nswanson27
First Post
So reading through this thread, I think I've seen every single class mentioned at least once as being "played a lot/too much"...
Build-wise, what's far too common in the AL?
Z. H. Darkstar
Explorer
I think that it's more a matter of certain race/class combos are more prevalent than others. Every class has a nonhuman race that synergizes with it. It's natural to see more of those builds than ones which would be considered suboptimal. However, when you only see the dominant builds appear at your tables, then we've reached a saturation point and it finds its way onto this list. VHumans are already synergistic with any class, thus why there was a VHuman Anything post.
Also, I started this thread as a counterpart to the Too Uncommon Builds thread, so that we could get an overall sample of the build diversity within the AL by combining the results of both threads.
nswanson27
First Post
I think that it's more a matter of certain race/class combos are more prevalent than others. Every class has a nonhuman race that synergizes with it. It's natural to see more of those builds than ones which would be considered suboptimal. However, when you only see the dominant builds appear at your tables, then we've reached a saturation point and it finds its way onto this list. VHumans are already synergistic with any class, thus why there was a VHuman Anything post.
Also, I started this thread as a counterpart to the Too Uncommon Builds thread, so that we could get an overall sample of the build diversity within the AL by combining the results of both threads.
Fair enough. Personally I would be wary of hidden leaps of logic here - just because a build is popular (or a DM is "tired of seeing it"), therefore there is something "wrong" with it, and people end up trying to "fix" what's right with 5e AL rather than what's actually wrong with it.
Z. H. Darkstar
Explorer
If there was ever an easy way to "fix" any perceived "problem" caused by certain builds becoming too ubiquitous, it would be to add NPCs to adventures that showcase builds that don't see much play. I know that the rules for monster creation are slightly different from the rules for player creation, but I think that it would be an easy way to try to encourage PC diversity.
I'd like to think that the faerzress-infused areas of Season 3 did show that the Wild Magic Surge table can gameplay more interesting. However, having a Wild Magic Sorcerer as an enemy combatant would probably convert more people to the subclass.
Want to see more Beastmaster Rangers? Throw a couple in an adventure and watch how people react to the increased durability and damage that the companions have in comparison to their stock counterparts.
nswanson27
First Post
Not a bad idea. Maybe have some NPC allies that stick around a bit - that may showcase it better than enemies. Beastmaster rangers need a power boost. I had a friend play one (once), and that convinced me NOT to play one.
Jabborwacky
First Post
After making about a dozen characters using AL rules, I would say any optimized race/class options. So anything that fulfills a D&D stereotype like elf wizard or dwarf fighter. The things that would be least played are those that actually defy the norm in a way that's actually interesting from an RP standpoint. You are not likely to see a tiefling cleric of Lathander: Probably one of the best original RP ideas someone can come up with, considering the symbolism involved. On the other side, humans and half-elves will be common due to racial flexibility.
Last edited:
NeverLucky
First Post
Until Dawnbringer 2.0 arrives to ruin your day.
Jabborwacky
First Post
It's also a great season to play batman.
Acr0ssTh3P0nd
First Post
Hmmm, I wonder why that trend is...
Could it be that mechanics like racial ASIs being the difference between starting with a +3 and a +2 modifier in your class's primary ability discourage diversity? Is it possible that with, a system like the D&D Next playtest's Standard Array and racial ASIs, with a 16 instead of a 15 in the array and racial ASIs only going up to +1s, one might see far more diversity in character builds? Could it be that (gasp) differences in the core math of the mechanics affect the decisions of players?
Nah, that would be admitting fundamental basics of human psychology and game design.
Sorry, had some bad experiences recently with grognards not understanding the difference between (a) wanting to be able to solely focus on flavorful racial traits without having significant differences in my primary stat, because I don't like being heavily influenced by mechanics designed to do just that, and (b) being a filthy min-maxer who wants nothing more than to ruin the game and never roleplay.
Similar Threads
