PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next More Feats



demonslayerelf
2018-07-15, 12:58 AM
Allo, I'm here with feats. I did something like this a while back(Twice, actually), but most have undergone changes, and a ton were added. That, and I couldn't find my old thread.
So here it is!

FEATS (https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/BJqM2urmf)

Feedback is always appreciated.

Quick Note:
Proficiency Dice are a DMG variant rule, which I reference a lot in the feats. They give the die equivalent to your proficiency modifier, and therefore scale perfectly TO the proficiency modifier, just as a die, and with more randomness.
The dice are as follows;


Proficiency Modifier
Proficiency Die


+2
1d4


+3
1d6


+4
1d8


+5
1d10


+6
1d12

Sir Brett Nortj
2018-07-15, 02:16 AM
Allo, I'm here with feats. I did something like this a while back(Twice, actually), but most have undergone changes, and a ton were added. That, and I couldn't find my old thread.
So here it is!

FEATS (https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/BJqM2urmf)

Feedback is always appreciated.

Bloody great stuff!

You bring new flavour to the d n d game!

demonslayerelf
2018-07-16, 12:37 AM
Bloody great stuff!

You bring new flavour to the d n d game!

Appreciated, but I was more hoping for "Oh, there's a problem with X! You need to get on that!" You know?

Vogie
2018-07-16, 09:22 AM
Feats are supposed to be focused and as eloquent as possible. My main critique of these feats in general is there's too much going on. There's also a proficiency die thing in a bunch of the feats that isn't explained, so I assume it's something you've created in a previous list.

Ambidexterity seems really overpowered. Double down on bonus attacks on light weapons is interesting, but powerful in its own right, then tacking on a supersized version of PAM is absurd.

Anvil of Thunder, Hammer's Edge & Bear Fang are way too narrow to be of value.

Arcane Equipment is way overpowered, for weapons. Sharpshooter & GWM are considered OP by giving -5 to hit and +10 to damage... and this allows you to burn a spell slot to give +hit AND +damage. 2nd level spell slot gives +1 to hit and +4 to damage, a 5th level spell slot gives +2 to hit and +10 damage. It may be decent on Long rest classes, but it'd be overpowered on something like a warlock that allows their 5th level spell slots to refresh on short rest.

That being said, the Armor half of the feat is awesome, and worth a feat in itself... it's effectively a caster version of the RAW Defensive Duelist.

Brawler seems interesting, but it'd be easier if you just defined what the brawler die is, instead of that very confusing formula.

Brutal Attacker could easily be, and probably should be, 2 separate feats.

Channel Anger is mostly a paragraph of downside for a not great frighten effect. I like the idea, but the execution is notgood.

Revised Defensive Duelist makes no sense. You're using your reaction (on your turn?) to get special reactions to do the same thing but not, then you get a bonus action Dodge that isn't Dodge.

I really like that Revised Magic Initiate can grab Paladin & Ranger Spells.

Medic was great until you gave them a Revive, that's probably a bridge too far.

Quick Wit is fantastic

I can't tell if revised Ritual Caster is better or worse, because you get more rituals when you pick up the feat later, but you lose that time to pick up rituals during the campaign

Tactician is really interesting, but the Plot action needs to have a number of uses to burn through... maybe based on your Int modifier?

demonslayerelf
2018-07-16, 10:07 AM
There's also a proficiency die thing in a bunch of the feats that isn't explained, so I assume it's something you've created in a previous list.
Proficiency Die is actually a variant rule in the DMG. I should probably put that in the OP, but it's basically +2 becomes +1d4, +3 becomes +1d6, etc.


Ambidexterity seems really overpowered. Double down on bonus attacks on light weapons is interesting, but powerful in its own right, then tacking on a supersized version of PAM is absurd.
Let's be clear; PAM is garbage. There are much better ways to get a bonus action attack than a feat that gives the equivalent of a Dagger in the off-hand. And while taking a second bonus-action attack seems bad, it's still adding a singular off-hand attack(Meaning no ranged weapons, and you have to also have the fighting style for it to really help) each turn. At a barbarian's absolute best, that's 1d6+11(Or 14 average), discounting magic. That's 20th level with maximum strength, and the best light weapon they can have. 20th level. It's not great, really, and certain classes and subclasses already get the- as you call it- "absurd" PAM upgrade.


Anvil of Thunder, Hammer's Edge & Bear Fang are way too narrow to be of value.
Eeehhh, there are more narrow feats in the DMG(For instance, the above Polearm Weapon Master, which you call absurd). They are relatively narrow in scope, though. I'll see what I can't do about that.


Arcane Equipment is way overpowered, for weapons. Sharpshooter & GWM are considered OP by giving -5 to hit and +10 to damage... and this allows you to burn a spell slot to give +hit AND +damage. 2nd level spell slot gives +1 to hit and +4 to damage, a 5th level spell slot gives +2 to hit and +10 damage. It may be decent on Long rest classes, but it'd be overpowered on something like a warlock that allows their 5th level spell slots to refresh on short rest.

