¿House Rule: Replace standard ASIs with: You gain 1 feat & +1 to any 1 stat?

[HPisBS]

As someone who likes Monks and other MAD PCs, I've always lamented the steep cost of picking up feats. Feels bad, man to not only delay, but outright give up core stat progression just to achieve some of the personalized character building that most others enjoy. (It's especially bad if burdened by standard arrays.)

Every once in a while, you'll hear about a game where PCs get a free feat at lvl 1, or with each ASI. That sounds like too much to me, but what if you split the difference? Apologies if it's already been discussed before, but I'd like some white-room feedback on how impactful this level of power boost would be.

One point I notice is that, now that we have so many half-feats, this change would let you pick up a potent effect and still get the full standard +2 to your main stat. So... maybe it'd be safer to do "Standard ASI + flavorful / weaker feat" (like Skilled or Dungeon Delver) instead?


So, how does the playground think this would affect things? Is there any reason why you might actually want to avoid such a game?

[Rukelnikov]

I think Feat + ASI for every ASI is fine, so this is fine too.

[Saelethil]

I’ve considered making ASIs +1 +1 +1, +2 +1, or Feat +1

[Chronos]

There was a thread a couple of weeks ago (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?642263-Replacing-ASIs-with-1-to-two-different-stats-and-a-feat) suggesting a feat and +1 to two different stats at every ASI.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Think about why players would want it. Because it gives them more options and makes their characters more effective.

Not saying that is bad.

Just it may mess with your CR calculations.

[HPisBS]

Think about why players would want it. Because it gives them more options and makes their characters more effective.

Not saying that is bad.

Just it may mess with your CR calculations.

True, true.

Is there any other reason a (random) DM might find it distasteful, apart from wonkier CR calculations?

[Angelalex242]

Nothing wrong with this at all. If somebody really needs +2 to a stat, they can take an appropriate half feat that also boosts that stat. Which can lead to some odd feat choices, which may even be desirable. It does mean there'll be a heck of a lot of observant monks, clerics, and wizards, and wizards will be observant with keen minds, none of which is a bad thing....

Then you consider that while it might make sense for bards, warlocks, and even sorcerers to all have the Actor feat, there will suddenly be an amazing amount of Paladins who apparently had fantastic theater programs in Paladin School. Presumably they were all performing tales of the gods.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

True, true.

Is there any other reason a (random) DM might find it distasteful, apart from wonkier CR calculations?

Speaking as a 'random' DM I have no interest in things that broadly buff characters. I'm already having to ignore CRs for home generated content and significantly boost pre-generated content for groups of 4-5 characters. The lone exception is my fellow DM who is currently DMing a smaller group than ususal (3 of us) where something like this would be fine.

That said, I take your original point on Monk and I think you're far better off to buff classes and subclasses that are playing weaker at your table. So, give Monks an extra +1 at 4th and 8th level...? Sure.

[HPisBS]

Nothing wrong with this at all. If somebody really needs +2 to a stat, they can take an appropriate half feat that also boosts that stat. Which can lead to some odd feat choices, which may even be desirable. It does mean there'll be a heck of a lot of observant monks, clerics, and wizards, and wizards will be observant with keen minds, none of which is a bad thing....

Then you consider that while it might make sense for bards, warlocks, and even sorcerers to all have the Actor feat, there will suddenly be an amazing amount of Paladins who apparently had fantastic theater programs in Paladin School. Presumably they were all performing tales of the gods.

That certainly would've been the case, if Fey / Shadow Touched and Telekinetic/pathic weren't around.

[JonBeowulf]

I don't like it.

As a player, since all characters get the power buff it doesn't change the "my character feels weaker than the rest of the party" issue. Sure, as a monk you get to grab the stat boost and a feat... but so does everyone else.

As a DM, the characters get stronger so the encounters get more difficult so the characters get stronger so the encounters get more difficult so the characters get stronger so the encounters get more difficult... where does it end?

