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

[Mort]

Not necessary to rehash here, but it's perfectly legal. CE feat doesn't reference the two-weapon fighting rules at all.

I took a look at it. It seems very clear that the crossbow attack is a bonus action attack (1 attack) on top of another weapon's attack action. Whether that's RAW or not, it certainly seems Rules as intended, and that's how I'll treat it at my table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[Nevvur]

Noble background.

 

[TwoSix]

I took a look at it. It seems very clear that the crossbow attack is a bonus action attack (1 attack) on top of another weapon's attack action. Whether that's RAW or not, it certainly seems Rules as intended, and that's how I'll treat it at my table.

Perfectly fair; Crossbow Expert is one of the feats I ban in my own games.

 

[Mort]

Noble background.

Can you elaborate?

The skills associated are nice without being the typically saught after perception, athletics etc.

The benefit would seem to lead to massive role playing opportunities and can really help the DM set hooks for adventures and the like.

Heck I could see a common thread for the adventurers as being members of a prominent City of Greyhawk Noble Adventurers' club.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[Caliban]

I took a look at it. It seems very clear that the crossbow attack is a bonus action attack (1 attack) on top of another weapon's attack action. Whether that's RAW or not, it certainly seems Rules as intended, and that's how I'll treat it at my table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

Except that Sage Advice explicitly stated that it works. Since Jeremy Crawford is one of the designers, it is apparently RAI now, even if it wasn't when the feat was originally written. (I don't know who wrote the original feat, it may have been Crawford or someone else.)

It is a very powerful combo - I'm playing a character who uses it in Adventure League right now because I wanted to see for myself if it was as OP as people said. It is. (It's also kind of fun...)

Not saying that you shouldn't house rule it into something more reasonable or ban it altogether - you should do whatever makes sense for the game you are running.

 

[Mort]

Except that Sage Advice explicitly stated that it works. Since Jeremy Crawford is one of the designers, it is apparently RAI now, even if it wasn't when the feat was originally written. (I don't know who wrote the original feat, it may have been Crawford or someone else.)

It is a very powerful combo - I'm playing a character who uses it in Adventure League right now because I wanted to see for myself if it was as OP as people said. It is. (It's also kind of fun...)

Not saying that you shouldn't house rule it into something more reasonable or ban it altogether - you should do whatever makes sense for the game you are running.

OK.

So how's it been relative to other party members in actual play?

I'm not particularly concerned with OP as to the world at large, much more so with the other players rolling their eyes, etc.



Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[Nevvur]

Can you elaborate?

The skills associated are nice without being the typically saught after perception, athletics etc. .

The benefit would seem to lead to massive role playing opportunities and and can really help the DM set hooks for adventures and the like.

Heck I could see a common thread for the adventurers as being members of a prominent City of Greyhawk Noble Adventurers' club.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

It's complicated.

Two different games, two different nobles. The problems were purely narrative, not mechanical, and I see in hindsight I could've managed them better. Still, these situations left a sour taste in my mouth for this background.

In the first game, I was hoping to give the players a tour of my homebrew world with a campaign that required much travel. This would have required the noble to leave his lands while they were still under threat. He stated he "wouldn't be playing [his] character right" if he left before the danger passed. The rest of the players jumped on board with his plan to cleanse the local lands, putting a serious crimp in the pacing of the story.

In the second, the campaign was a parable of the American Revolution in a medieval fantasy setting, with the players on Team America. I warned the player the nobility would become very unpopular early in the story. He still wanted to move ahead with his noble background. When the war broke out, he basically sided with the bad guys. Had to make a new character while we discussed OOCly how to handle the old one. He did end up returning to the party, but his initial decision to stick it out with the old world nobility felt like going back on what we agreed to in our session 0.

