Why no synergy for the Sentinel feat?

[Wyvern]

I find it odd that the description of the Sentinel feat says you don't get the third benefit (attack an enemy who attacks one of your allies) if the ally also has the Sentinel feat. The only reason I can think of why they'd disallow that is to prevent a situation where two Sentinels are flanking an enemy, and no matter which of them is attacked, the other one gets a free attack in. I can see why that might be considered "abusive", but it doesn't make any sense thematically. The description of the feat is "You have mastered techniques to take advantage of every drop in any enemy’s guard." There's no logical reason why your training would be less effective just because your ally has also had the same training. If two players want to both take the Sentinel feat so that they can team up like this, shouldn't they be rewarded for good planning and tactics? Or is it really that overpowered?

 

[Caliban]

Are you asking us to divine the reasoning of the game designers, or are you asking us to defend the feat as it is written? Or are you asking a message board of anonymous gamers permission to change the feat to make it more powerful?

I'm not exactly sure what you want here.

 

[Wyvern]

I'm asking, of those who have had experience playing or running 5th edition (I haven't yet, due to lack of opportunities), and particularly those who have used the Sentinel feat or seen it used in-game, do you think that changing the rule would create an overpowered exploit? (Also, can you think of any other possible reason for the RAW which I've overlooked?)

 

[neogod22]

I'm asking, of those who have had experience playing or running 5th edition (I haven't yet, due to lack of opportunities), and particularly those who have used the Sentinel feat or seen it used in-game, do you think that changing the rule would create an overpowered exploit? (Also, can you think of any other possible reason for the RAW which I've overlooked?)

In short yes. Creatures and characters should not be stuck in a dammed if you do dammed if you don't situation. The feat is already pretty powerful since it stops movement and allows your AoO against an enemy even if it tries to disengage. I feel like saying that if two sentinels flank an enemy, and the enemy attacks one of the two, the other can't attack does synergize with each other, because the creature still has to attack one of you, and is unable to move away from either of you, makes it easier to lock down.

 

[CapnZapp]

Are you asking us to divine the reasoning of the game designers, or are you asking us to defend the feat as it is written? Or are you asking a message board of anonymous gamers permission to change the feat to make it more powerful?

I'm not exactly sure what you want here.

The first one.

To offer our explanations of why the developers added that restriction.

A quite reasonable question.

 

[Caliban]

Well, the limitation is intentional, and you've already pointed out the most likely reason for it.

If two characters have the feat, it can guarantee one of them an extra attack every round. On melee characters, extra attacks can be very powerful force multipliers.

So if you remove that limitation, it will without a doubt be more powerful - if two characters have the feat and place themselves next to the same enemy.

Overpowered? It really, really depends on how effective the characters in question are with their attacks. If they are able to 30-50 points of damage on an attack (very possible at the mid levels of the game) that's very powerful. If they are only doing 10-15 damage per melee attack...not so much.

 

[Caliban]

The first one.

To offer our explanations of why the developers added that restriction.

A quite reasonable question.

Ah. Thank you for reading the OP's mind and answering on their behalf, since they are seemingly unable to speak for themselves... Oh wait, they already did answer my question.

What was the point of this? To show off your powers of prescience... oh wait, they responded before you did, so it's not that.

Hmm..... Well, I'm at a loss. Thanks for the unsolicited input, I guess.

Maybe it would have been more useful to answer his question than mine, since you knew exactly what he wanted?

 

[CapnZapp]

Ah. Thank you for reading the OP's mind and answering on their behalf, since they are seemingly unable to speak for themselves... Oh wait, they already did answer my question.

What was the point of this? To show off your powers of prescience... oh wait, they responded before you did, so it's not that.

Hmm..... Well, I'm at a loss. Thanks for the unsolicited input, I guess.

Maybe it would have been more useful to answer his question than mine, since you knew exactly what he wanted?

No, I replied to call you out on characterizing the OPs simple question as "divine the reasoning of the game designers" as if that somehow was unreasonable.

But nice try getting on your high horse there

 

[Mouseferatu]

I would be very leery of getting rid of that restriction.

Having played a high-level fighter with the Sentinel feat, I'm already prepared to claim that it's one of the best/most powerful melee feats in the game. Making it even stronger is almost guaranteed to lead to overpowered, if not broken, combinations.

If you need an in-game justification, assume that both Sentinel feat-users would be going for the exact same opening, and thus getting in each other's way.

 

[CapnZapp]

I'm asking, of those who have had experience playing or running 5th edition (I haven't yet, due to lack of opportunities), and particularly those who have used the Sentinel feat or seen it used in-game, do you think that changing the rule would create an overpowered exploit? (Also, can you think of any other possible reason for the RAW which I've overlooked?)

My best guess?

They didn't want to encourage similar builds.

Normally, there isn't extra benefit in picking a feat someone else has already taken. This just ensures that, and encourages the heroes of a party to be different.

I don't see a huge issue if you want to play "the Shield Brothers", where two characters have learned to use the feat together.