Are Teamwork feats useless?

[sirkydor]

90% of the groups I'm in no one ever takes teamwork feats.
Only way I've been able to use them is building a character to work with my main.. through a familar or leadership if a GM allows.

I built a Butterfly Sting/Seize the Moment/Wild flanking Inspired Blade.. (set up artist)

With a Two-handed Warrior Power attack/Seize the Moment/Wild Flanking fighter hitting for over 200 damage with a 4x weapon

an this is at lvl 9 .. why dont people like Teamwork feats?

[pipedreamsam]

I have no idea, they are ridiculously good. Stealth synergy, escape route and amplified rage come to mind.

[Turin the Mad]

Not enough examples of it in play are seen is my guess, especially with only 10-11 feats for many classes over 20 levels. Part and parcel of the "too many gorram feats".

[avr]

If it takes all the feats you have and then some to create the character you want, you're not going to welcome being asked to use a couple more.

Also there are many characters who aren't the standard beatsticks & just don't benefit the same way; most full casters, a rogue who sneaks alone (& likes it that way), a mounted combat guy who plans to use ride by attack to avoid being close enough to flank, a magus who has different hit and run plans, etc. Often there just aren't two people with spare feats and compatible plans.

[RDM42]

And often people don't want to subtract from their individual optimization to work on the whole party ...

[BigNorseWolf]

No. Takes 2 people and two feats to use and usually only gives 1 feats worth of benefit. People avoid these for good reason.

A real kicker is that they often have to be used in conjunction, but this is a game about taking individual turns, making it very, very hard to coordinate.

[lemeres]

usually? Cause some people don't play well with others. At least when they try to tell them how to play their characters.

Now, they are somewhat conditional most of the time. It requires another player with the feat to be in a situation or to take an action.

This can be eased a bit with class features like tactician, where you are the only one that needs the feat, and everyone else gets the benefit.

Out of the common ones (lets ignore the common ones, since they suffer the 'not very good' syndrome most feats suffer from), they are fantastic when they work. Some even fulfill long held desires by the players (coordinated charge is pratically like a psuedo pounce with an extra attack- you get to move outside of your turn, ending up near an enemy, just ready to full attack)

[Ellioti]

because in PFS you won't know what feats your allies have

[sirkydor]

So teamwork feats are a tool for GM's to wreck parties ... because hitting a PC for 200+ damage at lvl 9 because bad guys work together is the only purpose to explain why you one shot them.

[BretI]

Hunter class can make excellent use of teamwork feats, regardless of what other characters are out there.

Any class with an animal companion can often use teamwork feats. My friend has a sylvan sorcereress who has Lookout on both her sorceress and the tiger animal companion. She got tired of failing her perception rolls.

Paired builds can often make use of them, where two players have a shared background and work together for the build.

Inquisitors and any other class that gets Solo tactics can use them in spite of what anyone else has.

It really depends on the group dynamics and the character concepts.

[Malwing]

They way I see it teamwork feats are either enemy minion feats or side-loaded class features, so overall they are useful as in the fulfill their function but they aren't the kind of feats that are traditionally useful. About the only reason for a PC to take them is for class features that abuse them, like a pet, the cavalier ability and the inquisitor ability.

Occasionally there's a thread about whether or not teamwork feats are useful and I don't really get it. I think its super obvious that they're either meant for class features that support it or minions that need more juice.

[claudekennilol]

My lvl 7 hunter has 7 teamwork feats. It only works if you make it work. So it works well for a hunter, an inquisitor, ratfolk.. to name a few.

My wife and I also have a pair of characters we play in PFS that have Outflank in addition to her having Butterfly's Sting.

I also have plans for a half-orc barbarian and half-orc barbarian/druid combo with amplified rage that'd work out well.

[Mike J]

GM's don't need tools to wreck parties - Cthulhu arrives (or rocks fall), everyone dies... Or crank the CR up to 25 and keep adding monsters until the PCs die.

Teamwork feats are awesome, IF you can get them for "cheap" or "free": Inquisitor, cavalier, or using a non-PC (eidolon, familiar, hireling, cohort, etc.)