In both situations, the failure was largely on me for not correctly anticipating how those characters would engage with their background. Prior to the first campaign I mentioned, I never had a noble in the party for all my past DMing, so I call it more a learning experience than a regret. It taught me that nobles require a greater degree of consideration when integrating them into the story/plot than other backgrounds (YMMV). I do regret the second one, because I knew it was inappropriate for the story, but I convinced myself we could make it work. In the end, we did, sort of. Again, he came back to fight for the good guys. It still caused some resentment on my part, and now I'm wary about letting players choose the noble background in the future.

If it happens again, I'll just have a tarrasque awaken under their castle and devour their family, then go right back to sleep so we can move on with the adventuring.

 

[Mort]

It's complicated.

Two different games, two different nobles. The problems were purely narrative, not mechanical, and I see in hindsight I could've managed them better. Still, these situations left a sour taste in my mouth for this background.

In the first game, I was hoping to give the players a tour of my homebrew world with a campaign that required much travel. This would have required the noble to leave his lands while they were still under threat. He stated he "wouldn't be playing [his] character right" if he left before the danger passed. The rest of the players jumped on board with his plan to cleanse the local lands, putting a serious crimp in the pacing of the story.

In the second, the campaign was a parable of the American Revolution in a medieval fantasy setting, with the players on Team America. I warned the player the nobility would become very unpopular early in the story. He still wanted to move ahead with his noble background. When the war broke out, he basically sided with the bad guys. Had to make a new character while we discussed OOCly how to handle the old one. He did end up returning to the party, but his initial decision to stick it out with the old world nobility felt like going back on what we agreed to in our session 0.

In both situations, the failure was largely on me for not correctly anticipating how those characters would engage with their background. Prior to the first campaign I mentioned, I never had a noble in the party for all my past DMing, so I call it more a learning experience than a regret. It taught me that nobles require a greater degree of consideration when integrating them into the story/plot than other backgrounds (YMMV). I do regret the second one, because I knew it was inappropriate for the story, but I convinced myself we could make it work. In the end, we did, sort of. Again, he came back to fight for the good guys. It still caused some resentment on my part, and now I'm wary about letting players choose the noble background in the future.

If it happens again, I'll just have a tarrasque awaken under their castle and devour their family, then go right back to sleep so we can move on with the adventuring.

Yeah, I can see how the noble background forces you, as the DM, to consider the character's role in the world, as opposed to it being a blank slate to carve out. As you show, this can be both a blessing and a curse.

This background also seems to be particularly susceptible to a difference of expectations between the player and the DM. Extra care would seem to be warrented to ensure proper meeting of the minds.

Thanks for the in play examples.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[Caliban]

OK.

So how's it been relative to other party members in actual play?

I'm not particularly concerned with OP as to the world at large, much more so with the other players rolling their eyes, etc.

This character is in Adventure League, so it's a bit easier to customize your gear and magic items than in most home games. But he is part of a static group that is playing through the Yawning Portal mods (we play every other week or so). The other players in this particular group are relatively new to D&D, so my characters tend to seem OP compared to theirs because I'm more familiar with the system and know some tricks.

This particular character is almost in a league of his own - I regularly out-damage everyone else in the party. To the point where I deliberately throttle back my damage sometimes and try to let them have a chance to shine. Usually by throwing nets to restrain things so they can hit it easier.

It's not a real problem in this group, because they usually appreciate the me bringing the thunder and ending the fight quicker, but in a group of more competitive minded players this character could definitely be annoying.

 

[aco175]

My group has not played with feats and there does not seem to be many power problems that some of the feats seem to have. Some of the small things that seem to be a problem include; backstab damage and AC limit.

The thief backstabs just about each round since we tend to play with flanking and advantage. At a certain level that damage is the highest in the party. Not necessarily the worst thing, but it stands out, even with the fighter getting 2 attacks and the higher chance for criticals.

The fighter makes up for the damage with the highest AC and becomes nearly untouchable unless I ramp up the monster challenge or make overwhelming numbers. He has plate, shield, defensive stance and was given the ring of protection I figured another PC would take. With a 22 AC and the other PCs in the 15-18 range I became torn with what monsters to throw at the party.

Players has fun and nobody was upset at the other PC powers and shtick but those are the big that stood out last campaign.