D&D 5E Mid-level Versatility

[SailorNash]

What in your opinion is the best way to pack the most utility and versatility into a small number of levels? Assume the 5-to-10 range, rather than a hypothetical Level 20 build.

In a team game such as this, it's probably better for everyone to have their own specialty...Tank, Healer, or what have you. It's mechanically sound, and each player gets a chance to shine without anyone "stepping on their toes". But I lean more towards self-sufficiency...nothing annoys me more than not having a path forward. Even if it's a terrible idea I likely can't pull off, I like at least having something crazy I can try no matter the situation.

There's a number of ways you could go here, but I'm not sure which may be traps. "Bard" is the one-word answer, but has the most annoying theme (music) to work with. Ritual Caster looks amazing, but there's a full caster in any party who already has this covered. Short Rest mechanics are always a gamble, despite being designed for frequent use. Skills can be great, as they're flexible and consume no resources, but some can become formalities that simply move the plot forward...it's expected that someone will make the check, and so long as somebody succeeds everyone can take advantage.

There's also the problem in spreading yourself too thin. If too many of your abilities are redundant, or if none of them are reliable enough to succeed, you risk becoming a useless extra unable to pull your own weight.

There has to be some trade-off...you can't be able to do everything, at full power, all the time, without having to manage resources...but which areas do you focus on most? Which feats, spells, skills, and such do you think are "must haves" that simply give you the most bang for your buck?

 

[pdegan2814]

You've kinda hit on one of the key aspects of the game. No one character is going to be so skilled at so many different things that they don't need to rely on their fellow party members. Especially in the level range you're talking about, before characters start to get really powerful.

That doesn't mean your character can only be really good at ONE thing, but pick a couple of things to focus on(one in-combat and one out-of-combat role, for example), and focus the rest of your effort on making the character interesting. You'll likely have more fun.

 

[Redthistle]

After winning a bucket full of gold medals at the '72 Olympics, Mark Spitz endured a lot of interviews. The one thing that's stuck with me all these years later was his answer to one reporter when he was asked if there was anything any of his mentors over the years said to him that helped him toward his stellar achievement.

He replied that he had been coached that to be really good at any one thing in life requires concentrating on it to the exclusion of other very worthwhile things.

Aim for one main thing, then look for ways to round out your PC with few odd talents.

In other words, what pdegan2814 said about player characters.

 

[SailorNash]

All very true. But there's still the question of which thing (or things) should you limit yourself to, knowing that you're trying to get the most mileage out of them?

For example, I've gotten into the habit of giving just about any build a single Rogue dip if not starting there. I'm not sure if the delayed progression is worth it, but two skills and two levels of expertise makes any character stand out. Monks can get Athletics, Rangers can get Survival and Handle Animal, etc. Seems hard to pass up.

As far as skills go, I personally am shying away from the party face role. Persuasion is a great skill, but if an encounter goes really badly it's still memorable, and there has to be a Plan B to keep the campaign from grinding to a halt. On the other hand, Stealth is a must-buy because it opens up an entire new play style unlike any other skill in the game.

The thing that most often gets sacrificed, sadly, is Extra Attack. Less powerful in combat, but five levels for only that forces you to only be a guy that hits stuff good. I try to pick that up at some point, but generally rely on scaling cantrip damage (possibly from Magic Initiate) to fill in that gap.

Just a few things I've tried so far. Wondering how other people have approached the same.

 

[Redthistle]

Your central question is beginning to filter through my thick skull.

I'm going to take an experimental stab at creating a few "multi-multiclass" PCs with different class combinations just to test it out. This is going to take awhile, so it might be some time before I get back to you on this.

It seems to me that Dex would make the most useful central ability, Rogue would gain the most skills, and Monk would provide utility insofar as one never knows when the DM might deprive the party of its equipment, so that's where I'll be starting.

 

[pdegan2814]

All very true. But there's still the question of which thing (or things) should you limit yourself to, knowing that you're trying to get the most mileage out of them?

For example, I've gotten into the habit of giving just about any build a single Rogue dip if not starting there. I'm not sure if the delayed progression is worth it, but two skills and two levels of expertise makes any character stand out. Monks can get Athletics, Rangers can get Survival and Handle Animal, etc. Seems hard to pass up.

As far as skills go, I personally am shying away from the party face role. Persuasion is a great skill, but if an encounter goes really badly it's still memorable, and there has to be a Plan B to keep the campaign from grinding to a halt. On the other hand, Stealth is a must-buy because it opens up an entire new play style unlike any other skill in the game.

