PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Combat Versatility -feat



Arkhios
2016-11-13, 02:33 AM
Another thread in 5e/Next subforum made me think what if there was a feat that would allow certain locked-up class features to expand their capabilities. Above all I'm talking about rage and divine smite as melee only features, but when thinking about it, such a feat could help many other characters as well. Such as rogues being proficient with longsword which isn't a finesse weapon, for example. I don't see it's too powerful to let a versatile weapon benefit from being held in two hands while using dexterity to attack -- especially if it has a feat tax. A d10 as a dexterity weapon isn't too powerful, when you don't get to use sneak attack on it as well.

Combat Versatility
<Catchy fluff text here>

You can benefit from a class feature that normally works only with melee attacks up to a range of 30 feet.
You can choose to substitute your Dexterity for your Strength when making an attack with a one-handed melee weapon as long as you are proficient with it, even if the weapon doesn't have the Finesse property. You must make the decision before you make the attack roll.
You can choose to substitute your Strength for your Dexterity when making an attack with a longbow, a shortbow, or a sling, as long as you are proficient with it. You must make the decision before you make the attack roll.


Opinions, further ideas, and possible playtest feedback are welcome.

Note: Finesse is a weapon property. The feat does NOT bestow that property on the weapons handled by the character with this feat. If it did, it would say so.

Amnoriath
2016-11-13, 07:48 AM
Another thread in 5e/Next subforum made me think what if there was a feat that would allow certain locked-up class features to expand their capabilities. Above all I'm talking about rage and divine smite as melee only features, but when thinking about it, such a feat could help many other characters as well. Such as rogues being proficient with longsword which isn't a finesse weapon, for example. I don't see it's too powerful to let a versatile weapon benefit from being held in two hands while using dexterity to attack -- especially if it has a feat tax. A d10 as a dexterity weapon isn't too powerful, when you don't get to use sneak attack on it as well.

Combat Versatility
<Catchy fluff text here>
Requirement: Dex 13

You can benefit from a class feature that normally works only with melee attacks up to 30 feet range.
You can substitute your Dexterity for your Strength when making an attack with a melee weapon which you are proficient with, even if the weapon doesn't have the Finesse property.
You can substitute your Strength for your Dexterity when making an attack with a ranged weapon which you are proficient with.



Edit: Afterword, I think the above solution is more or less balanced, because with Magic Initiate you could substitute your wisdom for your strength when attacking with a shillelagh, and being able to unleash divine smite up to 30 feet will still leave you relatively close to melee range and susceptible to being attack by most creatures because most have land speed 30 ft. - with the only corner case exceptions being characters that can also fly.

Opinions, further ideas, and possible playtest feedback are welcome.
1. The reason why is this feat is perfect for marrying the GWF style with sneak attack. The more dice you get to throw the better it is and they are d6's.
2. The direction of the feat also seems for those who juggle between between Dexterity and Strength. Personally it should focus more on being versatile in fighting styles with appropriate prerequisites of course.

Matticusrex
2016-11-13, 08:02 AM
Why be a strength character anymore?

Arkhios
2016-11-13, 08:36 AM
1. The reason why is this feat is perfect for marrying the GWF style with sneak attack. The more dice you get to throw the better it is and they are d6's.
2. The direction of the feat also seems for those who juggle between between Dexterity and Strength. Personally it should focus more on being versatile in fighting styles with appropriate prerequisites of course.

1. But the thing is, that it won't help with specifically "GWF + Sneak Attack". All those versatile weapons still remain as they are, they can't be used to deal sneak attack damage. Yes, you could attack with the longsword using dexterity, but a longsword still won't qualify for sneak attack since it lacks the finesse property -- The feat doesn't grant it; it only lets you use your dexterity instead when attacking with Longsword.
2. While I do see your point, I didn't mean this feat would supplement only those characters that have access to Fighting Style (which would narrow it down to fighter, paladin, and ranger, period. I wanted to provide meaningful option for those whose class features force them to use a specific type of weapon to benefit from their class features. A monk can't benefit from Martial Arts when throwing daggers, for example. While a 17+ level monk could deal d10 with dagger in melee, as soon as he would throw it, the damage suddenly becomes d4 again. Seems stupid to me, but that's how the game works. Likewise, Rage functions only when used to make melee attacks with strength. What if I wanted to throw my melee weapon which had the thrown weapon property? No rage bonus to damage. "Thanks a lot, rules!".
Also, the fact that a divine smite is only usable with melee attacks seems weird. Why would a melee weapon be any more susceptible to divine power than a bow, for example? The smite spells do work with ranged weapons, so why not the class feature as well?
A rogue gets proficiency with longsword, even though it's not a finesse weapon, and thus can't deal sneak attack with it. Why would a rogue ever choose to use a longsword because of that reason?
All in all, the direction I was aiming at was to make different approach possible at the cost of a feat that doesn't even give a +1 bonus to chosen stat.

