Unearthed Arcana UA feats, are they trying to allow people to not have to multiclass to get class abilities?

[SkidAce]

I like MCing as is.

However, the new "mc feats" are a good in-between to a a bit of another class's flavor.

 

[ccs]

I like these well enough. I don't see anything that'll cause problems at our table. So I'll print a copy for the players in my Thur game (only one of them might ever check out UA on their own).

As for MCing?
I don't like it when all it's used for mechanical advantage. Your character is not a ***#&% MTG deck. You are not assembling the ultimate boardgame piece - at least not in games I run.
However, MC definitely has a place when used to add to the expanding story, to represent changes to your character through play. So I'd never advocate for ditching it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Come to think of it... there's no Monk feat either...

Okay, list of classes, and their dip feats:

• Artificer: Artificer Initiate (Good feat, maybe a bit OP, some people want an infusion feat)
• Barbarian: There's nothing here. Maybe they could make a feat that gives something like Brutal Critical or Reckless Attack.
• Bard: Magic Initiate (Bard), maybe Practiced Expert and nothing else. (Some have recommended Bardic Inspiration. I think that could work, but would be overshadowed by Lucky)
• Cleric: Magic Initiate (Cleric), Ritual Caster, nothing else. (Some have recommended Channel Divinity. I think this would work, but they're going to have to decide how broad it is.)
• Druid: Magic Initiate, Ritual Caster, nothing else. (Some have recommended Wild Shape. To this, I disagree. Druids own wild shape, no one else can have it. Maybe a feat that makes you a shape changer)
• Fighter: Martial Adept, Fighting Initiate, the armor/shield feats could fit under here (We need nothing else, IMO.)
• Monk: Absolutely nothing (right, isn't there nothing? Maybe Tavern Brawler? Any thoughts on a monk feat? Give Ki or something, like MM Initiate?)
• Paladin: Nothing. (Maybe a possible Channel Divinity feat, or Lay on Hands. I'm indifferent to this)
• Ranger: Tracker (We don't really need anything else)
• Rogue: I guess you could count Skulker and Tandem Tactician, maybe Practiced Expert (Some have said a Sneak Attack feat, I don't see the need for it. Maybe a Cunning Action feat)
• Sorcerer: Magic Initiate (Sorcerer), Metamagic Initiate (I don't think we need anything else. Maybe some more planar feats, but those don't really belong to sorcerers)
• Warlock: Magic Initiate (Warlock), Eldritch Adept (We don't really need another one, but I could see one that gives another spell slot of 1st level)
• Wizard: Magic Initiate (Wizard), Ritual Caster (We don't really need another one)

 

[Minigiant]

MCing is just too risky. If you don't know what you're doing you can cripple your character, but spending a feat to add a dash of flavour from another class is way easier and simple and you know it's about on par with your ASI. You're less likely to mess it up.

It's less risky and more that Multiclassing is only not a nerf in power if not planned. Classes are designed to be continued straight. The powers jumps are preprogrammed.

All Multiclassing does it disrupt that. So you have to go use Multiclassing to combine multiple lower tier features into a higher one.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Okay, list of classes, and their dip feats:

• Artificer: Artificer Initiate (Good feat, maybe a bit OP, some people want an infusion feat)
• Barbarian: There's nothing here. Maybe they could make a feat that gives something like Brutal Critical or Reckless Attack.
• Bard: Magic Initiate (Bard), maybe Practiced Expert and nothing else. (Some have recommended Bardic Inspiration. I think that could work, but would be overshadowed by Lucky)
• Cleric: Magic Initiate (Cleric), Ritual Caster, nothing else. (Some have recommended Channel Divinity. I think this would work, but they're going to have to decide how broad it is.)
• Druid: Magic Initiate, Ritual Caster, nothing else. (Some have recommended Wild Shape. To this, I disagree. Druids own wild shape, no one else can have it. Maybe a feat that makes you a shape changer)
• Fighter: Martial Adept, Fighting Initiate, the armor/shield feats could fit under here (We need nothing else, IMO.)
• Monk: Absolutely nothing (right, isn't there nothing? Maybe Tavern Brawler? Any thoughts on a monk feat? Give Ki or something, like MM Initiate?)
• Paladin: Nothing. (Maybe a possible Channel Divinity feat, or Lay on Hands. I'm indifferent to this)
• Ranger: Tracker (We don't really need anything else)
• Rogue: I guess you could count Skulker and Tandem Tactician, maybe Practiced Expert (Some have said a Sneak Attack feat, I don't see the need for it. Maybe a Cunning Action feat)
• Sorcerer: Magic Initiate (Sorcerer), Metamagic Initiate (I don't think we need anything else. Maybe some more planar feats, but those don't really belong to sorcerers)
• Warlock: Magic Initiate (Warlock), Eldritch Adept (We don't really need another one, but I could see one that gives another spell slot of 1st level)
• Wizard: Magic Initiate (Wizard), Ritual Caster (We don't really need another one)

One thing all of these feats seem to be doing is work both as a multi-classing option and an in-class boost: ie Metamagic Initiate is also good for sorcerers, not just for other classes who want to be more sorcerer-y.

For barbarian - I'd go with Brutal Critical (+1 die, so it stacks with half-orc and barbs). Maybe add that as a second bullet to Savage Attacker to make that feat worthwhile.

For monk, there's also an unarmed fighting style in the last UA (class feature variants) That plus the Fighting Initiate feat means there's a pretty good "red belt" feat, which does stack with martial arts.

Paladin probably shouldn't get a feat, unless it's a Magic Initiate variant, or maybe something like Angel-touched? I don't like a mini-oath, and there's already several 'get a little bit of healing' options.

For warlock, I can actually see the argument for a Hex Warrior feat if you assume "getting rid of dipping" is a goal of these. I'm drawing a blank on how to have it stack with the existing feature while still being enough that paladins aren't all forming pacts with mysterious weapon-shaped shadows, though. If we remove Hex Warrior form Hexblades it would be easy enough to just make that the feat.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

In all my games since 3e, I've never played or run a group that didn't want feats. In my experience, most players think they're cool, and don't mind the extra power.

My groups always use feats, too, but my groups also rarely use humans.

However, the data from wotc and ddb so far has indicated that feats are taken by a minority of players, which is why I am curious what data points to nearly all players using feats.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

My groups always use feats, too, but my groups also rarely use humans.

However, the data from wotc and ddb so far has indicated that feats are taken by a minority of players, which is why I am curious what data points to nearly all players using feats.

Maybe it's because most games don't make it that far?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Maybe it's because most games don't make it that far?

To level 4?

I know the ddb data still showed low feat usage amongst post-level 4 characters made by users with access to feats.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

To level 4?

I know the ddb data still showed low feat usage amongst post-level 4 characters made by users with access to feats.

I mean, maybe players prefer increasing ability scores, and then taking feats at higher levels, but then the game ends? I don't know, there could be a combination of reasons. Everyone I've ever played with has said they like feats, and taken them at every opportunity.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean, maybe players prefer increasing ability scores, and then taking feats at higher levels, but then the game ends? I don't know, there could be a combination of reasons. Everyone I've ever played with has said they like feats, and taken them at every opportunity.

I mean, we can search for explanations like that, or maybe people like us like feats more than the average player does.