What new feats do you want for 5th Edition?


4th Edition

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I think it would be neat if there was a feat that let you select a number of weapons equal to your Proficiency Bonus and gain special abilities when using the selected weapon, such as using a flail to negate the AC bonus from a shield, or getting a free trip attempt from a sickle, or the ability to fight like a Spartan with a pike and shield. Stuff like that.

I also think it would be neat to gain half your Proficiency Bonus on saves you are not proficient in.


That's an interesting idea, SmiloDan!

But... if it's reasonable to allow a flail to negate the AC bonus from a shield, then can't any fighter do it already? Same with tripping people with crooks and sickles. The old "tactical infinity" issue. It's why the games have a referee (DM): so that anyone can try anything.

What I like about the existing feats and battlemaster maneuvers is that they not only codify a specific tactic, but give a bonus to those attempting it. E.g. anyone can grapple, and anyone can hit the one they're grappling, but if you have the Grappler feat you get advantage when doing so. Or anyone can make a lunging attack but if you have the "Lunging Attack" battlemaster maneuver, you get to add your superiority die.

The game can't have rules for every single situation, like once when I was playing Dungeon World I was the druid and turned into a slippery fish in order to escape some kobolds grappling me but then I couldn't turn back and then the building was on fire and the fighter tried to grab me and look for a barrel of water before I would die.

Or once we were playing Labyrinth Lord and we poured glue on the floor and put up trip wires and when the skeletons came we spammed Color Spray on them and bashed them with maces.

With that in mind, if someone would ask if they could make a flail attack that negated the cover of a shield, I might say yes. Same with the sickle tripping. So while it's an excellent theme for a feat, the feat could help you do it more consistently and with a bonus. Because just codifying interesting actions in feats otherwise risk taking away those actions from everyone who hasn't got that feat.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I appreciate all of that, 2097, but I miss weapons having special features (besides reach and finesse), so I thought having it be a feat would bring some of those interesting features back for those who want them, but still having the baseline weapons be relatively simple. The Shove action in combat is great for bull-rushing and tripping, but (I think) there should be a way for specially trained folk to do special things. I also like that baseline characters can try (and succeed!) at all sorts of special maneuvers.


I liked the basic idea in the feat. Maybe the feat could be that you get an extra bonus (beyond just the +2 for shield) when you fight a shield with a flail.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
SmiloDan wrote:
I think it would be neat if there was a feat that let you select a number of weapons equal to your Proficiency Bonus and gain special abilities when using the selected weapon, such as using a flail to negate the AC bonus from a shield, or getting a free trip attempt from a sickle, or the ability to fight like a Spartan with a pike and shield. Stuff like that.

I think this is a clever idea, but I wonder if it would fit more neatly with the rest of the system as a fighter archetype. Like a "weaponmaster", or something.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I think the Champion is the weaponmaster. They get "Improved Critical" and "Super Duper Improved Critical" and two Fighting Styles.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
2097 wrote:
What I like about the existing feats and battlemaster maneuvers is that they not only codify a specific tactic, but give a bonus to those attempting it. E.g. anyone can grapple, and anyone can hit the one they're grappling, but if you have the Grappler feat you get advantage when doing so. Or anyone can make a lunging attack but if you have the "Lunging Attack" battlemaster maneuver, you get to add your superiority die.

I don't think we'd allow anyone to make a lunging attack. Reach is reach, as far as we're concerned I expect. How would you do that? Is it presented as an option somewhere?


I just find it weird that you can't lunge out to hit, unless maneuver.


I think it's odd to imagine that difficult physical manoeuvres can be carried out without a lot of training and practice. If someone's beyond your effective reach, there are techniques that let you strike at them anyway, but anyone who thinks they can perform them without knowing and practicing how to move properly is going to regret it - at least, unless the person they're fighting starts laughing at the idiot falling on their face in the middle of a fight. Fighting beyond the limits of your technique is a very good way to lose.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
2097 wrote:
I just find it weird that you can't lunge out to hit, unless maneuver.

What does having a reach of five feet mean then?