The thing that most often gets sacrificed, sadly, is Extra Attack. Less powerful in combat, but five levels for only that forces you to only be a guy that hits stuff good. I try to pick that up at some point, but generally rely on scaling cantrip damage (possibly from Magic Initiate) to fill in that gap.

Just a few things I've tried so far. Wondering how other people have approached the same.

Honestly, I think at some point you're just gonna have to learn to let go, accept there will be some things your character simply won't be expert at, and remember the mantra of Wolverine: "I'm the best there is at what I do"

That being said, when I go into future campaigns, I have a feeling my tendency will be towards Dex-based vs. Str-based characters, mostly because of the bias towards better Initiative rolls and Stealth. Perception will always be a priority in my skill selection. But there will definitely come a time when I try playing a big bruiser of a character. The wide variety in character types is precisely what I'm looking forward to. I don't want my next character to look very much like the one I'm playing now if I can help it. In fact, I've already started forming in my head what I want to try and build for my next campaign, even though I've got a long way to go with the guy I'm playing now

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

What in your opinion is the best way to pack the most utility and versatility into a small number of levels? Assume the 5-to-10 range, rather than a hypothetical Level 20 build.

Ah, that's easy enough.

In a team game such as this, it's probably better for everyone to have their own specialty...Tank, Healer, or what have you. It's mechanically sound, and each player gets a chance to shine without anyone "stepping on their toes". But I lean more towards self-sufficiency...nothing annoys me more than not having a path forward. Even if it's a terrible idea I likely can't pull off, I like at least having something crazy I can try no matter the situation.

This is an entirely different request. Now we are at:

1) Versatile
2) Self-sufficient

It just got a lot harder. Honestly, there isn't a "self-sufficient" class in the game. Challenges are designed to be encountered with a team, and for a single party member, may be impossible to achieve. We can try though.

There's a number of ways you could go here, but I'm not sure which may be traps. "Bard" is the one-word answer, but has the most annoying theme (music) to work with. Ritual Caster looks amazing, but there's a full caster in any party who already has this covered.

Wait...now we just went into another territory altogether. Now we are at:

1) Versatile
2) Self-Sufficient
3) Not a Bard
4) Does not duplicate abilities of anyone else in the party

So not only do we have difficulty with #2, but #1 and #4 are probably not going to happen with the same build. Versatility is always going to mean a bit of redundancy with what other party members can do.

Anyway, I'll give it my best. I probably wasn't going to suggest Bard anyway, I find their spell list so restrictive that magical secrets doesn't provide enough spells to make a truly versatile list.

Short Rest mechanics are always a gamble, despite being designed for frequent use. Skills can be great, as they're flexible and consume no resources, but some can become formalities that simply move the plot forward...it's expected that someone will make the check, and so long as somebody succeeds everyone can take advantage.

Short rest abilities are dependent on a group that takes a couple short rests between each long rest. If this doesn't happen in your group, they are certainly at a disadvantage. As for skills, yes, often that's exactly how they work.

There's also the problem in spreading yourself too thin. If too many of your abilities are redundant, or if none of them are reliable enough to succeed, you risk becoming a useless extra unable to pull your own weight. There has to be some trade-off...you can't be able to do everything, at full power, all the time, without having to manage resources...but which areas do you focus on most? Which feats, spells, skills, and such do you think are "must haves" that simply give you the most bang for your buck?

If I want maximum versatility I would focus on skills and spells. To fill the requirements the best I can, I would recommend a Cleric (knowledge domain) 1/Wizard (Diviner) X, I would make it a half elf. Probably go for the Urchin background.

Here's what the build would achieve:

Starting skills: Medicine (Cleric), Insight (Cleric), Arcana (with expertise knowledge), History (with expertise knowledge), Stealth (background), Sleight of Hand (background), Perception (Half Elf), Investigation (Half Elf), Thieves tool proficiency (background)

So that's 8 starting skills (2 with expertise) and thieves tool proficiency off the bat. Also, with guidance, that's an extra d4 whenever you have time to throw up the cantrip first.