That being said, would it be too strong if you could use greatsword with dexterity? I don't know. Or to fire an arrow using your strength? I doubt it.


Why be a strength character anymore?

I won't belittle that concern, as I did get it myself as well. Maybe I should add a restriction that the weapons with which you can substitute a different ability score had to be specifically one-handed versatile melee weapons and specifically ranged weapons, respectively. Besides, it's a feat. You can just as well choose to not take it.

Amnoriath
2016-11-13, 09:47 AM
1. But the thing is, that it won't help with specifically "GWF + Sneak Attack". All those versatile weapons still remain as they are, they can't be used to deal sneak attack damage. Yes, you could attack with the longsword using dexterity, but a longsword still won't qualify for sneak attack since it lacks the finesse property -- The feat doesn't grant it; it only lets you use your dexterity instead when attacking with Longsword.
2. While I do see your point, I didn't mean this feat would supplement only those characters that have access to Fighting Style (which would narrow it down to fighter, paladin, and ranger, period. I wanted to provide meaningful option for those whose class features force them to use a specific type of weapon to benefit from their class features. A monk can't benefit from Martial Arts when throwing daggers, for example. While a 17+ level monk could deal d10 with dagger in melee, as soon as he would throw it, the damage suddenly becomes d4 again. Seems stupid to me, but that's how the game works. Likewise, Rage functions only when used to make melee attacks with strength. What if I wanted to throw my melee weapon which had the thrown weapon property? No rage bonus to damage. "Thanks a lot, rules!".
Also, the fact that a divine smite is only usable with melee attacks seems weird. Why would a melee weapon be any more susceptible to divine power than a bow, for example? The smite spells do work with ranged weapons, so why not the class feature as well?
A rogue gets proficiency with longsword, even though it's not a finesse weapon, and thus can't deal sneak attack with it. Why would a rogue ever choose to use a longsword because of that reason?
All in all, the direction I was aiming at was to make different approach possible at the cost of a feat that doesn't even give a +1 bonus to chosen stat.

That being said, would it be too strong if you could use greatsword with dexterity? I don't know. Or to fire an arrow using your strength? I doubt it.



I won't belittle that concern, as I did get it myself as well. Maybe I should add a restriction that the weapons with which you can substitute a different ability score had to be specifically one-handed versatile melee weapons and specifically ranged weapons, respectively. Besides, it's a feat. You can just as well choose to not take it.
1. If you accept that monks can use sneak attack with unarmed strikes than this feat must apply as well.
2. Yes, for the rage, no for the monk. The martial arts die apply regardless how they choose to use a monk weapon.
3. It is the intentional direction of the class. It is kind of how like the Ranger favors archery even though it throws a couple of bones in which melee could use.
4. It makes a combo in which is among the stronger ones out there with significant returns in damage with little cost. With a d6 they have a 1/3 chance of re-rolling for each one. It is a noticeable chance for increasing damage in which its only drawback is a 1/6 of getting 1 point less. Ultimately to me a feat like this shouldn't work like this as it is suppose to add versatility and options not specialize to get certain combos.

Sicarius Victis
2016-11-13, 05:33 PM
1. If you accept that monks can use sneak attack with unarmed strikes than this feat must apply as well.
2. Yes, for the rage, no for the monk. The martial arts die apply regardless how they choose to use a monk weapon.
3. It is the intentional direction of the class. It is kind of how like the Ranger favors archery even though it throws a couple of bones in which melee could use.
4. It makes a combo in which is among the stronger ones out there with significant returns in damage with little cost. With a d6 they have a 1/3 chance of re-rolling for each one. It is a noticeable chance for increasing damage in which its only drawback is a 1/6 of getting 1 point less. Ultimately to me a feat like this shouldn't work like this as it is suppose to add versatility and options not specialize to get certain combos.