Things are nearly balanced as they are. Changes to one side necessitate a change to the other, resulting in a zero-sum game. Why even bother?

[Trask]

This might lead to a bit higher power and also be a bit tangential, but I've considered making the ASI bonus apply a +1 bonus to all your ability scores to represent increasing competence in every aspect of adventuring and not just rushing your most important scores and make the game more MAD friendly by design, which I see as a good thing. Not sure how it could/should interact with feats though.

[Segev]

there will suddenly be an amazing amount of Paladins who apparently had fantastic theater programs in Paladin School.

How else do you think they master the dramatic posing and the bombastic friendship speeches?

[HPisBS]

I don't like it.

As a player, since all characters get the power buff it doesn't change the "my character feels weaker than the rest of the party" issue. Sure, as a monk you get to grab the stat boost and a feat... but so does everyone else.

As a DM, the characters get stronger so the encounters get more difficult so the characters get stronger so the encounters get more difficult so the characters get stronger so the encounters get more difficult... where does it end?

Things are nearly balanced as they are. Changes to one side necessitate a change to the other, resulting in a zero-sum game. Why even bother?

The kind of constructive feedback I was looking for! :smallsmile:

- Of course, the goal of this isn't moar powarrr so much as just providing space for customization. As it is, every OH Monk mostly feels like every other OH Monk, every Shadow Monk mostly feels like every other Shadow Monk, etc -- regardless of what levels you're comparing them at. By contrast, mid-tier BM Fighters can have wildly different builds, and even something like Storm Sorcerer provides plenty of room for customization after maxing Cha.

I just want to let the MAD classes have some of that without having to sacrifice either of their core stats in the process.

-- Would limiting this to a smaller list of "weaker" or "mostly flavor" feats be more to your taste?


This might lead to a bit higher power and also be a bit tangential, but I've considered making the ASI bonus apply a +1 bonus to all your ability scores to represent increasing competence in every aspect of adventuring and not just rushing your most important scores and make the game more MAD friendly by design, which I see as a good thing. Not sure how it could/should interact with feats though.

That seems like taking things too far lol. For one thing, that'd give all casters a bunch of extra Con - and Dex - for free. Sounds kinda broken.


How else do you think they master the dramatic posing and the bombastic friendship speeches?

Indeed! After all, preaching is Performance.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

True, true.

Is there any other reason a (random) DM might find it distasteful, apart from wonkier CR calculations?

I do have a difficult time keeping challenging battles short for the level 18-20 group I DM. More Feats lead to more stuff then, its a minor concern.

Um, maybe it can cause more seperation between the power gamer dude and the guy who wants to role play a charasmatic Druid with no common sense?

[5eNeedsDarksun]

The kind of constructive feedback I was looking for! :smallsmile:

- Of course, the goal of this isn't moar powarrr so much as just providing space for customization. As it is, every OH Monk mostly feels like every other OH Monk, every Shadow Monk mostly feels like every other Shadow Monk, etc -- regardless of what levels you're comparing them at. By contrast, mid-tier BM Fighters can have wildly different builds, and even something like Storm Sorcerer provides plenty of room for customization after maxing Cha.

I just want to let the MAD classes have some of that without having to sacrifice either of their core stats in the process.

-- Would limiting this to a smaller list of "weaker" or "mostly flavor" feats be more to your taste?



That seems like taking things too far lol. For one thing, that'd give all casters a bunch of extra Con - and Dex - for free. Sounds kinda broken.



Indeed! After all, preaching is Performance.

The funny thing for us (and I don't know if others have found the same) is that we've had Paladins in just about every campaign we've run and the MADness has contributed to a huge variety of builds (on top of well balanced subclasses). Some have leaned into feats, some attack stat, and some Chr, and the class is designed in such a way that each choice is valid. I actually wish more classes were designed this way so that characters were more mechanically distinct.