BigNorseWolf hit it on the head. Teamwork feats generally cost double for the benefit. They sometimes cost even more since one member of the "team" is only taking the feat to benefit someone else and they could have used that feat slot for something else. Outflank really helps the rogue, but the fighter who takes it often needs more "to hit" like they need more negative levels (not at all).

Another factor is the "fun" element. Many people don't find it fun to play a character whose sole capability is to stand in X place to make someone else a rock star.

I think these are some of the reasons people don't take teamwork feats.

[HeHateMe]

Teamwork feats are absolute garbage because it takes two or more people taking the same feat and positioned exactly the right way for them to work. The only classes that can make good use of teamwork feats are Cavaliers, Hunters and Inquisitors. And the only reason I have any teamwork feats for my inquisitor is because the class gets them for free. I would never waste a feat slot on those pieces of crap otherwise.

[Malwing]

Mike J wrote:

GM's don't need tools to wreck parties - Cthulhu arrives (or rocks fall), everyone dies... Or crank the CR up to 25 and keep adding monsters until the PCs die.

I disagree. Its not to wreck parties but to make a monster more of a threat, which is totally different.

For example; Say I want a situation where there are a swarm of goblins. I want the players to feel threatened because there are a lot of them but also feel badass by plowing through them. Normally I can't do that because at the point where they can just plow through a swarm of goblins the goblins have no hope of even landing a blow let alone being a real threat. You could beef up the goblins but then they would be too strong as a swarm and you'd have to reduce the goblins to a more decent number and doing that would destroy the whole experience. So throw a couple of teamwork feats to make them kinda scary but still getting mowed down in large numbers and making the PCs feel like battle gods. Or genocidal maniacs.

I still don't get the teamwork feat hate. They only function for the the function that they're supposed to be used for. Such a crime that they don't function in a vacuum.

[Athaleon]

RDM42 wrote:

And often people don't want to subtract from their individual optimization to work on the whole party ...

So they'll ask the rest of the party to take a feat they don't want to take. Is that what teamwork means?

[Anguish]

Most of the time at the tables I've seen, each character has its own "contribution" to a combat.

One PC defeats enemies through sneak attack. Another through fire spells. Another through a plethora of arrows. Yet another through compulsions.

Teamwork feats by definition require you to have two or more PCs who are contributing in the same way, and that is rare. While some of them work for similar contributions, such as benefits to flankers, most don't.

[Ms. Pleiades]

It's hard enough getting a team to coordinate with a reach build or someone with sneak attack. Teamwork feats would be like chasing rabbits.

[justaworm]

OP wrote:

"Are teamwork feats useless?"

No. They are in fact far more useful than a debate on their usefulness.

Feel free to ignore that section of the feat list if you don't like them though.

[Nox Aeterna]

The fact that a teamwork feat requires other characters makes them ... uncertain.

It is my feat , i want to make it work when I want it, even if other PCs also had the feat , the other PCs might for multiple reasons decide not to use it or not be there to use it...

The only time i consider these feat worth it , is when i can get it on a NPC i have control over, so for example when playing a hunter , in which case i find these feat quite good.

[Rycaut]

Teamwork feats are exceptionally powerful IF you coordinate with others or use them smartly via a class that can grant them to others (Cavalier, Tactician and a few others).

They are more powerful than most other feats BUT of course they have constraints (need to have another party with the same feat, need to usually also meet some other specific criteria - being adjacent, flanking etc) When they are used well they amplify the advantage that characters coordinating their actions already have (i.e. Outflank makes a pair that flank together even better - a rogue & an ally each with Outflank will mean a rogue who delivers sneak attacks far, far more reliably - especially since Outflank can help offset penalties from using two weapon fighting etc.

There are a couple of classes that grant all of their teamwork feats to their companion (animal companion or there are ways to do this for some familiars with some archetypes) Those classes in particular get to really benefit from teamwork feats.

In PFS play when I have seen teamwork feats used it has meant a table that usually worked well together - frequently this meant a couple who always played together (or at least always did with those specific characters). I've also seen a table of half-orcs leveraging amplified rage and some other orc specific classes/traits to have a really unique (and full of rage) experience.

I would never say teamwork feats are "garbage" - they just may not be right for a given character or group (if your group doesn't play well with each other or all have hyper optimized builds that require every feat your characters get then teamwork feats won't be very useful. But there are many classes / races that do have some flexibility in the feats they choose and taking a few teamwork feats may make a huge difference for such tables.