That being said, the Armor half of the feat is awesome, and worth a feat in itself... it's effectively a caster version of the RAW Defensive Duelist.
SS and GWM essentially have no penalty(The -5 is so easy to offset it's not even funny), and add 10 damage even as a 4th or 8th level character. This ties into using a resource(Spells), and to get a boost as good as SS or GWM, you have to give up the use of a Cone of Cold, Danse Macabre, Destructive Wave, etc., which would probably be better for a caster able to use it. Certain subclassing can get two attacks, or an attack as a bonus action(With the same weapon). Since this applies to one weapon, that's just about adding your level to the damage for 1 minute, and getting a pretty small bonus to hit. Only slightly better than the Aasimar's transformation; but that works once/round(And carries another effect with it), and is otherwise free, while this works however many times per round, at the cost of a spell slot.


Brawler seems interesting, but it'd be easier if you just defined what the brawler die is, instead of that very confusing formula.
Well, that's how you would define it. I basically made it a slow-progression, but limited by strength. (For instance, having 20 strength, it goes 1d4, then becomes 1d6 at 5th level, 1d8 at 9, etc., but stops at 1d10. But I can't list it for every strength score, it would take up a hilariously massive amount of space.)


Brutal Attacker could easily be, and probably should be, 2 separate feats.
See, when you do that, you get Savage Attacker(A laughingstock feat in the PHB), and Single-exploding dice on a crit. Neither good enough for it's own feat.


Channel Anger is mostly a paragraph of downside for a not great frighten effect. I like the idea, but the execution is not good.
And essentially expertise(Or triple-expertise) on a skill check. It's also the best frighten effect period, with no concentration and no roll to cure yourself of it.


Revised Defensive Duelist makes no sense. You're using your reaction (on your turn?) to get special reactions to do the same thing but not, then you get a bonus action Dodge that isn't Dodge.
No, you use your ACTION for special reactions, which you parry with. And it's dodge, there's just a limit to how many attacks it gives disadvantage.
I'll give an example. If a 11th level fighter used it's action to get parrying reactions, they would get 3 extra reactions, which they may only parry with. Each parry adds 4 to their AC, but only against one weapon attack. If the same fighter then went into a limited dodge action(Using their bonus action), they would give 2 attacks disadvantage.


Medic was great until you gave them a Revive, that's probably a bridge too far.
As with all resurrection abilities, I anticipated that. But it should be noted that you essentially get to cast a less-than-third level Revivify, but using your healer's kit(You also have to do it within, AT MOST, 30 seconds. Most likely, you'll get 3 or fewer turns, and you're removed from combat, but can still get yourself murdered.)


I can't tell if revised Ritual Caster is better or worse, because you get more rituals when you pick up the feat later, but you lose that time to pick up rituals during the campaign
I have absolutely no clue what you mean by this. I more or less copied word-for-word the Ritual Caster feat, only I removed the bit about having to choose a class.


Tactician is really interesting, but the Plot action needs to have a number of uses to burn through... maybe based on your Int modifier?
It lets you spend an action and EVERYBODY'S reactions, so they get to act in a different initiative, once. It's already not the best, it would be garbage if you could only do it a few times.

Rerem115
2018-07-16, 12:37 PM
Let's be clear; PAM is garbage. There are much better ways to get a bonus action attack than a feat that gives the equivalent of a Dagger in the off-hand. And while taking a second bonus-action attack seems bad, it's still adding a singular off-hand attack(Meaning no ranged weapons, and you have to also have the fighting style for it to really help) each turn. At a barbarian's absolute best, that's 1d6+11(Or 14 average), discounting magic. That's 20th level with maximum strength, and the best light weapon they can have. 20th level. It's not great, really, and certain classes and subclasses already get the- as you call it- "absurd" PAM upgrade.


PAM is good because it gives the classes that take it something to do with their bonus action. The fighter or the paladin wasn't going to do much with it anyway, and it gives the paladin another chance to smite, and if you have any other rider on your attacks, it becomes even better.
Now, from a pure damage perspective, Ambidexterity is straight up better than PAM, one of the Holy Trinity martial feats, alongside GWM and SS. Here's my reasoning why:

--You can't really consider the dual wielding half in a vacuum, since it's a style that has such poor support RAW; anybody who takes this is probably going to gun for both the TWF fighting style and the Dual Wielder feat (or one of your...interesting replacements. Seriously, why no love for Florentining/two rapiers? Eh, more on this later). They're going to be rather specialized, and are probably going to stack riders on their attacks. Also, because it no longer requires you to take the Attack action, you're essentially giving a combination of Extra Attack and Cunning Action, since you can use your bonus action to essentially take the Attack action (with Extra Attack!) and then Dash, Dodge, Disengage, or Hide, or literally anything else that requires your action on your turn.

