D&D 5E Why Should I Allow Feats

[Mephista]

Do martials need some way to spike damage? They already do the most damage. Fighters have Action Surge to boost damage. Paladins Divine Smite. Rogues have Sneak Attack for higher round to round damage. Barbarians get a damage boost with rage and they can take damage better than anyone. Rangers are a little weak, but have a few things like Hunter's Mark and Colossal Slayer.

Martials do better round to round damage than casters. Spells don't boost it a whole lot unless we're talking the single 9th level spell a caster gets. Fireball does 8d6 or 28 points average damage in a round. 14 if you save. Spells don't do a lot of damage either. Casters don't get many caster slots. Consumables are rare.

Not sure the martials do need to boost their damage with feats as well as class abilities. They're already quite far ahead of casters in damage. Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Mastery only make that gap much, much wider given casters don't have a lot of ways to boost damage, no feats and very few class abilities (save for the Sorcerer).

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. However, it is absolutely one of the ways in which they're making martial characters more attractive in 5e. There are only a handful of ways that a spellcaster can boost their damage, and that all comes from their class features, and one feat that raises damage by an average of 1.3 per fireball.

I don't know if its an overreaction to caster dominance of 3e or what, but there it is. Martial characters get a lot of ways to boost damage - magic weapons, spells, feats, racial abilities. When taken together and mixed, it ends up as pretty strong.

Of course, by that same rationale, I don't think that any one piece is a problem, but the group as a whole. Or that's been my experience so far.

 

[Celtavian]

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. However, it is absolutely one of the ways in which they're making martial characters more attractive in 5e. There are only a handful of ways that a spellcaster can boost their damage, and that all comes from their class features, and one feat that raises damage by an average of 1.3 per fireball.

I don't know if its an overreaction to caster dominance of 3e or what, but there it is. Martial characters get a lot of ways to boost damage - magic weapons, spells, feats, racial abilities. When taken together and mixed, it ends up as pretty strong.

Of course, by that same rationale, I don't think that any one piece is a problem, but the group as a whole. Or that's been my experience so far.

What feat raises caster damage? I haven't seen one.

The game was built without feats as a requirement. I'm assuming they aren't necessary. I don't plan to push for their limitation or removal until I see more of them, especially at higher levels.

 

[Joe Liker]

What feat raises caster damage? I haven't seen one.

Elemental Adept

 

[sithramir]

Elemental Adept

Hah. That feat is so weak compared to the other feats I forgot it was there. Removing the damage resistance is nice but very situational and making a 1 into a 2 isn't bad for maybe a fireball but it's definitely not the same thing as -5/+10 damage.

A feat that allowed you to do that with ranged spells would be amazing.

 

[Joe Liker]

Hah. That feat is so weak compared to the other feats I forgot it was there. Removing the damage resistance is nice but very situational and making a 1 into a 2 isn't bad for maybe a fireball but it's definitely not the same thing as -5/+10 damage.

That was pretty much Mephista's point, I believe.

 

[Celtavian]

Elemental Adept

I was thinking of picking this one up. I'm still not sold on it. I think I'm going to stick with boosting my dex. Dex is a huge stat in this game. It was always a really good stat. But it is probably on par with Con in 5E for casters. Initiative, AC, and Ref saves are huge in this game.

 

[transtemporal]

Without those accuracy bonuses, -5/+10 feats don't provide big damage boosts and often cost damage in taking that penalty to hit. That tells me the issue isn't with the -5/+10 and it's more of an example of the potency that comes with accuracy bonuses in a system that has bounded accuracy where -5 is a big penalty. -5 is the equivalent of max ability modifier or very high level proficiency bonus and it is a big penalty.

That begs the question that if the -5/+10 isn't a good investment without the accuracy bonuses then why are we looking at -5/+10 instead of the accuracy bonuses, or possibly the applicable bonus attacks (like pole arm master) that can apply it additionally. Exclusively applying either pole arm master or great weapon master but not both simultaneously is where that leads, and you are correct in that it can be a solution if one assumes there is an issue to solve. I don't agree that there is because more damage is working as intended, but also, we're still looking at that big -5 penalty that's being offset by accuracy bonuses that creates the damage with both feats (which is a big investment and also part of why I'm not convinced of a problem).

Exactly right. I can certainly tell you in a party without a cleric (for the bless) that hasnt sussed out the archer fighter/crossbow expert/sharpshooter thang, these feats are not attractive at all. No one in our group is using them.

Im kind of inclined to think if your party has optimized to work in concert like that, you should let them. It requires some thinking and coordination to achieve that and Im not sure they should be punished for that.

 

[Zardnaar]

Exactly right. I can certainly tell you in a party without a cleric (for the bless) that hasnt sussed out the archer fighter/crossbow expert/sharpshooter thang, these feats are not attractive at all. No one in our group is using them.

Im kind of inclined to think if your party has optimized to work in concert like that, you should let them. It requires some thinking and coordination to achieve that and Im not sure they should be punished for that.

The feats also work with shield bash fighter for the Xbow expert or faerie fire
```````

 

[transtemporal]

The feats also work with shield bash fighter for the Xbow expert or faerie fire
```````

Sure, there are additional sources of accuracy, I get that. In fact, there are so many you have to wonder whether the game was designed around it being a given...

What I'm saying is that your player group has done some research and thinking about the most optimal way to negate that penalty and probably designed their party around it with people taking specific roles. Which I don't think is a bad thing if that's the kind of game you guys want to play.

If you nerf those abilities that they've optimized for, you're doing several things: 1) you're locking yourself into a cycle where every time an ability pops up that deals "too much damage" you're obliged to nerf it to bring it in line with everything else; and 2) you're sending a confusing message to your players is "optimize, but don't optimize too much or I'll nerf it".

Although I started out saying the solution wasn't in the encounter design, I think it might be. I think this can work in game too. The group would gain a reputation for accomplishing seemingly impossible feats and take on commensurately dangerous work. One dragon is a walkover? How about 4 in their lairs?