D&D 5E To use or not to use feats

[Yunru]

Are you using array or point buy?

With the standard array, the most a fighter is going to get in their 3 main stats is 17, 16 and 14 (I think). Getting all three to 20 is going to require all their ASIs. If they want another stat raised, for proficiency reasons, then they will have to trade off.

Problem is (with the exception of the EK), there is no "3 main stats". They have their attack stat, and Con.

 

[Ovarwa]

Hi,

Fighters only have one main stat and one secondary stat.

Str fighters can happily ignore Dex. Dex fighters can happily ignore Str. And they usually do. Both like to have a decent Con but it's secondary.

4 ASIs are plenty to bring both Dex/Str and Con to 20. The other 3 ASIs are a great big yawn. I suppose boosting Wisdom doesn't hurt. But yawn.

Oh, and Moon Druids: They have little use for ASIs. Boost Wisdom and then who cares! They hardly have use for their 5 ASIs without Feats. (And except at levels 2, 3, 4 and 20, they aren't very good. At levels 2 and 3, they are too good.)

Point buy or standard array.


Anyway,

Ken

 

[BookBarbarian]

Problem is (with the exception of the EK), there is no "3 main stats". They have their attack stat, and Con.

I prefer my Barbarians with STR, DEX, CON, and if I'm fortunate WIS too. I could make a SAD EK easier than a SAD Barb.

 

[Yunru]

I prefer my Barbarians with STR, DEX, CON, and if I'm fortunate WIS too. I could make a SAD EK easier than a SAD Barb.

I can make a SAD Bard too, but people find him too depressing.

 

[Ovarwa]

Many classes care about 3 stats: Wizards (Int/Con/Dex), Paladins (Str/Cha/Con), Sorcerers, Warlocks... but the classes that get more than 5 ASIs care about only 2. They need Feats.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Str fighters can happily ignore Dex. Dex fighters can happily ignore Str. And they usually do. Both like to have a decent Con but it's secondary.

4 ASIs are plenty to bring both Dex/Str and Con to 20. The other 3 ASIs are a great big yawn. I suppose boosting Wisdom doesn't hurt. But yawn.

It's called diversity. You get to max out the stat you care about, and then you're free to develop in any direction you see fit. Without feats, a Strength-based fighter has a meaningful decision about whether to improve their Dexterity or their Wisdom, and they aren't shooting themselves in the foot if they want to improve their Intelligence or Charisma. With feats, a Strength-based fighter has a bunch of powerful feats to increase their damage or saves or whatever, and it presents a massive opportunity cost if they want to increase their other stats.

 

[Greg Benage]

Problem is (with the exception of the EK), there is no "3 main stats". They have their attack stat, and Con.

Unless they're the sort of fighter who wants to be skilled with greatswords and heavy armor, but also with the longbow. Like, pretty much every fighter I ever played in B/X and AD&D. It seems no one wants that anymore, though. Most players (on the boards, at least) seem to want optimized super-specialists. Feats are great for that.

 

[BookBarbarian]

I can make a SAD Bard too, but people find him too depressing.

Stolen for a future character: Deb E. Downer- Aspiring, but rarely Inspiring Bard

 

[Ovarwa]

It's called diversity. You get to max out the stat you care about, and then you're free to develop in any direction you see fit. Without feats, a Strength-based fighter has a meaningful decision about whether to improve their Dexterity or their Wisdom, and they aren't shooting themselves in the foot if they want to improve their Intelligence or Charisma. With feats, a Strength-based fighter has a bunch of powerful feats to increase their damage or saves or whatever, and it presents a massive opportunity cost if they want to increase their other stats.

They aren't shooting themselves in the foot because all of this diversity is meh. So it doesn't matter what he chooses.

Unless, of course, he chooses to take a class that gets cool abilities instead of rubbish ASIs.

A player who wants diversity is obviously better off with Feats. Sure, that Battlemaster longbowman is going to take Sharpshooter and Dex 20. Now he's all of level 8, with 4 ASIs remaining. He *could* boost Con, but if he's in a skill-heavy campaign, he might prefer to become proficient in 3 of them. He might want to become Alert. He might want one of the healing feats. That's real diversity. Feats are the reason Fighters in D&D5 are actually good, because they let him do everything he needs to do *and* have room for customization beyond the narrow confines of his class.

Your argument that taking away character options makes them more diverse seems strange to me.

Anyway,

Ken

 

[The Crimson Binome]

They aren't shooting themselves in the foot because all of this diversity is meh. So it doesn't matter what he chooses.

Unless, of course, he chooses to take a class that gets cool abilities instead of rubbish ASIs.

Every class has some rubbish abilities, so the fighter isn't really missing out on anything, because ability scores are always at least slightly useful. If you're a rogue or a ranger, you're going to get some powers that you don't care about at all, but the fighter can always take something they want, even if it's not as powerful as +1 to hit and damage. When you give them options that are comparable to +1 to hit and damage, they just become way more powerful.

Feats aren't some huge balancing measure designed to bring the fighter in line with other classes. The classes are relatively balanced before you add in all of the optional stuff. Feats are pure power creep, and the game works better if you don't include them.