--As crazy good as the dual wielding half is, the second part is even better. It's a bonus action attack with a Greataxe/Glaive/Maul/Greatsword. It's the Berserker Barbarian's defining class feature in a feat, except with no downsides. This is INSANELY powerful, and synergizes really, really well with nearly everything.

I don't really like what you've done with the Dual Wielding feat. Yes, I know it's usually considered a feat tax and can be a little underwhelming, but at least it's broad enough in scope that can apply to pretty much any character. Its replacements, however, are incredibly narrow in scope while also being broken mechanically (at will Stun/Paralysis, adding up to 2d10+48 damage on an attack, wielding a d10 and a 1d6+2d4 weapon, wielding two d10 weapons and at will prone on anything with <24 Strength with no action cost). It hearkens back to 3.PF, with increasing specialization, which 5e as a general rule tends to avoid.

Brutal Attacker is probably too strong, and needs clarification. What is Weapon Damage? Is Sneak Attack/Colossus Slayer/Smite also weapon damage? Even if it's just the weapon's damage die, this is still good, but the fact that you also re-roll damage and have the exploding dice is enough to push this over the edge.

I'm leery of Arcane Equipment because it's a flat but significant bonus to damage and to hit or a big bonus to AC and Damage Reduction (a mechanic that has almost entirely been phased out of 5e) that also stacks with magic items. It's limited enough that I'll tentatively give it a pass, but this could pull some serious shenanigans given the proper support, especially the armor options.

The Defensive Duelist changes may or may not have been necessary, but the end result is a bit of a mess. Maybe you could find a more elegant way to implement this?

I'd honestly just get rid of the prone aspect of what you've done with GWM; it's already good enough with decoupling the extra attack from your bonus action and getting rid of the to-hit penalty.

Necromancer's Touch is a little nuts, especially at higher levels. If I'm reading this right, at 17th level, you can cast Inflict Wounds 6 times per day as a 3rd level spell, and heal the same amount. That's 30d10 worth of damage and healing, on top having up to 20 temporary hit points every round. This feels like like the cornerstone abilities of a class, and as such, shouldn't be available as a feat. This needs to be SIGNIFICANTLY scaled down.


At any rate, these are what immediately jumped to my attention as I was reading through this.

demonslayerelf
2018-07-16, 01:38 PM
PAM is good because it gives the classes that take it something to do with their bonus action. The fighter or the paladin wasn't going to do much with it anyway, and it gives the paladin another chance to smite, and if you have any other rider on your attacks, it becomes even better.
You say this, but for all of the above, it's just as easy to use a longsword and a dagger. You lose reach and a bit of damage(And when I say a bit, I mean single-digits of damage. It goes from(Upto) 4d10+1d4+StrModx5, to 4d8+1d4+StrModx5), but since that's just about all this feat gives(Aside from a semi-guaranteed AoO on the first round of combat), it's pretty bad.


Now, from a pure damage perspective, Ambidexterity is straight up better than PAM, one of the Holy Trinity martial feats, alongside GWM and SS. Here's my reasoning why:

--You can't really consider the dual wielding half in a vacuum, since it's a style that has such poor support RAW; anybody who takes this is probably going to gun for both the TWF fighting style and the Dual Wielder feat (or one of your...interesting replacements. Seriously, why no love for Florentining/two rapiers? Eh, more on this later). They're going to be rather specialized, and are probably going to stack riders on their attacks. Also, because it no longer requires you to take the Attack action, you're essentially giving a combination of Extra Attack and Cunning Action, since you can use your bonus action to essentially take the Attack action (with Extra Attack!) and then Dash, Dodge, Disengage, or Hide, or literally anything else that requires your action on your turn.
Well, no, you get a single attack as a bonus action. Quote; "and you may otherwise make a single offhand bonus attack with a Light weapon on any turn, even if you did not use the Attack action." You only get the second hit when taking the attack action. As to the rest of the reply, I never said they probably wouldn't, just that they would definitely have to to get the most out of it. On any round, it is a single extra attack with nothing more. (And I'll respond to the bit in parenthesis lower)


--As crazy good as the dual wielding half is, the second part is even better. It's a bonus action attack with a Greataxe/Glaive/Maul/Greatsword. It's the Berserker Barbarian's defining class feature in a feat, except with no downsides. This is INSANELY powerful, and synergizes really, really well with nearly everything.
It's literally the same as above, it just provides a single extra attack. And the damage difference between a longsword and any of the two-handers is either 2 steps(Average bonus of ~2) or less, some having reach(Such as ye old glaive(Also, my Autocorrect is trying to make that lawgiver... Thanks Obama :P)).

But you're not wrong, it synergizes with just about everything that would appreciate an extra hit, and doesn't already use bonus actions for things. But it's still just one extra hit per round. At most, for say a 10th level character(Assuming they don't already get this, like a War Cleric, or Frenzy Barbarian), this would give 1d12+5 damage, or +8 for barbarians(Rage damage and whatnot), which is still only 11 or 14 extra damage, on average. It's an extra chance for Riders, aye, but that can still be done by just picking up a shortsword and longsword. Slightly lower damage, for more or less the same effect.