[BigNorseWolf]

What really annoys me is how much love these seem to get from the devs. Heroes from the wild had 2 pages of these and inner sea races aparently was chock full of them as well.

[Atarlost]

Most teamwork feats aren't even worth a feat. PFSRD isn't working for me right now so let's just look at the APG.

Allied Spellcaster: Like spell penetration, but only if your party has a redundant spellcaster and they're standing next to each other. Anyone coordinated enough to take a teamwork feat would never have redundant casters for the same offensive spells known or prepared in a normal sized party.

Coordinated Defense: Not strictly inferior to a CRB feat, but for non-martials defensive combat training is equal by level 5 against equal sized foes. And, of course, DCT doesn't require adjacency. Very specialized feat even for an inquisitor.

Coordinated Maneuvers: Same bonus as an improved/greater maneuver feat. How often do you build one character for multiple maneuvers? Even fighters can't really afford to ride that train.

Duck and Cover: Sounds like a reasonable way to mitigate the drawbacks of adjacency at first, but then you get to this nice little clause: "If you take your ally's result you are knocked prone (or staggered on your next turn if you are already prone or cannot be knocked prone)." That debuff. Wow. I'd seriously consider a spell that did half as much damage as a standard blast but knocked prone or briefly staggered its targets.

Lookout: This is one good feat out of five so far. A pity about the adjacency, though. You can't use this unless you're bunched up unnaturally. If it worked to fifteen or twenty feat it would be an actual good feat, not just a good feat compared to all the trash feats Paizo has published.

Outflank: Flanking is a trap. If you're flanking against more than one opponent someone's rear is hanging out in the breeze. Consequently most flanking is done with summons, who don't have this feat. Also, doesn't play nicely with other teamwork feats, which require adjacency. See the next entry.

Paired Opportunists: The other good teamwork feat. Too bad it's a feat you really need to build around. Nothing wrong with that normally and the build is worth the feats, but it does make it harder to get two people in the same party who want to sink that many feats into the same build. Also a pity there aren't very many good ways to generate AoOs on demand.

Precise Strike: Let's take the thing that rogues are terrible for relying on and spend a feat on a limited version of the same! Let's not. Precision damage is bad. Lots of stuff is immune, it doesn't crit, and you have to be flanking so it's not even as good as 1d6 sneak attack.

Shield Wall: Okay. For light shields or bucklers it's a conditional shield focus, which is equivalent to dodge. For heavy shields it's better, but who uses heavy shields? Oh, right. Dual weapon sword and board builds that plan on getting shield mastery. Who doesn't have any free feats? Dual weapon builds. Offensive sword and board is the single most feat intensive build in the game, capable of sucking up every feat a fighter has and then some in just core. Using a shield just for defense completely ruins your ability to deal damage. Bards and clerics might make that trade off, but they can't use heavy shields because they need to be able to pass their weapon to their shield hand to perform somatic components.

Shielded Caster: Unless your friend has a shield it's conditional combat casting. If this weren't a teamwork feat the shield benefit would make it a possible choice, but it is a teamwork feat so your friend with the shield is completely wasting his feat unless he's also a caster. Since he's a caster it's a light shield. But if he's proficient in shields he's a gish class of some sort so he's probably fine with full attacking instead of casting a spell if someone stands next to him so it's back to only benefiting one of the two people who spent a feat on it.

Swap Places: How often does this really come up? If you set up your march order reasonably this is only useful for flipping your whole party, which requires four people to have this feat just to swap the primary melee guy in the van with the secondary melee guy in the rear. Or the cleric could spend the feat on being a better melee guy. When's the last time you were attacked in the rear in 5' wide tunnels that you weren't also attacked from the front at the same time?

Note the problem with Shielded Caster only being useful to one of the people who takes it while being a dubious sidegrade of another feat that already exists? That's a recurring problem. There's an improved precise shot clone in another book that requires a non-archer to take point blank shot as well as the teamwork feat itself.

[alexd1976]

claudekennilol wrote:

My lvl 7 hunter has 7 teamwork feats. It only works if you make it work. So it works well for a hunter, an inquisitor, ratfolk.. to name a few.

