Feat idea

[EvanescentHero]

I've been tossing this idea around in my head for a while, and I wanted to ask you all your opinions.

I think it would be good if there was a way for classes besides the d10 crew to get a fighting style, or for (non-champion) fighters, paladins, and rangers to get another one, without being forced to dip into another class to do so. For example, swashbuckler rogues have a heavy emphasis on dual-wielding, but can't fully take advantage of it without the TWF style.

So, what do you think of this feat?

Trained Warrior (or a better name)
• Increase your Strength or Dexterity by 1, to a maximum of 20.
• You gain one fighting style of your choice from those available to the fighter.

Too little? Too much? What do you think?

[Foxhound438]

seems good to me. Getting 1 stat is probably the saving grace, it would allow for example a human to have effectively +2/+1 with a fighting style.

[EvanescentHero]

I figured it was better as a half-feat; gaining just a fighting style seemed too weak for a full one.

[bid]

GWF is about as strong as savage attacker, dueling is stronger. Archery has a dangerous synergy with SS. AC is always good. But nothing you can't get with MC fighter 1.

The Str/Dex bonus might be pushing it.

[JNAProductions]

I think the stat bump is too much, but JUST a Fighting Style is too little. Try to come up with something in between those two, and you'll be golden.

[Foxhound438]

GWF is about as strong as savage attacker, dueling is stronger. Archery has a dangerous synergy with SS. AC is always good. But nothing you can't get with MC fighter 1.

The Str/Dex bonus might be pushing it.

you forget that savage is bar none the worst feat available in 5e.

[EvanescentHero]

you forget that savage is bar none the worst feat available in 5e.

What about Actor? =P

[R.Shackleford]

you forget that savage is bar none the worst feat available in 5e.

Weapon Master.

Savage Attacker has its uses, weapon master is just plain terrible.

[Lollerabe]

Martial adept is also flirting with 'how the hell are you an actual feat?' Concept. But both savage and martial should be half feats, I think your feat seems fair most classes that benefit hugely from fighting styles already got em.

[Foxhound438]

Weapon Master.

Savage Attacker has its uses, weapon master is just plain terrible.

weapon master

a) gives you +1 to a stat
b) allows you to have decent weapons on a class that otherwise wouldn't get them (ie knowledge cleric, as an example.)

Savage attacker, at its very best, gives about 2 damage per round. not per hit, once per round you can maybe milk out a bit more damage.

[Foxhound438]

What about Actor? =P

a) gives +1 to a stat
b) >comparing RP/situational utility feat to failure of an attempt of a combat buff

[PoeticDwarf]

Weapon Master.

Savage Attacker has its uses, weapon master is just plain terrible.

My bet's grappler. You can better go grapple/shove for one extra attack but better effect. In a game without MC the weapon master can be worth it.

[R.Shackleford]

weapon master

a) gives you +1 to a stat
b) allows you to have decent weapons on a class that otherwise wouldn't get them (ie knowledge cleric, as an example.)

Savage attacker, at its very best, gives about 2 damage per round. not per hit, once per round you can maybe milk out a bit more damage.

Any class that needs a weapon to use their features will have weapon proficiencies.

Knowledge clerics don't have features that rely on weapons. There is no need for a knowledge cleric to ever need weapon master. They might as well just use a weapon with non-proficiency. Or you know, cast Spiritual Weapon.

Gaining +2 ASI is worth more to a character than Weapon Master.

You already have all the tools (wepaons) your class needs and can use. There is no reason to get weapon master.

A knowledge cleric would gain more from Savage Attacker. Savage Attacker at least allows you to do something you couldn't before.

For grappler... It's another bad one but it still gives you a new option. They should have fixed it when they had the chance.

[Foxhound438]

Any class that needs a weapon to use their features will have weapon proficiencies.

Knowledge clerics don't have features that rely on weapons. There is no need for a knowledge cleric to ever need weapon master. They might as well just use a weapon with non-proficiency. Or you know, cast Spiritual Weapon.

Gaining +2 ASI is worth more to a character than Weapon Master.

You already have all the tools (wepaons) your class needs and can use. There is no reason to get weapon master.

A knowledge cleric would gain more from Savage Attacker. Savage Attacker at least allows you to do something you couldn't before.