And if you're going to combine it with other feats, you have some options; If it's one of mine, it might be as high as another d12, but that's at a really high level(17+) and with conditions on it. If it's PHB... You've got GWM, which is +10 per hit, which most people agree is pretty much the best(You call it part of a Holy Trinity, with SS and PAM(And I should point out CE and Sentinel both, since they're pretty nice). That one's borken on it's own, though.


I don't really like what you've done with the Dual Wielding feat. Yes, I know it's usually considered a feat tax and can be a little underwhelming, but at least it's broad enough in scope that can apply to pretty much any character. Its replacements, however, are incredibly narrow in scope while also being broken mechanically (at will Stun/Paralysis, adding up to 2d10+48 damage on an attack, wielding a d10 and a 1d6+2d4 weapon, wielding two d10 weapons and at will prone on anything with <24 Strength with no action cost). It hearkens back to 3.PF, with increasing specialization, which 5e as a general rule tends to avoid.
Funnily enough, they're only a little bit less broad than the original DW feat. You can still wield whatever weapons, it just takes away the AC bonus(Except Slash and Burn, that's a little more specific.) But yeah, those are a bit much. I realized I hadn't put them in the "WIP/Testing" page, but onto the normal one, right after I made the post, so I didn't have time to actually math those out. All of the above, good points, but I did have an idea to fix them while typing this. (Also to the above; Nothing against it, but I didn't want to have it be just a SINGLE weapon, that's too focused to even consider)

Basically, have a "Dual Wielding Style" feat, which is just the one feat, but has a ton of weapon combinations under it. Sort of, "You can wield any two weapons, and can draw/stow two weapons at a time, then get one of the following thingies", where each thingie was "Bear Claw" or "Anvil of Thunder" or whatever. Also haven't thought it out yet, we'll see how it goes, I guess.


Brutal Attacker is probably too strong, and needs clarification. What is Weapon Damage? Is Sneak Attack/Colossus Slayer/Smite also weapon damage? Even if it's just the weapon's damage die, this is still good, but the fact that you also re-roll damage and have the exploding dice is enough to push this over the edge.
A- It's JUST weapon damage. The damage of the weapon exclusively.
B- Rerolling damage adds diddly squat. I set up a thing in Google Sheets, and it was only an average of +2 on a d12, getting smaller from there. That's just to preserve the original Savage Attacker.
C- The exploding damage only works once per die, and that means that if you're using a Greatsword, and you don't get extra crit dice(Half orcs and barbarians), you're getting about a +6 damage on a crit. Greatswords benefit the most from this, as well as Mauls(Same damage and whatnot). Other weapons like it, just not as much.
I actually know how to math this one out. 25/36 times, you'll roll between 1-5, and the math doesn't significantly change, so you take the average of those 5, which is 3, and multiply it by the 25/36, to get 75/36. The other side is bigger, because you add that to the 11/36 odds you roll a 6. When you roll a 6, you roll again, and the average is still 3.5, but I'm gonna round it to 4 because you do end up rolling it twice, and that gives a small(Almost nothing) benefit. This gets 110/36 average. 185/36 is the average for each d6, which is about 5, making your average about 20, as compared to 14 average damage on 4d6(critical 2d6).

And it's funny, because if you maximized the critical damage, you wouldn't get exploding dice(Since you didn't actually roll dice), meaning it's just +10. Once per turn, assuming you get a crit. Barbarians would find this more effective than anyone else, but they already get brutal crits, sooooo... Eh.


The Defensive Duelist changes may or may not have been necessary, but the end result is a bit of a mess. Maybe you could find a more elegant way to implement this?
Truthfully, I don't think there is? Without changing it drastically again, that is. It's too weak RAW, and I wanted it to be something you can use to enter a sort of "Absolute defensive position", use everything you have to not die. Your action, bonus action, and reaction(s), all in an attempt to not die. I'm open to new ideas on it, but I don't think there's much in the way of making it prettier, you know?(But if you saw Brawler or Eldritch Warrior, you know prettiness isn't at the top of my list)


I'd honestly just get rid of the prone aspect of what you've done with GWM; it's already good enough with decoupling the extra attack from your bonus action and getting rid of the to-hit penalty.
I'm a little hesitant about that, but you're probably right.


Necromancer's Touch is a little nuts, especially at higher levels. If I'm reading this right, at 17th level, you can cast Inflict Wounds 6 times per day as a 3rd level spell, and heal the same amount. That's 30d10 worth of damage and healing, on top having up to 20 temporary hit points every round. This feels like like the cornerstone abilities of a class, and as such, shouldn't be available as a feat. This needs to be SIGNIFICANTLY scaled down.
That is a very good point. Ima note this with the other stuff.