My wife and I also have a pair of characters we play in PFS that have Outflank in addition to her having Butterfly's Sting.

I also have plans for a half-orc barbarian and half-orc barbarian/druid combo with amplified rage that'd work out well.

Precise Strike goes nicely with that as well. Extra D6 damage? Yes please!

[TPK]

I actually approached my long term group to build a group of PCs that all have teamwork feats and their non-teamwork feats are designed to make them even better. I got a mixed reaction. However I will say this since a lot of class builds that people love are rocking high crit threat ranges if everyone in the party contributed 2 feats to the cause the AOO that can be generated by Out Flank and Paired Opportunist gets out of hand. Add in a rogue or slayer with assault leader and opportunist then things get really ridiculous. Toss in a Horde Charge and then it just gets super ridiculous, because one person charges and the whole team can charge now!!!

[Riuken]

I can't remember where I saw it, but I remember reading a developer post that basically stated that teamwork feats weren't very good because they were intended to be class features for certain classes. Classes like inquisitor, cavalier, and hunter that others in this thread are pointing out as cases when teamwork feats are good.

Working as intended.

[alexd1976]

Riuken wrote:

I can't remember where I saw it, but I remember reading a developer post that basically stated that teamwork feats weren't very good because they were intended to be class features for certain classes. Classes like inquisitor, cavalier, and hunter that others in this thread are pointing out as cases when teamwork feats are good.

Working as intended.

As someone playing a Hunter, I gotta say... they work pretty damn well.

:D

[Turin the Mad]

Allied Spellcaster requires only one spell in common between the casters. For one feat and one known spell, both casters gain +1 CL and +4 more vs. SR, equal to Greater Spell Penetration and it stacks with everything else.

[SheepishEidolon]

I think it's good Paizo tries to make them work, in favor of diversity and teamplay. Browsing through the books, you can find quite a few classes / archetypes specialized on them:

Classes / archetypes which provide these feats to allies:
Cavalier: Gets 3 for 'free' (technically, class features are a resource too)
Paladin (Holy Tactican archetype): 4
Paladin (Holy Guide): 1 (less sacrifices than other archetype)
Brawler (Exemplar archetype): 0 (but can use martial flexibility for it)
Slayer (Vanguard archetype): 1
Warpriest (Divine commander): 1

Class that use them without allies:
Inquisitor: 6 for 'free'

Classes / archetypes which give them to companions:
Hunter: 6 for free, to animal companion
Hunter (Feral Hunter archetype): To summoned creatures
Hunter (Packmaster archetypes): To multiple companions
Inquisitor (Sacred Huntsmaster): To animal companion

They don't come for free, but when it works, you gain quite a bit out of them. And yes, they don't work with some builds, some players, some tables - but after all, they don't have to. They are just options.

[Lemmy]

Most of them are pretty weak and too situational to be worth investing a feat, unless you get specialized class features to make them more useful... And even then, normal feats would often be a better choice.

[Hayato Ken]

There are some very powerful and fun teamwork feats out there, but it´s similar to playing a rogue. You need tactical understanding, a sense for cooperation (in and outgame) and someone to team up with.
When everyobdy is spotlight hogging that´s not gonna work.

[Hiruma Kai]

I believe there are counter examples to the thread's title.

For example, I've recently started playing PFS with my wife and daughter, and the first group we've made started with teamwork feats:

Half-Orc Barbarian with Amplified Rage
Half-Orc Bloodrager with Amplified Rage
Half-Orc Skald with Warleader's Rage

We've been able to effectively use Amplified Rage in every serious encounter. The skald buffs and debuffs, while the Barbarian and Bloodrager simply one shot everything when the wonder twin powers activate on the very first turn. I'm wondering what other builds can reliably be at +8 to hit, 2d6+12 damage at 1st level in multiple encounters against generic enemies. (I suppose it could be higher if we had bumped strength from 18 to 20).

So thats at least one example.

We're also considering a group with animal companions (with int 3) and Stealth Synergy. That teamwork feat actually makes more people in the group better when trying to get the drop on someone or bypass an encounter rather than less. Six rolls and take the best one for everyone sounds pretty good to me. Where as without it, trying to stealth an entire party invariably means someone rolls a 1,2, or 3.

