D&D 5E What 5e rule/option/class/item etc. do you regret allowing into your game

I'm starting a fresh 5e Greyhawk campaign - the players should be generating new characters soon. I'm generally pretty permissive and have been doing this long enough to spot traps/trouble but it's always good to crowd-source these kinds of things.

So, as the title says, What rule/option/class etc. do you regret allowing into your game? If you're a player - what do you wish hadn't been allowed into the game? Basically, what addition/option (be it feats, a UA option, a certain class, etc.) do you believe was not good/fun for your game?

All of them!

More seriously - I'm looking forward to running games that are more tight thematically; whether that's constraining race options, or class options or whatever. I'm tired of everything but the kitchen sink settings that means that anything goes and nothing makes real sense. Often less is more.

I regret nothing!

Seriously, though, when I DMed the previous campaign (in Greyhawk, also) there was nothing that was included that I wish hadn't been. Also, in the (also Greyhawk) campaign I'm currently playing in, there's nothing included that grates on my nerves. Really, the only things that have annoyed me is 5e's classification of which armors are light, medium, and heavy and other nitpicks like that.

I know it's boring to see the same responses, but I haven't encountered anything like that entirely. I strongly vet all material, make edited versions of it on the campaign's OneNote for my players, and everything is clockwork.

I suppose my best answer in the vein would be Great Weapon Master. Very early on when we first started playing, I took that as a player and hated it. The damage was just too much for group balance and made me feel out of place with the rest of the group. Since then we have a Homebrew version of it we use to make things a bit more to 'our taste.'

robus said:

All of them!

More seriously - I'm looking forward to running games that are more tight thematically; whether that's constraining race options, or class options or whatever. I'm tired of everything but the kitchen sink settings that means that anything goes and nothing makes real sense. Often less is more.

Click to expand...

I like to make the party pick a theme and go with it. Last campaign had the group as Knights of the Silver Flame (every character was in service to the Silver Flame in Eberron). The one before that had each character be an employee of Morgrave University.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

Xaelvaen said:

I suppose my best answer in the vein would be Great Weapon Master. Very early on when we first started playing, I took that as a player and hated it. The damage was just too much for group balance and made me feel out of place with the rest of the group. Since then we have a Homebrew version of it we use to make things a bit more to 'our taste.'

Click to expand...

That's exactly the type of response I'm looking for.

I'm mostly concerned with introducing things that could cause lack of fun within the party.



Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

There's problems, and then there are problems. You really need to consider what levels you'll be playing at, and what the "sweet spot" for the campaign will be. Everyone (myself especially) wants to make a game and be like "this train is never stopping!", but it's not realistic.

Even if everyone can reliably meet for months at a time, fatigue can set in, and the "new game smell" can wear off. New materials can appear that seem really fun, but hey, your characters are established, and this really doesn't fit the campaign...

Ahem. I digress. To give some examples of what I mean, if you want a low fantasy game where magic exists, but it's usually a problem for the players, and rarely an advantage, somebody playing a Wizard is going to be a problem, and Great Weapon Master is going to turn the Fighter from John McLane to John Wick.

If the game starts at mid-levels, has artificers cranking out "functional magic" to the masses, and the action is more political- well, sadly, the Wizard is STILL going to be a problem (lol), but GWM isn't going to stand out as much. Battles will be rarer, enemies will be better prepared (and will strike when you are least expecting it), and everyone is going to have more hit points. Nobody is fighting fair, and neither should you!

In a high level game where all the stops are pulled, the Fighter is likely going to be the problem. Not that he can't contribute, but more focus is going to be put on his weaknesses, and he's not going to have the narrative power over the game other classes might. The Wizard fits right in "yes, I think I can teleport us to the moon, and make sure we can survive.." and you'll be glad to have him around. Even if he is a cheating [REDACTED]!

As far as limiting options goes, I get that some worlds aren't ready for funny animal people or manga heroes. But let's look at Greyhawk. High magic, psionics, evil monks, crashed alien spaceships...this is a setting where just about anything could be found, just off the map. And that was what made it great. What's that, an insane demigod who built a dungeon with a Lewis Carroll theme? Dibs on the Vorpal Sword!

A serious game is a lot of fun, but cutting loose can be fun too. Don't be worried about how the players are going to warp your setting- nothing can stop that. Instead, stay open to how the game is improved by their wacky ideas. So what if some guy's Wizard has a 23 AC- the world is vast and grand, and there's more to it than being able to dodge shrapnel like some fantasy Rambo.

NPC henchpeople. One player really wanted to recruit henchpeople, and it seemed like he had a good strategy for doing so. But every henchperson recruited is a combat-balancing problem, and worse, a spotlight problem. It's just too easy to hog the gameplay when you've got your own mini-party.

This campaign wrapped so it's no longer a problem but in the future I'm going to be very cautious about allowing people to have henchpeople and followers.

I don’t regret it but I don’t think the damaging Arcane cantrips from SCAG were meant to be a dip into every spell casting class and Magic Initiate feat.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World

Also the SS & CE exploit. The optimizers love it and I think it’s a scam, but a few fog clouds and things like that solve the problem.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World