D&D 5E Subclass feature vs. feat -- Which is "worth" more?

[ezo]

Most of the schools are probably preternatural, but not obviously supernatural. The schools that are restricted to swordsage and crusader, which are a little more "supernatural" by intent, have more obviously supernatural elements. The schools that warblades use, which is the most "fighter-like" of the 9 Swords classes, are basically "fighter+".

I mean, these are some of the 9th level manuevers open to Warblades:

Strike of Perfect Clarity:

Strike

Deal +100 damage on single attack.

Mountain Tombstone Strike:

Strike

Attack deals 2d6 Constitution damage.

Feral Death Blow:

Strike

Leap upon foe, slay him with a single strike.

They strike me as obviously strong, but nothing that screams "that fighter is actually a wizard".

Link for reference.

We changed Foe Slayer to:

Critical Damage == "Exploding Damage dice"

 

[TwoSix]

We changed Foe Slayer to:

View attachment 388101

Critical Damage == "Exploding Damage dice"

I'm unclear as to the relevance to my post that you quoted (post #47).

 

[ezo]

I'm unclear as to the relevance to my post that you quoted (post #47).

Sorry. Just showing how you can have a high-level feature that doesn't have to be "magical" to be effective.

The warblade maneuvers can be powerful, but like you said, don't have to scream "wizard".

Our version of Foe Slayer (over the lame WotC one IMO) doesn't scream wizard, either.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

According to MM, certain classes have more power in their core class, so their subclass features are weaker. I believe he listed fighter and paladin among them. Obviously some of these features are still pretty good though! So yeah it seems like a mixed bag.

Which is frankly hilarious, because the class that actually presents this is Wizard. Wizards have barely-there subclass features because their core feature IS spellcasting and more spellcasting and also more spellcasting and did I mention spellcasting.

The more Mike Mearls speaks about 5e, the less I believe he actually understands game design.

 

[Horwath]

Which is frankly hilarious, because the class that actually presents this is Wizard. Wizards have barely-there subclass features because their core feature IS spellcasting and more spellcasting and also more spellcasting and did I mention spellcasting.

The more Mike Mearls speaks about 5e, the less I believe he actually understands game design.

maybe contrary to design aim, wizard is THE simple spellcasting class.
and some class should be that.

maybe a subclass or two can add few dials to turn from turn to turn in combat, like battlemaster vs champion fighter.

 

[CreamCloud0]

maybe contrary to design aim, wizard is THE simple spellcasting class.

we did have a thread not too long ago about just that where that was highly debated.

 

[ezo]

UPDATE: (updated OP as well for new readers)

Given the current poll results for roughly 70% weighing subclass feature awards are worth more than feats, I was wondering if there was a ratio or balance point which would bring them on par.

For example, would subclass awards at a level be worth TWO feats? Or a feat AND a single ability score increase +1?

 

[TwoSix]

UPDATE: (updated OP as well for new readers)

Given the current poll results for roughly 70% weighing subclass feature awards are worth more than feats, I was wondering if there was a ratio or balance point which would bring them on par.

For example, would subclass awards at a level be worth TWO feats? Or a feat AND a single ability score increase +1?

I don't see a way to. Feats are intended to roughly balance with each other. Subclass features have no such intent.

At best, you might be able to assign some kind of equivalence to Tier 1 subclass features, Tier 2 subclass features, etc. But how do you compare a cost for an 18th level subclass feature to a 3rd level one?

 

[Deset Gled]

I don't see a way too. Feats are intended to roughly balance with each other. Subclass features have no such intent.

At best, you might be able to assign some kind of equivalence to Tier 1 subclass features, Tier 2 subclass features, etc. But how do you compare a cost for an 18th level subclass feature to a 3rd level one?

I agree that this kind of modularity is simply not tenable.

For another example why, I'll posit that the spell list modifications for every casting subclass would be nigh impossible to measure for balance against a number of feats.

 

[Distracted DM]

The adventurer class has been oft-recommended to me, though I've never used it. It makes all features feat-equivalent in some manner or other, you build your character entirely out of them.

Check out what features it breaks down to equivalent to a feat, it might be that someone else has already done the work!