[lemeres]

Lemmy wrote:

Most of them are pretty weak and too situational to be worth investing a feat, unless you get specialized class features to make them more useful... And even then, normal feats would often be a better choice.

I think you mean normal feats [people would actually bother to take]. Most feats are terrible. So the fact that most teamwork feats are terrible is not a surprise.

If you are a class that loves flanking, such as anything with sneak attack, then teamwork feats are pure gravy, since your basic tactic is to flank with someone anyway, and that lets you take advantage of most of the teamwork feats (people would actually bother to take). I would try to convince the party's melee guy to take outflank at least.

[Astral Wanderer]

For me, most of what you can do with teamwork feats should have been a normal combat advantage, like flanking or aiding another.
Having to take a feat that to be used requires you to 1) have an ally, 2) have an ally with that same feat, and 3) a specific situation, is really a waste. Even more, considering that the benefits aren't usually balanced with the requisites.
No wonder that they had to give some classes/archetypes the ability to ignore at least the second requisite, to give the teamwork feats a spark of decency.

[MeriDoc-]

I have a pair of guys with teamwork (warpriest tactcal archetype and paladin tactical archetype) When you can grant the feat to everyone wi 30 its not bad, if you can't and coordination is a problem (pfs) - its hard to find a use.

[Imbicatus]

Even in PFS, they are golden for a hunter or inquisitor. Especially for a hunter. I would not trade any Hunter teamwork feat for a normal feat ever. Pack Flanking + Outflank + Paired Opportunists + Escape Route for a rider and mount is amazing.

[LazarX]

Astral Wanderer wrote:

For me, most of what you can do with teamwork feats should have been a normal combat advantage, like flanking or aiding another.

Having to take a feat that to be used requires you to 1) have an ally, 2) have an ally with that same feat, and 3) a specific situation, is really a waste. Even more, considering that the benefits aren't usually balanced with the requisites.
No wonder that they had to give some classes/archetypes the ability to ignore at least the second requisite, to give the teamwork feats a spark of decency.

Those combat advantages ARE there without the teamwork feats... The feats do what they should do... give coordinated teamwork the advantage it should get over incidental pairups.

[Lemmy]

lemeres wrote:

I think you mean normal feats [people would actually bother to take]. Most feats are terrible. So the fact that most teamwork feats are terrible is not a surprise.

Well, yeah... We can ignore that 80% of feats that are nothing more than garbage Paizo includes so they can inflate page count.

[TriOmegaZero]

alexd1976 wrote:

As someone playing a Hunter, I gotta say... they work pretty damn well.

:D

Put it on a class without a dedicated companion and see how well that goes.

(Solo Tactics is a dedicated companion for the purpose of this discussion.)

[HeHateMe]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

What really annoys me is how much love these seem to get from the devs. Heroes from the wild had 2 pages of these and inner sea races aparently was chock full of them as well.

Ugh I know. The teamwork feats in Inner Sea Races are the new gold standard for awful. Not only do they require the correct positioning, situation and teammates with the same feat, but there's an additional requirement for everyone to be the same race as well. Good luck ever using one of those pieces of crap.

[lemeres]

Lemmy wrote:

lemeres wrote:

I think you mean normal feats [people would actually bother to take]. Most feats are terrible. So the fact that most teamwork feats are terrible is not a surprise.

Well, yeah... We can ignore that 80% of feats that are nothing more than garbage Paizo includes so they can inflate page count.

I'll be generous and say that they are largely there for flavor (like those weird lamashtu feats) or for players to feel good about themselves for picking out the 'right' feats.

That and fodder for enemies designed purely to exploit some niche feat.

[Kudaku]

sirkydor wrote:

why dont people like Teamwork feats?

Teamwork (TW) feats were originally balanced around the classes that can sidestep the drawbacks of TW feats, such as inquisitors and cavaliers. Since Pathfinder doesn't really advertise the fact that TW feats are primarily intended for those classes, most people will evaluate the TW feat on its own merits, and usually find them extremely lacking.

In hindsight, it might have been better to remove the TW synergy aspect from cavaliers, inquisitors and hunters and make TW feats good enough to be attractive in their own right. That way they'd be viable options for all 40 classes rather than only 3.

With that said, there are a few TW feats that apparently didn't get the Cavalier memo and are genuinely good options in their own right, such as Stealth Synergy.