For grappler... It's another bad one but it still gives you a new option. They should have fixed it when they had the chance.

I mean, a rapier is waaaaay better than a dagger with savage attack, especially given the extra +1 to a stat. Knowledge cleric doesn't get heavy armor, so either you go dex and want a better weapon, or you get heavily armored and both have a still worse than rapier weapon and the generally worse physical stat. I get that you're usually going to use sacred flame there anyways, but how does savage attacker help you now? it only applies to melee weapon attacks.

And just to remind you, weapon master is still a garbage feat. The OP's feat is still leagues below polearm master or war caster or either power attacker or ritual caster... even with +1 stat it's behind all of those.

edit: an arcana cleric or sorcerer or non-bladesong wizard or non-blade warlock can get a lot out of a weapon upgrade, by the way, thanks to scag cantrips.

[bid]

And just to remind you, weapon master is still a garbage feat. The OP's feat is still leagues below polearm master or war caster or either power attacker or ritual caster... even with +1 stat it's behind all of those.

edit: an arcana cleric or sorcerer or non-bladesong wizard or non-blade warlock can get a lot out of a weapon upgrade, by the way, thanks to scag cantrips.
Greataxe (1d12) vs quarterstaff (1d8 versatile) is +2 damage while savage attacker is +1.31.
{anydice output [highest 1 of 2d8] - 1d8 -> mean = 1.31}

In a way, the proposed feat is fairly close in effect to weapon master. Seen that way it doesn't seem too broken.

[R.Shackleford]

I mean, a rapier is waaaaay better than a dagger with savage attack, especially given the extra +1 to a stat. Knowledge cleric doesn't get heavy armor, so either you go dex and want a better weapon, or you get heavily armored and both have a still worse than rapier weapon and the generally worse physical stat. I get that you're usually going to use sacred flame there anyways, but how does savage attacker help you now? it only applies to melee weapon attacks.

And just to remind you, weapon master is still a garbage feat. The OP's feat is still leagues below polearm master or war caster or either power attacker or ritual caster... even with +1 stat it's behind all of those.

edit: an arcana cleric or sorcerer or non-bladesong wizard or non-blade warlock can get a lot out of a weapon upgrade, by the way, thanks to scag cantrips.

You are putting savage attacker on a specific class (subclass) that doesn't use weapons, knowledge cleric. Weapon master is still worse for that class as they have no features that allow them to effectively use that weapon.

Any class made to use weapons will get more out of Savage Attacker than Weapon Master.

Any class made to use weapons will get more out of Savage Attacker than any class that doesn't use weapons.

Savage Attacker and Weapon Master is bad for a knowledge cleric because that's not who they are. They don't use weapons.

That"s like saying that Sentinel is a worse feat than Weapon Master because when wizards take Sentinel they can't use it... Well of course They can't effectively use it! They aren't weapon users! That doesn't mean sentinel is a worse feat than Weapon master, not by a long shot.

If you really think a feat is worth going from 1d6 to 1d8 (maybe 1d10, depending on str or dex and if you are using a shield) then you need to play 5e a lot more.

I'm not saying Savage Attacker is the be all end all of feats. But for a character that will be willing to use weapons, savage attacker is better than Weapon master because they will already have the weapons they need and can use.

[brainface]

Actor is a fantastic feat what is this I don't even.

Arguably, you might consider it a bad feat for suggesting that people normally can't mimic voices at all without it? But if you want to play a master of disguise it's pretty much your best choice for first feat. Of course it's terrible if you're trying to kill things with a greataxe unless it's very important to do impressions while you do so.

[jas61292]

Of course it's terrible if you're trying to kill things with a greataxe unless it's very important to do impressions while you do so.

That sounds fun. I need to try that.

[R.Shackleford]

That sounds fun. I need to try that.

In 3.5 the best cleric/wizard was Grog the Barbarian Cleric or Wizard (depending how you want to play him). Power Attack Inflict Wounds was his go to spell or the class feature spell Rage.

[PoeticDwarf]

Anyone still helps the OP with the feat?

[EvanescentHero]

Anyone still helps the OP with the feat?

Heh, thank you for trying to steer the thread back to its start. I've been trying to think of an appropriate benefit that's less than an ability increase, and I'm coming up with nothing.