We've only had one Monk, a Shadow, and after maxing Dex the player's complaint was that the feats didn't seem to be tailored to Monk as some seem to be to other classes. He ended up taking some of the generally good ones as I remember: Alert and Lucky.
So I wonder if this issue has more to do with A) Monk not being very strong, B) not a comparitively strong benefit for buffing Wis (vs. Paladin Chr who gets Spells + Turning + Aura), and C) A lack of goto Feats

[Greywander]

AOne point I notice is that, now that we have so many half-feats, this change would let you pick up a potent effect and still get the full standard +2 to your main stat. So... maybe it'd be safer to do "Standard ASI + flavorful / weaker feat" (like Skilled or Dungeon Delver) instead?
What I fear is that players would simply feel compelled to take these half feats instead of the feats they actually want. That's why the rule I suggested (found in the quote below) cleverly sidesteps this by forcing you to put your two +1s in a different both from each other and from whatever the feat gave you.


There was a thread a couple of weeks ago (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?642263-Replacing-ASIs-with-1-to-two-different-stats-and-a-feat) suggesting a feat and +1 to two different stats at every ASI.
Yup, that was me, and I'd still like to give this a try.

The main thing is that the game is balanced around being featless. So MAD classes are actually fine in a featless game, they just don't get to put as many points into tertiary stats. But with feats, the SAD classes are able to get more feats than the MAD classes. Bascially, part of the houserule I was proposing was simply to keep the ASI progression of a featless game while also giving every character, SAD or MAD, the same number of reats.


As a player, since all characters get the power buff it doesn't change the "my character feels weaker than the rest of the party" issue. Sure, as a monk you get to grab the stat boost and a feat... but so does everyone else.
So the monk gets like four more feats, while the SAD classes get, what, two more feats than they would have? You don't see how that's a huge benefit for MAD classes?

Another component of this is that ASIs give diminishing returns. If you are, say, a wizard, then once you've maxed your INT, where do you put your points? You could put them in DEX for better AC, or CON for better HP and concentration, but the value is still a lot lower than an INT bump would be. Ultimately, the reason you're not bumping INT is simply because the game won't let you. A DEX or CON bump has less value. For someone like a monk, both DEX and WIS give pretty high value. So while the wizard peaks early and then runs out of stats to boost, the monk continues to get good returns on their ASIs.

What I'm saying is that a rule like this, or like the one I proposed (which was linked to above) gives SAD and MAD classes different things. MAD classes get more feats, which they very much want, and without forcing them to stunt their secondary stat. SAD classes get more ability score points, which they... don't really need. Their primary score is already maxed out, and they get marginal returns from their tertiary stats.

So a houserule like this disproportionately benefits MAD classes. Do they need it? Well, not really. But as the OP said, being limited to maybe one feat, and not until very late in your character progression, it feels bad man. Considering that classes, MAD and SAD, are balanced around not having feats, i.e. getting full ASI boosts, it seems logical to assume that giving SAD classes more feats than MAD classes might upset the balance. All this is doing is restoring the balance by making sure everyone gets the same number of feats.

[Angelalex242]

No, no. Let's have a game full of oddly theatrical Paladins and see what they all do with their Actor feat.

Cause lulz.

...Wait. I know. Anyone else played Lunar 2 for Playstation 1?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38xcrF8b3KQ

This is what happens when you give a Paladin the Actor feat :P

[Greywander]

No, no. Let's have a game full of oddly theatrical Paladins and see what they all do with their Actor fear.
"Isn't that, like, against your religion?"

"'Thespian'! I said 'thespian'!"