[Grimserver]

Be a Monster Tactician Inquisitor, and summon your own allies who know some of your teamwork feats.

[Lemmy]

lemeres wrote:

Lemmy wrote:

lemeres wrote:

I think you mean normal feats [people would actually bother to take]. Most feats are terrible. So the fact that most teamwork feats are terrible is not a surprise.

Well, yeah... We can ignore that 80% of feats that are nothing more than garbage Paizo includes so they can inflate page count.

I'll be generous and say that they are largely there for flavor (like those weird lamashtu feats)

I hate this argument (not saying you're defending it). Players shouldn't be punished for adding to their character's flavor. IMHO, if a feat is flavorful, it should be effective as well.

lemeres wrote:

or for players to feel good about themselves for picking out the 'right' feats.

I also hate this one (Again... Not saying you're defending it). New players shouldn't have to filter through hundreds of awful trap-feats just to get to the ones that are actually worth the ink spent to print them...

Let's be honest. those crappy feats exist in PF for the same reason they existed in D&D: To allow the company to announce "100 PAGES OF NEW FEATS FOR YOUR CHARACTER!" without being sued. Same goes for spells and archetypes. They conveniently forget to add a "...But 80% of them will never see the light of day, and are likely to harm your character for taking them" addendum...

And we, the customers, pay for this b#!++#!@ with our money (since more pages = higher cost, even if they detract from the product) and time/patience (necessary to look for whatever few gems are buried in the pile of s%#%).

Ugh... This annoys me too much... I'll quit before I have a heart-attack...

/rant

[CWheezy]

Most of them are bad because of ADJACENT. Standing right beside an ally is usually the worst possible thing you can do, why do a huge majority of these feats require it?

[Riuken]

Kudaku wrote:

sirkydor wrote:

why dont people like Teamwork feats?

Teamwork (TW) feats were originally balanced around the classes that can sidestep the drawbacks of TW feats, such as inquisitors and cavaliers. Since Pathfinder doesn't really advertise the fact that TW feats are primarily intended for those classes, most people will evaluate the TW feat on its own merits, and usually find them extremely lacking.

That's the post I was looking for, thanks!

[Gisher]

Are any of the teamwork feats worth taking if you have the Scurrying Swarmer feat?

Since it let's you use teamwork feats even if your ally doesn't have the same teamwork feat and it lets you count your ally as adjacent even though you occupy the same square it seems like it might make some teamwork feats more workable.

[Scott Wilhelm]

sirkydor wrote:

90% of the groups I'm in no one ever takes teamwork feats.

Only way I've been able to use them is building a character to work with my main.. through a familar or leadership if a GM allows.

I built a Butterfly Sting/Seize the Moment/Wild flanking Inspired Blade.. (set up artist)

With a Two-handed Warrior Power attack/Seize the Moment/Wild Flanking fighter hitting for over 200 damage with a 4x weapon

an this is at lvl 9 .. why dont people like Teamwork feats?

Dude, get a Teamwork Feat via 1 level in Cavalier or 3 levels in Inquisitor. Then you can use your Teamwork Feats even if your fellow party members don't get them.

[ShroudedInLight]

Inquisitors and Hunters rock teamwork feats. Better if you can get allies to chip in but even if you can't those two classes make them awesome.

Mounted Hunters are absurd with teamwork feats. Packflanking, Outflank, Paired Opporunists, Seize the Moment, Wild Flanking...etc etc etc

[InVinoVeritas]

HeHateMe wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

What really annoys me is how much love these seem to get from the devs. Heroes from the wild had 2 pages of these and inner sea races aparently was chock full of them as well.

Ugh I know. The teamwork feats in Inner Sea Races are the new gold standard for awful. Not only do they require the correct positioning, situation and teammates with the same feat, but there's an additional requirement for everyone to be the same race as well. Good luck ever using one of those pieces of crap.

A bunch of us joined up to play in the World's Largest Dungeon, and we started thinking about what we'd need down there, and half-orcs started looking really fun. We all ended up becoming an extended half-orc clan all exploring together. It was a total blast, great camaraderie, and the GM said we all could get a teamwork feat for free. That actually worked out for us. But not as an Inner Sea Races feat.