I like the looseness of 5E, but i still think the rules have to mean something.


Steve Geddes wrote:
What does having a reach of five feet mean then?

If you leave someone's reach normally, they get an opportunity attack against you. Maybe I'd rule that if you lunge out against someone ten feet away (without using that particular battle master maneuver), they'd get a swipe at you as you moved back to your original position.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

The Lunge you are talking about is essentially moving forward 5 feet, attacking, and moving back 5 feet, which is allowed in 5th Edition. Also, leaving the reach of your target would provoke a Reaction Attack, which is what you said you would do anyways.

So you're both right! Yay! :-D


Hiya.

SmiloDan wrote:
I appreciate all of that, 2097, but I miss weapons having special features (besides reach and finesse), so I thought having it be a feat would bring some of those interesting features back for those who want them, but still having the baseline weapons be relatively simple. The Shove action in combat is great for bull-rushing and tripping, but (I think) there should be a way for specially trained folk to do special things. I also like that baseline characters can try (and succeed!) at all sorts of special maneuvers.

I'd make use of the Advantage/Disadvantage system FAR more than adding/subtracting bonuses....as the Adv/Dis system was designed to get away from that kind of "death by numbers" mentality.

In any 5e game I run, if someone wanted to try something specific with a weapon, I'd look at what they were trying to do and if it was an attempt to "negate" something in the game. In the flail example, well, flails were designed to get around shields. I'd rule that *anyone* could try and use it that way. I'd simply have them roll at Disadvantage. Now, for a Feat...I'd simply word it so that it got around the Disadvantage aspect of trying that "trick". Many other feats do it this way, why not continue the pattern? For example, Crossbow Expert allows you to shoot someone who is in melee with you using your regular attack...not at Disadvantage as everyone else would have to do. So, a "Flail Expert" might allow the user to "Attack around cover or a shield without rolling at Disadvantage". This doesn't "add" anything to the rules, it simply uses the rules that are already there in a slightly different way.

One thing I hope they (5e developers) continue to do is stick to their guns with regards to "bloating the system". Bloat is bad. Don't give things that "break" the Basic Rules, and don't simply tack on a bonus number. The numbers thing is a horrible way to go, because after a very short while, a munchkin player will be able to pick a class, race, feat and arch-type and by level 4 or 5 have something like "Attack: +19 to hit (+2, +4, +1, +1, +5, +2, +3, +1) because they took "the right class/race/feat combo". Better to have them with "Attack: +7", but have 3 special things they can do without Disadvantage (or that they can do with Advantage).

^_^

Paul L. Ming


pming wrote:

Hiya.

In any 5e game I run, if someone wanted to try something specific with a weapon, I'd look at what they were trying to do and if it was an attempt to "negate" something in the game. In the flail example, well, flails were designed to get around shields. I'd rule that *anyone* could try and use it that way. I'd simply have them roll at Disadvantage.

I think that would be a horrible way to approach it. The person trying it is failing more often, which hardly encourages them to do it; but they're also not taking any extra risk when compared to using the weapon in the normal fashion. If thirty years of re-enactment and some involvement in experimental archaeology trying to reconstruct medieval fighting techniques from the surviving manuals have taught me anything, it's that most 'tricks' involve exposing yourself to more risk than normal manoeuvres and that what practice does is make it so you can do them without taking as much risk. So what I'd say is that you can attack with the flail and bypass the shield automatically, but if you do then the next attack on you has advantage and/or forces you to make a saving throw (Con, probably) to avoid dropping your weapon when the strike lands on your exposed arm. And the feat would mean you'd do it without that penalty, or perhaps with a small one to your AC.

Edit: In either case, this would be a more interesting choice if shields were more valuable.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

What if proficiency in shields gave you your proficiency bonus to AC?

For the avoid the shield trick, maybe you can automatically avoid the shield, but your opponent gets Advantage against you until your next turn? And the feat would prevent your opponent from gaining Advantage against you?

