Greater customization

[paladinn]

I'm sure everyone has heard the main issue that Pathfinder/4e/3.x players have with 5e: "I want more granularity/customization!" I know that 5e has streamlined the options for a reason, and that a lot of customization can be done simply with a little imagination. That said, I wonder if there is something that can be done for people who just can't get over selecting micro-feats for every possible purpose.

Has anyone come up with a way to add more feat(ure) selection back into 5e? Not what we had in 3.x, and Definitely not what we have in PF (1 And 2), but some sort of happy medium?

I know no one wants to start splat-book multiplication; but this might be a good UA topic.

Thoughts? (And no, "Just play Pathfinder" is Not helpful!)

[JNAProductions]

I'm sure everyone has heard the main issue that Pathfinder/4e/3.x players have with 5e: "I want more granularity/customization!" I know that 5e has streamlined the options for a reason, and that a lot of customization can be done simply with a little imagination. That said, I wonder if there is something that can be done for people who just can't get over selecting micro-feats for every possible purpose.

Has anyone come up with a way to add more feat(ure) selection back into 5e? Not what we had in 3.x, and Definitely not what we have in PF (1 And 2), but some sort of happy medium?

I know no one wants to start splat-book multiplication; but this might be a good UA topic.

Thoughts? (And no, "Just play Pathfinder" is Not helpful!)

Allow for a feat to be taken at every ASI-generally a half feat and do NOT include the +1 to stat from it.

Probably want to make more feats for this purpose.

[paladinn]

Allow for a feat to be taken at every ASI-generally a half feat and do NOT include the +1 to stat from it.

Probably want to make more feats for this purpose.

Umm.. can't players do this already? A feat in place of an ASI? Or should it be a feat in addition to an ASI?

How do we do "half-feats"?

[JNAProductions]

Umm.. can't players do this already? A feat in place of an ASI? Or should it be a feat in addition to an ASI?

How do we do "half-feats"?

Half-feats are called that because they give +1 to a stat and some other (usually minor) bonuses. Stuff like Actor, Linguist, or Keen Mind.

What I proposed was giving them the feat half of a half-feat in addition to their usual +2 or +1/+1 to stats. You'd want to make more of them (not enough to really diversify a ton) but it's a good start.

[Man_Over_Game]

I have two suggestions:

1: Take a look at my Prestige Options. It is centered around shifting around primary stats to allow newer multiclassing options and builds. Each option also contains a summary of the reasoning behind each Option, and why they're balanced. For example, allowing Clerics to use Charisma instead of Wisdom by restricting them to not have Warlock or Sorcerer levels. There's a bunch in there, about 2-3 per class.

With these included, there are very few archetypes that you could come up with that couldn't be accomplished.

If anyone likes a challenge, consider making an unbalanced build using the Prestige Options rules. I'm very interested in seeing how OP someone could get using the rules, but most people end up being stumped (which is kind of disappointing to me, I like improving on stuff).

*************************************************

2: Consider this unique feat I came up with a while back:

Cross-trained Specialization.

Prerequisite: 8 or more levels into any one class.
You gain the benefits of 4 levels into the class chosen for the prerequisite, but these levels only grant you benefits from a subclass that isn't the same used for the prerequisite.

You can take this feat multiple times, but the prerequisite for the same class increases by 4 levels each time you take it. You can choose different subclasses each time you choose this feat, or the same subclass to stack the level benefits.
*****************
So a level 12 Samurai could also have the subclass features of a level 4 Champion and a level 4 Battlemaster, OR the Samurai could have the benefits of a level 8 Champion. The Samurai would only gain the subclass benefits of those choices and wouldn't have additional hit dice or Action Surges or anything like that from the "secondary" subclass levels from the feat.

[paladinn]

I have two suggestions:

1: Take a look at my Prestige Options. It is centered around shifting around primary stats to allow newer multiclassing options and builds. Each option also contains a summary of the reasoning behind each Option, and why they're balanced. For example, allowing Clerics to use Charisma instead of Wisdom by restricting them to not have Warlock or Sorcerer levels. There's a bunch in there, about 2-3 per class.

With these included, there are very few archetypes that you could come up with that couldn't be accomplished.

If anyone likes a challenge, consider making an unbalanced build using the Prestige Options rules. I'm very interested in seeing how OP someone could get using the rules, but most people end up being stumped (which is kind of disappointing to me, I like improving on stuff).

*************************************************

2: Consider this unique feat I came up with a while back:

Cross-trained Specialization.

Prerequisite: 8 or more levels into any one class.
You gain the benefits of 4 levels into the class chosen for the prerequisite, but these levels only grant you benefits from a subclass that isn't the same used for the prerequisite.

You can take this feat multiple times, but the prerequisite for the same class increases by 4 levels each time you take it. You can choose different subclasses each time you choose this feat, or the same subclass to stack the level benefits.
*****************
So a level 12 Samurai could also have the subclass features of a level 4 Champion and a level 4 Battlemaster, OR the Samurai could have the benefits of a level 8 Champion. The Samurai would only gain the subclass benefits of those choices and wouldn't have additional hit dice or Action Surges or anything like that from the "secondary" subclass levels from the feat.