[Santra]

Heh, thank you for trying to steer the thread back to its start. I've been trying to think of an appropriate benefit that's less than an ability increase, and I'm coming up with nothing.

Athletics procifiency? A single weapon proficiency?

[rhouck]

Athletics procifiency? A single weapon proficiency?

I don't see an issue with the +1 stat bump, but if looking for an alternative, I like this skill proficiency suggestion.

I would make it broader: "One skill proficiency of your choice that uses Strength or Dexterity."

[Foxhound438]

If OP wants more critique on his design than flaming of the book, post to the homebrew forum.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?15-Homebrew-Design

[krugaan]

minor bonuses everyone can use but won't break the game:

- a bit of extra hp, like 4.
- a single skill proficiency
- a single weapon proficiency
...

actually that's all I can think of as well, without actually making new abilities.

could try:

- reroll a weapon attack, usable once per long rest
- make one extra weapon attack when you take the attack action, usable once per long rest.
- regain your level in hp, once per short rest

[gfishfunk]

What about Actor? =P

This is the only feat any of m players have taken as of yet. Massively useful for the creative.


I don't see an issue with the +1 stat bump, but if looking for an alternative, I like this skill proficiency suggestion.

I would make it broader: "One skill proficiency of your choice that uses Strength or Dexterity."

My suggestions:

+ 1 Wis (not Str / Dex), which provide a tangential benefit,
May use a reaction to move 5' (without disengaging), and
May gain 1 fighting style

That is less powerful, more powerful, and situational all in one.

[BigONotation]

I've been tossing this idea around in my head for a while, and I wanted to ask you all your opinions.

I think it would be good if there was a way for classes besides the d10 crew to get a fighting style, or for (non-champion) fighters, paladins, and rangers to get another one, without being forced to dip into another class to do so. For example, swashbuckler rogues have a heavy emphasis on dual-wielding, but can't fully take advantage of it without the TWF style.

So, what do you think of this feat?

Trained Warrior (or a better name)
• Increase your Strength or Dexterity by 1, to a maximum of 20.
• You gain one fighting style of your choice from those available to the fighter.

Too little? Too much? What do you think?

Perfectly balanced IMHO.

[EvanescentHero]

I like the extra attack once, though I might make it short rest instead. I think I'll go with that if I don't use the stat increase. Thanks, guys!

[Reaver25]

I think it's a great feat. I'm a Rogue, and I sure wish I could fight more effectively with TWF. If I was able to use this feat (I'm sure my DM wouldn't allow me), I would take it in a heartbeat.

[R.Shackleford]

I think it's a great feat. I'm a Rogue, and I sure wish I could fight more effectively with TWF. If I was able to use this feat (I'm sure my DM wouldn't allow me), I would take it in a heartbeat.

I'm not entirely sure if that is a sign of a great feat or the sign of a broken feat.

Though in this case giving the rogue an extra 3 - 5 damage per round isn't going to hurt anything.

Actually, for a rogue this is kinda a waste.

[Reaver25]

I'm not entirely sure if that is a sign of a great feat or the sign of a broken feat.

Though in this case giving the rogue an extra 3 - 5 damage per round isn't going to hurt anything.

Actually, for a rogue this is kinda a waste.

Now that I think about it, you're probably right. Sometimes, it would be nice to have that extra 5 damage, though. I just think they should have included it in the Dual Wielder Feat or make Archery/Two Weapon Fighting Styles available to Rogues. It would have been a good addition.

To the OP: I like the idea.

[krugaan]

Now that I think about it, you're probably right. Sometimes, it would be nice to have that extra 5 damage, though. I just think they should have included it in the Dual Wielder Feat or make Archery/Two Weapon Fighting Styles available to Rogues. It would have been a good addition.

To the OP: I like the idea.

Rogues need some kind of homebrew that says "if you do not sneak attack this round, you may take an attack twice with the Attack action."

[Grod_The_Giant]

- a single weapon proficiency
I like this one. Learn a weapon and how to use it.

[krugaan]

I like this one. Learn a weapon and how to use it.

"Railgun!"

Right up there with "Death Star as pact weapon".