Rerem115
2018-07-16, 02:33 PM
You say this, but for all of the above, it's just as easy to use a longsword and a dagger. You lose reach and a bit of damage(And when I say a bit, I mean single-digits of damage. It goes from(Upto) 4d10+1d4+StrModx5, to 4d8+1d4+StrModx5), but since that's just about all this feat gives(Aside from a semi-guaranteed AoO on the first round of combat), it's pretty bad.

You're missing a couple of things with this analysis. Since RAW, both weapons need to be Light, the best you could do is a pair of shortswords, and without a fighting style that only Fighters and Rangers have access to, you don't get to add your modifier to the bonus action attack. In comparison, you do get to add your modifier to the PAM bonus attack, so it's 1d4+STR, as opposed to 1d6+0. Yes, you could take TWF, if you're a Fighter or a Ranger, but that doesn't do diddly for Paladins, and it means that you're also missing out on Defense or GWF. It's why PAM is so good.



Well, no, you get a single attack as a bonus action. Quote; "and you may otherwise make a single offhand bonus attack with a Light weapon on any turn, even if you did not use the Attack action." You only get the second hit when taking the attack action. As to the rest of the reply, I never said they probably wouldn't, just that they would definitely have to to get the most out of it. On any round, it is a single extra attack with nothing more.

Oh, my bad, I misread that. It's still a big power boost, but it's one I've been considering giving to dual wielding for a while. I'd still be cautious with allowing a bonus action attack without an attack action, though. That gives a shocking amount of flexibility, granting both one of the EK's class features and allowing for whatever goofy interactions your players can find.



It's literally the same as above, it just provides a single extra attack. And the damage difference between a longsword and any of the two-handers is either 2 steps(Average bonus of ~2) or less, some having reach(Such as ye old glaive(Also, my Autocorrect is trying to make that lawgiver... Thanks Obama :P)).

But you're not wrong, it synergizes with just about everything that would appreciate an extra hit, and doesn't already use bonus actions for things. But it's still just one extra hit per round. At most, for say a 10th level character(Assuming they don't already get this, like a War Cleric, or Frenzy Barbarian), this would give 1d12+5 damage, or +8 for barbarians(Rage damage and whatnot), which is still only 11 or 14 extra damage, on average. It's an extra chance for Riders, aye, but that can still be done by just picking up a shortsword and longsword. Slightly lower damage, for more or less the same effect.

No, this is most certainly not the same as picking up two swords. As I said earlier, without feats and/or fighting styles, you're limited to a pair of shortswords and can't add your ability modifier to the bonus action attack. At 4th level, it's the difference between 2d6+3 and 2d12+6, which is 2.5 times as much. Even with Extra Attack, this is still massive; it's 50% more damage compared to other two-handers without this feat, and is 150% more than a character dual-wielding shortswords. The Berserker Barbarian actually has the highest DPR in the game if the player doesn't care about exhaustion, and you just made that into a feat.


Basically, have a "Dual Wielding Style" feat, which is just the one feat, but has a ton of weapon combinations under it. Sort of, "You can wield any two weapons, and can draw/stow two weapons at a time, then get one of the following thingies", where each thingie was "Bear Claw" or "Anvil of Thunder" or whatever. Also haven't thought it out yet, we'll see how it goes, I guess.

All right, fair enough. What I was concerned about was that as far as I could tell, your replacement feat(s) didn't get rid of the light limitation and the draw/stow stipulation as a global modifier; it was just for the handful of weapons listed.

I'll take your word for it with regards to Brutal Attacker; it's just that I've always thought it a troublesome feat. It does nothing interesting, since it doesn't open up new ways of playing the game, and instead just makes you a bit better at what you've already been doing. Upgrading it is a bit of an issue too, since it turns into sort of a "win more" feat; it's just more damage. It's not conditional, doesn't make you do anything fancy, it's just more damage, and making it so that it's even more "more damage" bugs me.

Sir Brett Nortj
2018-07-16, 08:41 PM
Appreciated, but I was more hoping for "Oh, there's a problem with X! You need to get on that!" You know?

Hey, I am 'too lost in you...' I just looked at most of the names and glanced at the descriptions - short attention span...

Let's leave 'nit picking' for others?

demonslayerelf
2018-07-16, 10:14 PM
You're missing a couple of things with this analysis. Since RAW, both weapons need to be Light, the best you could do is a pair of shortswords, and without a fighting style that only Fighters and Rangers have access to, you don't get to add your modifier to the bonus action attack. In comparison, you do get to add your modifier to the PAM bonus attack, so it's 1d4+STR, as opposed to 1d6+0. Yes, you could take TWF, if you're a Fighter or a Ranger, but that doesn't do diddly for Paladins, and it means that you're also missing out on Defense or GWF. It's why PAM is so good.