[JonBeowulf]

- Of course, the goal of this isn't moar powarrr so much as just providing space for customization. As it is, every OH Monk mostly feels like every other OH Monk, every Shadow Monk mostly feels like every other Shadow Monk, etc -- regardless of what levels you're comparing them at. By contrast, mid-tier BM Fighters can have wildly different builds, and even something like Storm Sorcerer provides plenty of room for customization after maxing Cha.
I hear ya. I'm playing my first OH monk and I've tried to make him feel different than the stereotype but he's still pretty unoriginal. He has all the monk tricks... just like all the other ones. And BM is actually my 2nd fav subclass.


I just want to let the MAD classes have some of that without having to sacrifice either of their core stats in the process.

-- Would limiting this to a smaller list of "weaker" or "mostly flavor" feats be more to your taste?
Making a list of feats that qualify for this sounds tiring and is open for lots of debate. I think 5eNeedsDarksun figured it out for us:

That said, I take your original point on Monk and I think you're far better off to buff classes and subclasses that are playing weaker at your table. So, give Monks an extra +1 at 4th and 8th level...? Sure.

Precise changes to specific subclasses.

[Chronos]

Quoth 5eNeedsDarksun:

Some have leaned into feats, some attack stat, and some Chr, and the class is designed in such a way that each choice is valid.
I've just started playing a paladin, and I actually put Con first: Basically the O-Chul approach. I'm only one session in now, but so far, it's working exactly as I intended it to.

[HPisBS]

I hear ya. I'm playing my first OH monk and I've tried to make him feel different than the stereotype but he's still pretty unoriginal. He has all the monk tricks... just like all the other ones. And BM is actually my 2nd fav subclass.


Making a list of feats that qualify for this sounds tiring and is open for lots of debate. I think 5eNeedsDarksun figured it out for us:


That said, I take your original point on Monk and I think you're far better off to buff classes and subclasses that are playing weaker at your table. So, give Monks an extra +1 at 4th and 8th level...? Sure.

Precise changes to specific subclasses.

I guess you have a point. It's just that my impulse is to keep things as even as possible.

That said, a common point among full martials is an extra ASI or two (6th & 14 for Fighters, 10th for Rogues, 20th for Barbs), so I guess it'd be reasonable to give half-martials (and whatever Monks are) an extra +1 or two.

- Or maybe a free feat, with the condition of it not being a half-feat.

[Pildion]

As someone who likes Monks and other MAD PCs, I've always lamented the steep cost of picking up feats. Feels bad, man to not only delay, but outright give up core stat progression just to achieve some of the personalized character building that most others enjoy. (It's especially bad if burdened by standard arrays.)

Every once in a while, you'll hear about a game where PCs get a free feat at lvl 1, or with each ASI. That sounds like too much to me, but what if you split the difference? Apologies if it's already been discussed before, but I'd like some white-room feedback on how impactful this level of power boost would be.

One point I notice is that, now that we have so many half-feats, this change would let you pick up a potent effect and still get the full standard +2 to your main stat. So... maybe it'd be safer to do "Standard ASI + flavorful / weaker feat" (like Skilled or Dungeon Delver) instead?


So, how does the playground think this would affect things? Is there any reason why you might actually want to avoid such a game?

Well, at your table you can do whatever you want, but this would be a pretty big buff for the character players. I'm not saying don't do it, but you will probably need to adjust combat encounters.

[sethdmichaels]

I just want to let the MAD classes have some of that without having to sacrifice either of their core stats in the process.



as a monk player whose DM just gave all of us a free feat as part of our last levelup, i was really psyched to be able to add something flavorful even if the other characters got the same bump-up.

[Pex]

Humans are worse off by this. Regular humans because through point buy everyone else can have at 17 Prime stat, so at level 4 they're at 18 and a feat while human is at 17 and a feat, a significant +1 difference in ability modifier. To get the 18 the human has to take a half-feat for the appropriate score. If it's a feat the player really wants, great, but the non-human player has more flexibility in choosing full feats. Variant Human has the same issue but at least he'll have one more feat. By 8th level having one more feat won't be significantly noticeable, so the question is are racial features differences still significantly noticeable. It could depend on the race.