it does.

 

[Minigiant]

My big question to y'all is: At what point would a feat path concept be so powerful that you would have built a subclass instead? Or are they equivalent, and should be based on wether I want then limited to a certain class (subclass) or allow anyone to commit or dabble (feat path)?

The issue is the power level of a Feat Path isnt defined yet. Its in UA.

But let's look at what we got.

Lich Feath Path is pretty much

1. One feat that's about a cantrip power level.
2. One feat that's power level of about a first level spell.
3. 5 uses of a 3rd level spell

Uurrrr...


Currently a Feat Path is weaker and more situational than a good subclass. Like a B tier subclass.

 

[Maxperson]

The issue is the power level of a Feat Path isnt defined yet. Its in UA.

But let's look at what we got.

Lich Feath Path is pretty much

1. One feat that's about a cantrip power level.
2. One feat that's power level of about a first level spell.
3. 5 uses of a 3rd level spell

Uurrrr...


Currently a Feat Path is weaker and more situational than a good subclass. Like a B tier subclass.

Because they are supposed to be feats, not subclasses. The power level will be like a feat, not a subclass ability.

 

[Silam]

One of the worst things about the current incarnation of feats is just how little they tend to scale, they’re a one-and-done power bump in one particular specific way, i take magic Initiate and i get two cantrips and a once-a-day first level spell, wow, so impressive, my 17th level assassin rogue still only knows how to cast Disguise Self once a day despite knowing and casting it repeatedly since 4th level.

So yeah, that’s something I think would need to be fixed for properly expressing character concepts through feat selection.

I had similar thoughts about why i liked PB/day scaled features, people said they were bad because you could hypothetically dip and pick one up and significantly benefit from it without ever investing anything else in that class, but that was a good thing in my book, i might only have one level in, say, cleric, but I’m not a first level character, i can have 19 levels worth of experience being ‘just a first level cleric’, and that experience should show.

I hear you and I personally like feats based off of PB.

However, I want to slightly push back on the specific examples you gave. Magic Initiate can be scalable depending on what you pick. Many cantrips do scale with character level, which is exactly what we want. As for the level 1 spell, it can be upcast. A Wizard taking MI (Cleric or Druid) could cure quite well via upcasting, which they would never be able to get otherwise as a pure Wizard.

Even for spells that don’t upscale, you could still increase your spellcasting power via slots from other classes. A Cleric or Bard taking Magic Initiate (Wizard) can have Shield for the rest of their career, and cast it plenty more than once per day, arguably the best non-upcastable 1st level spell in the game.

Finally, for Wizards, Magic Initiate has the quirk of letting you learn one extra 1st level spell per level, since the spell counts as prepared, therefore you can back it up to a spellbook, and on your next character level swap it for another, and rinse/repeat. The utility of that is not incredibly high, but just a nice little perk for the spellbook-wise players out there…

But those nitpicks aside, I still agree with the sentiment you bring up. Feats that scale can be better balanced across the span of the game, by avoiding being too weak in the end nor too strong in the beginning.

 

[Minigiant]

Because they are supposed to be feats, not subclasses. The power level will be like a feat, not a subclass ability.

Well 3 feats.

Most 3rd level subclass abilities are better than the current 4th level feat path openings.

The middle feats are really weak for level 8.

The final 12th level feat gives you 2 resistances and bunch of uses of a 3rd level spell or an effect about as strong as a 6th level spell. Which tracks as just at level power. Whereas a good subclass scales well and is at or power level.

 

[SkidAce]

The issue is the power level of a Feat Path isnt defined yet. Its in UA.

But let's look at what we got.

Lich Feath Path is pretty much

1. One feat that's about a cantrip power level.
2. One feat that's power level of about a first level spell.
3. 5 uses of a 3rd level spell

Uurrrr...


Currently a Feat Path is weaker and more situational than a good subclass. Like a B tier subclass.

Sounds about right for my use, as a tradition or style you can dabble or max out.