No, this is most certainly not the same as picking up two swords. As I said earlier, without feats and/or fighting styles, you're limited to a pair of shortswords and can't add your ability modifier to the bonus action attack. At 4th level, it's the difference between 2d6+3 and 2d12+6, which is 2.5 times as much. Even with Extra Attack, this is still massive; it's 50% more damage compared to other two-handers without this feat, and is 150% more than a character dual-wielding shortswords. The Berserker Barbarian actually has the highest DPR in the game if the player doesn't care about exhaustion, and you just made that into a feat.
So, little note? The difference between 2d6+3 and 2d12+6 isn't 150%. It's 10 and 19, which is 90% difference, and that's if you don't get the fighting style. With the fighting style(And there's a very good chance you're going to take it if you're going to be dual wielding- To quote you from earlier, we can't look at the dual wielding in a vacuum. Pally's can't take it, but the 5 damage they can't add is less than their smite, so that doesn't even matter.) And besides that fact, the differences are as follows, with TWF and 20 strength, between "Normal dual-wielding(With the fighting style and 2 shortswords), PAM, and Ambidexterity with a greataxe." We'll say the first line is at 4th level, and the other is at 10th level(For no particular reason, it could be 5th level), and both of them have miracle 20 strength. I'm also giving PAM and the first Ambidexterity GWF, since they're spec'd to fighting with big weapons.



Ambidexterity(Greataxe)
Ambidexterity(Shortswords)
PAM
No feats


2d12+10(25)
3d6+15(25)
1d12+1d4+10(20)
2d6+10(17)


3d12+15(37)
4d6+20(34)
2d12+1d4+15(33)
3d6+15(28)



So as you can see, at absolute best(Because 4th level is the absolute best for the damage comparison), it's an extra ~50%(25/17) damage over absolutely no feats, 25% clean over PAM, and PAM is only ~17%(20/17) better than just dual wielding with the fighting style. Later on, especially for Fighters(Since they would get even more attacks, and the gap would further widen here), all the differences are lower, down to just 30% better at best.

Rerem115
2018-07-16, 10:47 PM
So as you can see, at absolute best(Because 4th level is the absolute best for the damage comparison), it's an extra ~50%(25/17) damage over absolutely no feats, 25% clean over PAM, and PAM is only ~17%(20/17) better than just dual wielding with the fighting style. Later on, especially for Fighters(Since they would get even more attacks, and the gap would further widen here), all the differences are lower, down to just 30% better at best.

My bad, I messed up a little on the math. However, my point still stands. It's more damage than dual wielding with TWF. It's more damage than dual wielding with TWF and Dual Wielder. From a damage standpoint, it invalidates PAM, while simultaneously allowing access to and benefiting from GWM, and you still get to pick any fighting style that you like. It's a subclasses' defining ability as a feat, except that it's also better, and that is not okay; a Totem Barbarian with Ambidextrous winds up being a better Berserker than the Berserker, and that is wrong. You say 30% better at best, but if you only have 2 attacks a round, then it's a 3rd attack, for a total of 50% better (2x1.5=3). You shouldn't get a 50% damage boost from a feat. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain this.

demonslayerelf
2018-07-16, 11:03 PM
My bad, I messed up a lot on the math.
ftfy


However, my point still stands. It's more damage than dual wielding with TWF. It's more damage than dual wielding with TWF and Dual Wielder.
Dual wielder isn't for damage. At most, it adds 2(2d6 -> 2d8, with shortswords to longswords), so this comparison is pretty dumb. And of course a feat for damage is better than a singular fighting style.


From a damage standpoint, it invalidates PAM, while simultaneously allowing access to and benefiting from GWM, and you still get to pick any fighting style that you like.
PAM is garbage, it was already irrelevant thanks to Sentinel. PAM can also trigger GWM, despite being garbage. And you can always choose whatever fighting style, even with the ****ty PAM.


It's a subclasses' defining ability as a feat, except that it's also better, and that is not okay; a Totem Barbarian with Ambidextrous winds up being a better Berserker than the Berserker, and that is wrong.
They could already achieve that with other feats. For instance, GWM, either the PHB version or the one I made. It just doesn't need a bonus action to do that.


You say 30% better at best, but that 30% (i.e., everyone with just one Extra Attack) is every single martial class other than the Fighter. A feat should not provide a 30-50% damage boost. I feel like I shouldn't have to be explaining this.
That's it's ABSOLUTE best. It lasts for one level, and the total difference is 8 per turn. There is nothing wrong here, and other abilities(Or, just being a slightly different fighter or barbarian using a different weapon) can give more.

Rerem115
2018-07-16, 11:43 PM
That's it's ABSOLUTE best. It lasts for one level, and the total difference is 8 per turn. There is nothing wrong here, and other abilities(Or, just being a slightly different fighter or barbarian using a different weapon) can give more.

I'm not entirely sure what your math is here for that; if you have 2 attacks and gain one more, you gain 50% more damage, since 3 is 50% more than 2. It's not 50% more damage for one level, it's 50% more damage for 15 levels. Even for Fighters, it's still 50% more damage until level 11 (the end point of most campaigns anyway), before decreasing to 33% and then to 25%. This is comparing a character with just this feat to a baseline of no feats at all.