EDIT:

Pming, you have a very valid point about bonus bloat. I think there is space in the game for some bonuses, but I think you're right that for the most part, new feats and features and the like should be built on the Advantage/Disadvantage chassis.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

This will likely be an unpopular view with some but... exactly none. Feat bloat makes games like 3.5e/PF a maze of trap options and really specific cases. 5th ed. has that nice open air feel. The more rules that take place under specific situations the more you, in my opinion, restrict the game and the input of the players imaginations.

Still nothing wrong with options that we can choose to ignore, meaning I hope any extra feats, and whatever else, are stated as options. The 4th ed. 'everything is core' was a pain in the butt.


Stefan Hill wrote:

This will likely be an unpopular view with some but... exactly none. Feat bloat makes games like 3.5e/PF a maze of trap options and really specific cases. 5th ed. has that nice open air feel. The more rules that take place under specific situations the more you, in my opinion, restrict the game and the input of the players imaginations.

Still nothing wrong with options that we can choose to ignore, meaning I hope any extra feats, and whatever else, are stated as options. The 4th ed. 'everything is core' was a pain in the butt.

I completely agree with this. So far, the few feat options available feel like they have consequence, like they're worth trading that ability score boost for. There are so many feats to sort through in Pathfinder that I dread feat selection, and I'm only building NPCs.


Exactly none? Yeah, I'm onboard with that!

Shadow Lodge

I'm not gonna say NONE, but I hope it keeps reasonable. No more than 3-4 for any supplements (and hopefully the supplements come at a slow rate as well). Not like 3.5 and Pathfinder, where the entire concepts of books that sounded interesting got lost in a mire of new feats, spells, prestige classes/archetypes, etc.


SmiloDan wrote:

What if proficiency in shields gave you your proficiency bonus to AC?

For the avoid the shield trick, maybe you can automatically avoid the shield, but your opponent gets Advantage against you until your next turn? And the feat would prevent your opponent from gaining Advantage against you?

I like the idea of proficiency with shields meaning you get your proficiency bonus to AC. If I run 5e again I think I'll try that.

I'm not so sure about the feat benefit, though. I like the idea that you have to choose between something safe but not devastating - Low Risk, Low Reward - or something that's both riskier and more effective. So rather than a feat removing the risk I'd rather see one that gives a larger benefit. Especially since spending a feat for something that's only going to apply situationally (it's no good if the opponent doesn't have a shield). That's if you need more feats at all, of course.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

For the flail vs. shield trick, I was thinking of a feat called Advanced Weapon Training (or Exotic Weapon Training!) where you select a number of weapons equal to your proficiency bonus, and you learn a special use for each selected weapon. For example, flail would negate shield AC, whips would trip, rapier crits on 19 & 20, you can finesse hand axes, shove with arrows, etc. etc.


Free trip on any sickle attack seems too much for me - it might unbalance combat too much.

What about a series of feats that grant bonus effects to weapons when the wielder has an advantage against an opponent. Possibly allowing to sacrifice advantage to gain additional effect?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Or "when wielding a sickle, you gain Advantage when using the Shove maneuver to make an opponent prone."


You are thinking about ideas for article for that ENnie 5E zine?

Me too.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

What?

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

If any future feats are published, I want to to EXPAND options, not limit them. That is a particular failing of 3.x and Pathfinder, in my opinion...many feats do more to limit a character that doesn't have them than they do to expand the options of a character that does take it. And when a system has hundreds upon hundreds of feats, that mean it's a LOT of options shut down since any single character can only take a tiny fraction of a percentage of those feats.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Right on, Kthulhu!!!

For example, I think it would be fun to have a feat that gives you Advantage when making the Shove combat action. Anyone could try it, but someone with the feat would be really good at it. It might also grant some other benefits, since that's how 5th Edition feats generally work, like maybe the option to make it as a bonus action or when you crit or something like that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SmiloDan wrote:
What?

En5ider

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Drejk wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
What?
En5ider

Oh, neat!

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like more +1 stat and other stuff options. Cha only has Actor if I recall correctly (not counting Resilient), variety there would be nice.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / What new feats do you want for 5th Edition? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in 4th Edition