Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Feats for Races

I find this line mystifying: "These feats don’t assume that multiclassing is used in a campaign."

What are they trying to say here? Do these feats become unbalanced when combined with multiclassing?

Also, some of the feats significantly alter a character's body. Barbed Hide, for example, endows a Tiefling with a barbed hide. That's not the sort of thing that you can acquire through training. Which gives rise to the question, "Why couldn't the Tiefling do this at level 1?" It's not like Pole Arm Master, where you can explain the acquisition of the new ability through practice and training. Either you were born with a barbed hide or you weren't.

Same with Dragon Wings: "You sprout draconic wings." I'm not well-versed in Dragonborn lore, but is that really something that just... happens during their adult life?

 

[Chaosmancer]

What's wrong with...

"This here's Prospero McStabby, our halfling mascot. He's our lucky charm!"

He's not wearing green.
There are no rainbows.
I don't want a horde of children chasing us for cereal.

Take your pick

 

[Corwin]

He's not wearing green.
There are no rainbows.
I don't want a horde of children chasing us for cereal.

Take your pick

Bah! I don't believe you. The first time a group of kobolds, or goblins, rushed towards li'l ol' McStabby, and you were able to yell out, "Their after me lucky charm!", the night will have been won right then and there. Provably, scientific fact right there.

 

[Argyle King]

The feats seem alright I guess.

Mostly, they look like old 3e and 4e racial features being turned into feats.

However, I feel like the amount of feat choices I have in 5e is too little. There are a lot of options I think sound cool, but my amount of choice often isn't enough to pick them over something else. One of the things I wish 5e would have kept from 4e was stretching the game to 30 levels. I feel this would allow parts of 5e to be broken down into smaller pieces. I think this would have solved the problem of some of the PHB feats doing a bit too much, and it would also make me feel as though I have more choices. ASIs could be broken in half: +1 to one or +0.5 to two. (I know that is not very elegant, but I am trying to think of how to stretch things out now that the edition exists as is.)

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

These seem okay. Something I would change is making the ASI for Fade Away a +1 to Charisma, rather than Intelligence. That would make it a better fit if someone wanted add it to the base gnome, in order to replicate 4E's "dawn gnome".

 

[Sean Dobbins]

The feats seem alright I guess.

Mostly, they look like old 3e and 4e racial features being turned into feats.

However, I feel like the amount of feat choices I have in 5e is too little. There are a lot of options I think sound cool, but my amount of choice often isn't enough to pick them over something else. One of the things I wish 5e would have kept from 4e was stretching the game to 30 levels. I feel this would allow parts of 5e to be broken down into smaller pieces. I think this would have solved the problem of some of the PHB feats doing a bit too much, and it would also make me feel as though I have more choices. ASIs could be broken in half: +1 to one or +0.5 to two. (I know that is not very elegant, but I am trying to think of how to stretch things out now that the edition exists as is.)

While 5e doesn't have 30 levels they still give players options for play at 20th level and allowing characters to keep improving beyond what you get at level up by allowing ASIs to be taken, with a higher cap, gaining boons, and feats. It may not be the same as just continuing to level up, it's just an option. 5e is mainly about having a general ruleset that is easy to pick up and play and isn't bogged down by too many mechanics. Keeping the level cap at 20 helps keep the game simpler, but with the added options for continued advancement at 20th level it still allows for play to continue as long as you want.

 

[Argyle King]

While 5e doesn't have 30 levels they still give players options for play at 20th level and allowing characters to keep improving beyond what you get at level up by allowing ASIs to be taken, with a higher cap, gaining boons, and feats. It may not be the same as just continuing to level up, it's just an option. 5e is mainly about having a general ruleset that is easy to pick up and play and isn't bogged down by too many mechanics. Keeping the level cap at 20 helps keep the game simpler, but with the added options for continued advancement at 20th level it still allows for play to continue as long as you want.

That's a good point, but the reasons why I'd want more levels are so that some of the pieces can be spread out more. I'm not saying that I want more "epic" levels. I'm saying that I'd like things to be spread out more and broken down into smaller chunks.

I'm not looking to go back to how 3rd Edition was. However, I'd prefer to have more decision points than 5th currently contains.

 

[Sean Dobbins]

That's a good point, but the reasons why I'd want more levels are so that some of the pieces can be spread out more. I'm not saying that I want more "epic" levels. I'm saying that I'd like things to be spread out more and broken down into smaller chunks.

I'm not looking to go back to how 3rd Edition was. However, I'd prefer to have more decision points than 5th currently contains.

So you just want less stuff gained at each level? Depending on the class, as well as whether or not you multiclass, some don't necessarily gain much at each level. Also, if you did that you'd have to scale back difficulty some, as the game assumes that you have a certain level of abilities by a certain level. To be honest, I thought it was better spread out, definitely more than 3.X, with having less features, some of which improve at certain levels. In general players like to do stuff and gain stuff so spreading it out too much can make it feel like PCs aren't improving as much as they want. If you want slower progression, it's best to either just keep players at certain levels longer or play a game that has a slower advancement, as there are games where you don't really get much greater than when you start. If you want to do things like you have stated, then I think it's best for it to be left up to the DM to figure that out and do what they need to do, not change the default rules.

 

[Argyle King]

So you just want less stuff gained at each level? Depending on the class, as well as whether or not you multiclass, some don't necessarily gain much at each level. Also, if you did that you'd have to scale back difficulty some, as the game assumes that you have a certain level of abilities by a certain level. To be honest, I thought it was better spread out, definitely more than 3.X, with having less features, some of which improve at certain levels. In general players like to do stuff and gain stuff so spreading it out too much can make it feel like PCs aren't improving as much as they want. If you want slower progression, it's best to either just keep players at certain levels longer or play a game that has a slower advancement, as there are games where you don't really get much greater than when you start. If you want to do things like you have stated, then I think it's best for it to be left up to the DM to figure that out and do what they need to do, not change the default rules.

I don't want less stuff. I want some parts of the game to be smaller pieces and to have more opportunity to choose which pieces I want.

Overall, what I'd like amounts to more stuff and more choice. In a poor attempt at a painting analogy, I'll say that I'd like a few more fine tipped brushes and a few less broad strokes. I don't want as many small pieces as 3rd had, but I would like more than what 5th currently has.