No martial class can match this; a Fighter (the class that benefits the LEAST from Ambidextrous) with TWF and Dual Wielder is doing 5d8+25 (50), a Fighter with PAM is doing 4d10+1d4+25 (52) vs 5d12+25 (60). That's at bare minimum a 15% increase over the best option in the game when it comes to damage. Also, it synergizes better with critical hits due to increased die size, so it's even better for Barbarians which can't get TWF without multiclassing anyway.

This is the second bullet of a single feat. I have no clue where you got the idea PAM was a "garbage feat", since it's one of the most popular choices for optimizing the damage of PCs, and this is straight up better than PAM.

demonslayerelf
2018-07-17, 12:45 AM
I'm not entirely sure what your math is here for that; if you have 2 attacks and gain one more, you gain 50% more damage, since 3 is 50% more than 2. It's not 50% more damage for one level, it's 50% more damage for 15 levels. Even for Fighters, it's still 50% more damage until level 11 (the end point of most campaigns anyway), before decreasing to 33% and then to 25%. This is comparing a character with just this feat to a baseline of no feats at all.
I literally just showed the numbers. At 5th level to 11th level(For fighters, otherwise forever) you get 37 damage with triple greataxing to 28 damage while dual-wielding shortswords. That's not 50% increase, that's an extra 9. If you're comparing the guy with Ambidextrous to someone with absolutely no bonus action, who is also wielding a Greataxe, yeah that's a 50% increase, but there are better options than that, notably ye-old shortsword trick. It's the exact same in terms of action economy and resource economy(Since there isn't one), and deals a bit better damage. Specifically, 11 LESS damage than taking RAW GWM(With only 2 attacks, obvs), AND it takes a bonus action.


No martial class can match this; a Fighter (the class that benefits the LEAST from Ambidextrous) with TWF and Dual Wielder is doing 5d8+25 (50), a Fighter with PAM is doing 4d10+1d4+25 (52) vs 5d12+25 (60). That's at bare minimum a 15% increase over the best option in the game when it comes to damage. Also, it synergizes better with critical hits due to increased die size, so it's even better for Barbarians which can't get TWF without multiclassing anyway.
Problem; Multiple martial classes can very easily match these(Albeit only with a form of magical help, for Pally's and Rangers), without feats in some cases. Paladins and Rangers can each pull off breathtaking damage, but they each use magic so we'll ignore them. A barbarian 20, with NOTHING, not even a subclass, will be pushing out either 3d6+26(36)(With shortswords) or 2d12+22(35)(With greataxe). Tack on any subclass, they'll get 1d6+10(+49, Zealot) extra damage with no tax on the action economy, an additional 1d12+11(52, Berserker)(As a bonus action), an additional 1d12+7(49, Totem)(And knock someone prone, as a bonus action), or an extra 6(Storm)(To several people, then an extra 10 to one creature). Rogues are the only ones which just can't beat that damage without luck or magic.(11d6+5(44), they need to either crit or magic or something.) This is all assuming no feats.

So, looking at the numbers WITH the feats; Oh boy, 8 damage(For Fighter 20)... So great. Just fantastic, truly. On some barbarians it would be pretty nice. Berserkers don't get any bonus from this with a greataxe, but if they were using Shortswords they would get 4d6+30(44). Totem already has Elk at high levels, this would just be a +4 for them(Total 53). Zealots would like it the most, since their bonus action is open, but it brings them 17 damage where other feats would give more(Mostly GWM, either RAW or Revised). Zealots get an absolute total of either 5d6+50(Shortswords, 67) or 3d12+1d6+43(Greataxe, 65).(And yes, I thought it was strange that their damage was higher with twin shortswords) Rangers and Paladins would actually hate this feat, since most of their big-hits are Bonus Actions already(Banishing Smite, Hail of Thorns, Lightning Arrow, anything?) Rogues would get a bonus of ~7(1d4+5), and their cunning action would get ruined. So really, it's only really good for fighters and barbarians(Especially Zealots), and there are better options for both.

Also, you keep saying "The best option"... does RAW GWM not register in your head? It's 40 extra damage for fighters, turning 4d12+20 into 4d12+60. 86. By far the best.


This is the second bullet of a single feat. I have no clue where you got the idea PAM was a "garbage feat", since it's one of the most popular choices for optimizing the damage of PCs, and this is straight up better than PAM.

Because PAM is a pretty garbage feat? It gives a single bonus action attack, with only 3 weapons, and is the equivalent of picking up a dagger. Look at the numbers; At 20th level PAM gets you 52. With baseline greataxe it's 4d12+20, average 49(With the fighting style, without it it's 46, not that it particularly matters.)

It restricts you into using one of 3 weapons, adds 3 damage, and it takes your bonus action. It's also tied to the attack action(Like TWF), meaning if ANYTHING takes your action or bonus action from you, your "Amazing holy trinity of martial feats" does literally nothing.