Spells: (this is at level 2)

Cantrips: Guidance, Light, Mending, Prestidigitation, Flame bolt, Minor Illusion (non-resource using versatility)
Cleric 1: Command, Identify (ritual), Healing Word, Bless, Detect Magic (ritual)
Wizard 1: Alarm (ritual), Comprehend languages (ritual), Find Familiar (ritual), Unseen Servant (ritual), Shield (prepared), Tasha's Hideous Laughter (prepared), Thunderwave (prepared), Sleep (prepared)

The following rituals will be available to you from level 2:
Identify
Detect Magic
Alarm
Comprehend Languages
Find Familiar
Unseen Servant

In combat you have a bunch of nice spells. The party loves a Bless, Healing word allows you to do back-up healing (neither of these spells require a focus on wisdom), shield + medium armor and shield make your AC pretty hard to bypass. Firebolt gives you neverending attack options, but Thunderwave is there for groups or sleep for that awesome low level auto-win. Tasha's is more for that one tougher foe.

You asked for level 5-10, so in addition to the above, add 3-8 more levels in Wizard. I recommend Diviner to get extra spell castings and for Portent, which adds a great deal of versatility to the character as well. It's also quite potent. You could call it Potent-Portent!

Anyway, that's the way I would go.

 

[SailorNash]

Honestly, I think at some point you're just gonna have to learn to let go, accept there will be some things your character simply won't be expert at, and remember the mantra of Wolverine: "I'm the best there is at what I do"

Agreed. Meaningful choices and opportunity cost are part of the system. But the flip side of that, saying that all characters have to be one-dimensional, isn't exactly a selling point.

Using Wolverine as the perfect counter-example, try and recall just how useless he was in the '90s cartoon. His only real power, outside of his superhuman popularity, was his ability to slice people in half. Not something you can do on kids' TV. So looking back, mostly he just growled a lot and made impromptu doors for lack of anything better to do.

Nobody wants to be that guy. Somebody sitting at the table, kind of excluded until (in this case) combat were to start. Or during a puzzle, they only have a weapon so they only can try to hit things. There's a perfectly good door to be used, but you have the ability to make holes in stuff so you're going to force ways to use that whenever you can because that's all you've got.

Contrast this with Mystique, or any of the telepaths, who also focused on their "one thing" but had a broad enough spread that they could always do something to meddle with the plot. (Magnetism would probably be included here as well, if it weren't the gimmick of the Big Bad who was a much higher power level anyway.)

In D&D terms, it's a matter of seeing how useful things are in practice versus how good they appear on paper. Some people adore Stealth as it opens up the ability for assassinations, thievery, covert ops of any kind. Others find it annoying - since you can't suddenly break away for a solo infiltration campaign, it becomes a skill tax as not to blow the entire party's cover or is reduced to the ability to look 30 feet ahead of everyone else and allow them to extend their vision a bit. Part of it depends on mechanics, partly on DM and group dynamics, and partly on playstyle.

TL;DR: I can build a Tank or a Healer, a melee guy or a caster guy, whatever. That's easy enough. But I then look at the sheet and think I'll probably get bored of hitting things with the same stick five levels from now. So it might be worth optimizing for variety rather than sheer DPS. Anyone else get stuck in a similar rut?

 

[SailorNash]

Wait...now we just went into another territory altogether. Now we are at:

1) Versatile
2) Self-Sufficient
3) Not a Bard
4) Does not duplicate abilities of anyone else in the party

So not only do we have difficulty with #2, but #1 and #4 are probably not going to happen with the same build. Versatility is always going to mean a bit of redundancy with what other party members can do.

Apologies for my meandering thoughts. The original question was the only real question I was asking...the rest was more me thinking out loud and debating pros and cons with myself to help get conversation started.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Apologies for my meandering thoughts. The original question was the only real question I was asking...the rest was more me thinking out loud and debating pros and cons with myself to help get conversation started.

yeah I got that. I just wanted to qualify my response as it was not going to fill all those requirements! Hopefully it presented some ideas of value.

I did think your perceptive on skills was a good point.

I think the skills that contain the greatest value are those with a set difficulty (like Athletics/acrobatics to escape a grapple or Investigation to find a trap)
or provide the difficulty (Like passive perception against stealth or passive insight against deception)

Skills like History/Nature etc often are a simple plot device where I don't think it really matters if you have a +5 or +10 to the skill. Often in the cases of these skills, the DM has a block of text he wants to read to the players, so he asks everyone to make a Religion roll. Then, whomever has the highest result (whether it be 15, 20 or 25) seems to have the exact result needed and the text is read. (Which is why I don't put too much value on the expertise provided by the Knowledge Domain - I'll take it, but let's not pretend it's as useful as expertise in stealth for example)