D&D (2024) On Feats & ASIs

[Corinnguard]

I think that is a bit unfortunate. I would like background, race, and class to be fairly independent decisions

I think they still are. You could play as someone who decided to be a soldier, but later found out that they had a knack for spellcasting. So they decided to become a wizard as soon as they left basic training. As a result, you are a bit more stronger than the typical bookwyrm and visit the local pub to see your soldier friends.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think that is a bit unfortunate. I would like background, race, and class to be fairly independent decisions

an idea i've personally had kicking around is that each species, class and background gives you two options for which stats you have as choices to put your three floating ASI in, ultimately that means you could either end up with only 2 places to put your ASI if all your character creation choices thematically overlap or have every stat option available if none of them overlap, this provides versatility of choice while at the same time ensuring all ASI are thematically tied to one of your choices, meaning you could just as easily say your +2 STR comes from being a goliath, a fighter, or gladiator, but you're not going to justify +2 STR on your halfling fighter from 'my halfling is just freakishly strong, because' but you're still going to have it as an option from fighter.

 

[CreamCloud0]

In my perfect of world, I've been noodling with the following concept (assuming 5e continues on the "relatively high powered" trend).

Character creation has the following choice points-
1. Species (formerly race)- This doesn't provide ASI, but would provide some type of innate ability. This is the darkvision etc. stuff.

2. Lineage. This is the "add-on" that we saw in VRGTR (dhampir, hexblood, etc.). But instead of replacing race, it will be an additional "thing" that is different from background.

3. Background. This will be improved to be a bigger source than it is in terms of skills, ASI, etc.

4. Class.

You can muck around with where to place bonuses, and in relation to each other, but given that so many people love the chargen minigame, I think that breaking out four independent choice points would be an interesting twist.

separating species as it is into both a bioligical choice and a culture choice would be a really good decision i think, 'i am a elf raised by dwarves' with the elven biology and the dwarven culture options, resisting charm and sleep and having perception proficiency while getting dwarven weapon proficiency and smith's/brewer's/stonecutter's tools

 

[Horwath]

separating species as it is into both a bioligical choice and a culture choice would be a really good decision i think, 'i am a elf raised by dwarves' with the elven biology and the dwarven culture options, resisting charm and sleep and having perception proficiency while getting dwarven weapon proficiency and smith's/brewer's/stonecutter's tools

that is mostly covered by Tasha's and interchanging of weapon, tools, language and armor proficiency from race.

 

[Charlaquin]

Level 1 feats need to be balanced around power level of a half-feat.

Then you can take level 1 feat at 4th level with added +1 ASI or as an option you can take any half-feat at 1st level with condition that you do not get the +1 ASI.

At that point, why even tie the ASI to feats? Just make all feats “half-feats” and say at every Feat level you get a Feat and a +1 ASI.

 

[CreamCloud0]

that is mostly covered by Tasha's and interchanging of weapon, tools, language and armor proficiency from race.

maybe but i'd still prefer to have the 'default' loadouts, thematic pre-made packages of what culture would provide to someone who grew up in it, especially as certain abilities are quite specific like the dwarf's stonecunning but which aren't something that someone will necessarily think to put on their character.

 

[Horwath]

At that point, why even tie the ASI to feats? Just make all feats “half-feats” and say at every Feat level you get a Feat and a +1 ASI.

that is the end goal I think.

 

[Pedantic]

At that point, why even tie the ASI to feats? Just make all feats “half-feats” and say at every Feat level you get a Feat and a +1 ASI.

I don't know if there's any way to correct 5e's Feat/ASI original sin and still really claim backwards compatibility.

Ideally, maximizing your accuracy stat up to 20 would be a built in part of character progression that sits beside feats, instead of competing with them. I just give my players +2 to whatever their accuracy stat in addition to each normal ASI, up to a max of 20, and then let them decide if they want to increase competence somewhere else or take a feat.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't know if there's any way to correct 5e's Feat/ASI original sin and still really claim backwards compatibility.

Ideally, maximizing your accuracy stat up to 20 would be a built in part of character progression that sits beside feats, instead of competing with them. I just give my players +2 to whatever their accuracy stat in addition to each normal ASI, up to a max of 20, and then let them decide if they want to increase competence somewhere else or take a feat.

I guess? I’m totally lost as to what is or isn’t considered backwards compatible at this point, and to be frank I don’t really care. If I like the rules more than the current ones, I’ll switch over. If I don’t, I won’t. Backwards compatibility is an irrelevant feature to me.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

At that point, why even tie the ASI to feats? Just make all feats “half-feats” and say at every Feat level you get a Feat and a +1 ASI.

Well, I think thematically you'd make the Ability-bump tie into the "training" that is implied by the feat, as opposed to willy-nilly. This is why I'd prefer to give L1 ASIs then remove them from L4 feats. But I'd rather have all the options available. I suppose it's easy enough to house-rule!