Not sure there are Quite what I was thinking. I have no problem with the existing classes for the most part. I just know a lot of people (especially PF players) who might be more open to 5e if they had a few more customization options.

Kind of like, I'm a fighter with the Great Weapon style. I'm up for an ASI, but I would Really like to up my game with my greatsword. Hey, maybe it could be that simple: add some mini-feats to martial types who have a certain fighting style. Or something to up a paladin's lay-on-hands. Or to give a wizard limited metamagic.

I don't know of anyone who wants the full-blown feat chaos of 3.5 (and PF1); but I'd think little things like this could add something to a player's experience.

[Man_Over_Game]

Not sure there are Quite what I was thinking. I have no problem with the existing classes for the most part. I just know a lot of people (especially PF players) who might be more open to 5e if they had a few more customization options.

Kind of like, I'm a fighter with the Great Weapon style. I'm up for an ASI, but I would Really like to up my game with my greatsword. Hey, maybe it could be that simple: add some mini-feats to martial types who have a certain fighting style. Or something to up a paladin's lay-on-hands. Or to give a wizard limited metamagic.

I don't know of anyone who wants the full-blown feat chaos of 3.5 (and PF1); but I'd think little things like this could add something to a player's experience.

There is a UA that has feats for enhanced fighting with specific types of weapons of almost every type. Stuff like the Polearm Master feat, but only for Sword users, stuff like that.

You could also look up some homebrew Gestalt rules, where people play as two classes at once.

Unfortunately, 5e isn't big on making feats or mechanics for specific classes or subclasses. Creating a feat for Lay On Hands would mean creating a feat for 1/12 of all the potential builds, when something niche like Heavy Armor Master can apply to 2.5/12 (0.5 from Clerics).

I think a good way of doing it is to include features that effect at least 2/12 builds. So something like a Channel Divinity feat (usable by Paladins and Clerics) could apply, which could be something like "You can use your Channel Divinity from one class twice, instead of once, per Short or Long Rest. +1 to Charisma or Wisdom".

It'd be interesting to see a list of possible features you could modify that belong to more than one class. Off the top of my head:

Spells
Proficiencies
Fighting Styles
Unarmored Defense
Channel Divinity
Class-specific spell lists
Casting spells as a Bonus Action
Spells cast as a Reaction



That's all I can think of at the moment. There'd be enough design space between those concepts to easily be able to mash up a few feats without much work.

[gooddragon1]

I'm sure everyone has heard the main issue that Pathfinder/4e/3.x players have with 5e: "I want more granularity/customization!" I know that 5e has streamlined the options for a reason, and that a lot of customization can be done simply with a little imagination. That said, I wonder if there is something that can be done for people who just can't get over selecting micro-feats for every possible purpose.

Has anyone come up with a way to add more feat(ure) selection back into 5e? Not what we had in 3.x, and Definitely not what we have in PF (1 And 2), but some sort of happy medium?

I know no one wants to start splat-book multiplication; but this might be a good UA topic.

Thoughts? (And no, "Just play Pathfinder" is Not helpful!)

Not really, 5e is built around very specific limits on things like attack bonus and other things. The monsters are made with this in mind. If you try to change it the system will fall apart as a result. It makes it balanced, but unfortunately means you can't have a different power level goal for any given campaign. There's only one power level and you must build around that. It also unfortunately precipitates meta slavery, which means that people will search out the most optimal builds and not deviate except for fluff reasons whereas with multiple power level options you can choose which meta you want. 5e is a good system, but going for balance in the way that it does (which is similar in a way to how 4e does even though it has more options) means that it loses flexibility along the way. This is unfortunate because it gives up the one advantage that p&p has over computer games in flexibility for balance which computer games will always do better while a computer game is also faster, more easily joined, has more prebuilt content, and better graphics among other things.

[JNAProductions]

Not really, 5e is built around very specific limits on things like attack bonus and other things. The monsters are made with this in mind. If you try to change it the system will fall apart as a result. It makes it balanced, but unfortunately means you can't have a different power level goal for any given campaign. There's only one power level and you must build around that. It also unfortunately precipitates meta slavery, which means that people will search out the most optimal builds and not deviate except for fluff reasons whereas with multiple power level options you can choose which meta you want. 5e is a good system, but going for balance in the way that it does (which is similar in a way to how 4e does even though it has more options) means that it loses flexibility along the way. This is unfortunate because it gives up the one advantage that p&p has over computer games in flexibility for balance which computer games will always do better while a computer game is also faster, more easily joined, has more prebuilt content, and better graphics among other things.

5E isn't that finely balanced. It's balanced, mostly, but it's a rough balance. A +1 here or -1 there won't break anything.

Excessive power changes WILL make encounters more difficult to plan for, but them's the breaks.

[Man_Over_Game]

5E isn't that finely balanced. It's balanced, mostly, but it's a rough balance. A +1 here or -1 there won't break anything.

Excessive power changes WILL make encounters more difficult to plan for, but them's the breaks.

From what I can tell, if you're able to measure damage gains by 3's and higher (as in, 1d6 vs. 1d6+3), then you're probably breaking something.