I'm not gonna lie... I feel very sorry for the suckers who took it.

JNAProductions
2018-07-17, 10:03 AM
Actor just seems really wonky.

Adrenaline Rush is usable too often.

Ambidexterity is far too good. Notice how GWM offers a bonus action attack too. Now, notice how it's restricted to when you kill someone or crit. This just allows it willy-nilly, at-will. And, as was pointed out, for any martial who uses a two-hander (except Fighters of level 11+) it's a straight 50% increase in damage, unless they have some other use for their bonus action. Some do (Paladins, for instance), some don't (Barbarians, for the most part, after they start raging).

Animal Affinity feels fine, but maybe a bit too strong as a ribbon feature.

Angry Warrior is probably too good as a single feat. Compare to Martial Adept.

Arcadian Heritage should not give blanket immunity to charmed-advantage on saves would be fine.

Arcane Equipment... I guess it's okay? It's very short-term and takes an action, but it's still pretty powerful. I'd change all the "Twice the spell level" to simply equal spell level.

Athlete looks fine.

Don't know Mystic, so can't comment on Awakened Mind.

Blood Magic feels okay, BUT! It should have a cap of 5th level spells. No doubling up on Foresight. (Wait, just read that it has to equal your proficiency mod or less. Okay, so you can't make 9ths with it. I'd still cap it at 5th level spells, though-no other feature lets you generate higher than 5th spells.)

Brawler looks fine.

Brutal Attacker might be a touch too good, but that's mostly because it's boring. It just adds damage, nothing fun.

Class Act basically gives Bardic Inspiration, the same as a Bard. Again, compare to Martial Adept. This is too good.

Chakra Healing needs to state how much it costs to upcast. Presumably 1:1, but it's not stated.

Channel Anger is just weird. You can, for instance, bake bread so angrily that you frighten people. It's just... Odd.

Charger might be a touch too good, if walls are available. A Wood Elf, for instance, can deal an extra 3d6 damage on attacks. Then again, it doesn't allow for Extra Attack, so... Probably okay. But! I notice it is not MELEE ONLY. So, you can Dash, shoot a bow, and deal extra damage by running away. Might want to fix that.

Defensive Duelist is fine, except for the Dodge bit. While oftentimes you'll be facing more attacks than 1-3, sometimes you won't, and even then, if you can prioritize the strong attacks, that's really powerful, considering a lot of classes don't need their bonus action for much.

Divine Favour gives more Channel Divinity than Paladins get. Drop it to one use per short rest.

Don't know Blood Hunter, skipping Eldritch Warrior.

Elemental Adept looks fine.

Flexible Magic should probably only give one metamagic.

Forged Pact gives access to Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast as a feat. I don't actually have an issue with that, too much so, but others might. And the gaining a 5th level slot is far too strong-compare to Magic Initiate.

Great Weapon Master is now boring. There's absolutely no choice, just an occasional extra attack. Feats should give choices-it's why I'm not a huge fan of stuff like Tough or Resilient, despite them being good feats. They're purely passive, and so is this.

Hardy should probably have a limit on how much you can spend hit dice out of combat.

Iron Fist feels okay.

Infernal Training is just odd, and too strong.

Magical Resilience is too good-two resistances for a feat? And they can be tailored to whatever your campaign is?

So Magic Initiate now gives, at level 17, five third level slots? Nope no nupe nop. It was already a good feat-could maybe use a SLIGHT buff, but that's an INSANE buff.

Martial Adept is far too good. You should not be able to get the same die size as an actual Battlemaster.

Medic allows for very, very cheap revival. Too cheap, in my opinion, and too reliable. Also, infinite access (limited only by money) to up from zero healing.

Natural Shifter is far too good, especially if taken as a VHuman. A CR 1 monster is stronger than a level 1 player. It does scale very poorly, but I'd rather have a feat that's good at level 1 but not overpowering, and still good at level 20, than one that's overpowered at level 1 and weak at level 20.

Necromancer's Touch feels fine.

Quick Wit feels fine.

Ritual Caster, I'm not even sure what you changed.

Sharpshooter is, similar to GWM, now kinda boring.

Skirmisher's Stealth is way too good.

Specialized Magic is too good.

Specialty Hunter needs to define what it means by type. And it's either too good, in a campaign focused entirely around demon hunting, for instance; or not good enough, when your variety of enemies abound.

Spell Mastery needs to specify what happens if you hit level 0. Magic Missile does not a reasonable cantrip make.

Spirit Animal is fine.

Tactician doesn't actually feel that good.

Too Tough To Die feels fine.

Touch Of Vitality feels fine.

Thuggish Fighter is probably okay.

Valorous Oath should grant advantage on saves vs. Frightened, not blanket immunity.

Weapon Master should not allow for, say, a Reach, Finesse Greatsword. A Rogue with a 10' reach on a 2d6 weapon and, with a one-level dip in Fighter, rerolling all 1s and 2s on his damage... It's an interesting feat, definitely. But not balanced.