Try looking at Sage Advice. They've already disproven both 1 and 4. No, unarmed attacks can't Sneak Attack, and no, GWF can't re-roll damage from sources other than the weapon damage dice. Correct about the Rage/Martial Arts thing, though.

Amnoriath
2016-11-13, 06:50 PM
Try looking at Sage Advice. They've already disproven both 1 and 4. No, unarmed attacks can't Sneak Attack, and no, GWF can't re-roll damage from sources other than the weapon damage dice. Correct about the Rage/Martial Arts thing, though.

I did say if because it is logical(finesse and ranged weapons=Dexterity to attack..etc), unfortunately Sage Advice isn't at all consistent in its logic. They allow a Rogue to throw out its sneak attack twice or more possibly with certain builds because it doesn't specify its turn even though no other feature refreshes on some one else's actions. Yet they block the line attack idea of Whirlwind Attack even though right before with Volley they specified declaring a point in the text while never did so with Whirlwind Attack.

Arkhios
2016-11-13, 10:58 PM
I did say if because it is logical(finesse and ranged weapons=Dexterity to attack..etc), unfortunately Sage Advice isn't at all consistent in its logic. They allow a Rogue to throw out its sneak attack twice or more possibly with certain builds because it doesn't specify its turn even though no other feature refreshes on some one else's actions. Yet they block the line attack idea of Whirlwind Attack even though right before with Volley they specified declaring a point in the text while never did so with Whirlwind Attack.

Logical or not, I'm not trying to change how the rules themselves work. Instead my intent was to work with the rules to make new options consistent with existing rules, using the same lingo the rules already use etc.

Now, with that in mind, allowing to use dexterity instead of strength for non-finesse weapons will not make any loopholes to sneak attack because sneak attack has already made clear in which conditions it works.

Regarding the Martial Arts, I re-read it and yes, you're right about how they choose to use their weapons. So, that's one case less that might need an optional solution. However, as already pointed out, monks being able to substitute dex for str does not, in itself, make weapons or unarmed strikes finesse weapons. That's an inherent weapon property whereas monk's capability comes from their martial arts training.

TheOldCrow
2016-11-15, 10:04 AM
Requirement: Dex 13

If you are going to have a requirement, I think STR 13 makes more sense. This seems to be about mastering STR features enough that one can also use them at range or with finesse.

Arkhios
2016-11-16, 09:29 AM
If you are going to have a requirement, I think STR 13 makes more sense. This seems to be about mastering STR features enough that one can also use them at range or with finesse.

You have part of a point there, but I intended the feat to be tempting for all classes, not just str-based classes. I put "str 13 or dex 13" as the requirement instead.

Also, again, being able to wield melee weapons with dexterity instead of strength doesn't exactly bestow the Finesse property on those weapons. That will remain unique to the weapons which have the property.
Likewise allowing strength to be used in place of dexterity on ranged weapons doesn't turn a bow into a weapon with the Thrown property, for example.

TheOldCrow
2016-11-16, 01:55 PM
You have part of a point there, but I intended the feat to be tempting for all classes, not just str-based classes. I put "str 13 or dex 13" as the requirement instead.

Yeah, that's much better. The Dex prereq made it just a feat for those who were Dex based, and costly for STR based characters. Changing the prereg to either/or opens it up. Honestly, you could probably just drop the prereq, as it seems unlikely anyone would take this feat unless they had one or the other anyway.

Arkhios
2016-11-16, 02:20 PM
Yeah, that's much better. The Dex prereq made it just a feat for those who were Dex based, and costly for STR based characters. Changing the prereg to either/or opens it up. Honestly, you could probably just drop the prereq, as it seems unlikely anyone would take this feat unless they had one or the other anyway.

True, I'll remove it. I made a number of other changes too, what do you think about them?

Basically adding limitations to the weapons which the feat could affect. With ranged weapons it's fairly plausible to benefit from strength when shooting with a bow, or slinging a bullet, but not much with shooting a crossbow.

Likewise lacking a proper strength might make it difficult to wield a greatsword, or any other heavy weapon, so I reduced the effect to only benefit one-handed melee weapons (incl. allowing dexterity with versatile weapons)