[R.Shackleford]

Rogues need some kind of homebrew that says "if you do not sneak attack this round, you may take an attack twice with the Attack action."

Hmmm...

I like it.

Have sneak attack take up the extra attack or something like that.

Attack Action + Bonus Action Attack + Extra Attack (if you didn't sneak attack and can't sneak attack with this one).

Of course that damage would 3d6+(2*dex) so... Unless you took the TWF feat then it would be 3d8+(2*dex).

[bid]

If rogues had a weird version of extra attack where you choose which of attack or SA will eat your bonus action, typical turn would be:
- first attack hits, do SA, disengage with CA
- first attack misses, second attack misses, disengage with CA
- first attack misses, second attack hits, disengage with CA
- first attack misses, second attack hits, do SA and stay

[R.Shackleford]

If rogues had a weird version of extra attack where you choose which of attack or SA will eat your bonus action, typical turn would be:
- first attack hits, do SA, disengage with CA
- first attack misses, second attack misses, disengage with CA
- first attack misses, second attack hits, disengage with CA
- first attack misses, second attack hits, do SA and stay

This is typically how a rogue must think anywyas, giving them a way to keep up with DPR really only makes the player feel better whenever they can't SA.

Though... Sneak attack is so damn easy to trigger that if you aren't getting it consistently then something is wrong.

[krugaan]

This is typically how a rogue must think anywyas, giving them a way to keep up with DPR really only makes the player feel better whenever they can't SA.

Though... Sneak attack is so damn easy to trigger that if you aren't getting it consistently then something is wrong.

I think yeah, generally speaking, it's hard not to get SA in ... just not always on the right target.

[R.Shackleford]

I think yeah, generally speaking, it's hard not to get SA in ... just not always on the right target.

The right target is the one you can get SA on.

The rogue is a slippery bugger for that reason.

[krugaan]

The right target is the one you can get SA on.

The rogue is a slippery bigger for that reason.

Lol, well, I don't happen to agree, but you might be right.

[R.Shackleford]

Lol, well, I don't happen to agree, but you might be right.

Being able to plink for SA from a distance or twf with daggers (you can throw them as part of DW) on top of the bonus action disengage or dash is all about being slippery.

Take the mobile feat, always take the mobile feat.

[krugaan]

Being able to plink for SA from a distance or twf with daggers (you can throw them as part of DW) on top of the bonus action disengage or dash is all about being slippery.

Take the mobile feat, always take the mobile feat.

Well, yeah, but doesn't necessarily help when the caster is at the back and no one can get to him.

[R.Shackleford]

Well, yeah, but doesn't necessarily help when the caster is at the back and no one can get to him.

...seriously?

There are so many rogue and party builds that work with that.

Cleric + Guiding Bolt

Swashbuckler Rogue

Strength Based Rogue + BA trip + sneak attack with advantage

Familiar goes in and gives next attack advantage

Monk runs up and hits caster then knocks him/her closer to the rogue and prone.

Druid with Faerie Fire or Entangle.

[Reaver25]

Being able to plink for SA from a distance or twf with daggers (you can throw them as part of DW) on top of the bonus action disengage or dash is all about being slippery.

Take the mobile feat, always take the mobile feat.

That may be true, but remember that making an attack with an offhand weapon takes a bonus action. So if you use both weapons, there is no bonus action for Cunning Action.

[R.Shackleford]

That may be true, but remember that making an attack with an offhand weapon takes a bonus action. So if you use both weapons, there is no bonus action for Cunning Action.

Yes, however that's exactly the tactics of the rogue.

Did you roll well and still miss with your main hand? So you really need this thing to die? Are you in a decent location going forward? Should you retreat?

If you sneak attack with your main hit (due to having advantage) then you shouldn't be using your BA for another attack.

[Reaver25]

Yes, however that's exactly the tactics of the rogue.

Did you roll well and still miss with your main hand? So you really need this thing to die? Are you in a decent location going forward? Should you retreat?

If you sneak attack with your main hit (due to having advantage) then you shouldn't be using your BA for another attack.

Oh, asbolutely, I was just pointing out that you couldn't do both in the same turn. But that's how I think while I'm playing. If it might be close to death, I sacrifice maneuverability for that extra damage. If it will truck me, though, I disengage and move away.