D&D 5E No Feats Allowed?

The idea of trusting players to roll their stats & hp sight-unseen utterly flabberghasts me. The ones who don't want to cheat are going to be aware that the cheaters will be cheating. It seems like a great way to ruin the game.

I have only ever played table top pen and paper, but hasn't anyone ever developed a browser "shell" or anything that players and DM can use to both play the adventure and roll dice in a clear, fair and unbiased manner?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I have only ever played table top pen and paper, but hasn't anyone ever developed a browser "shell" or anything that players and DM can use to both play the adventure and roll dice in a clear, fair and unbiased manner?

That is called video chatting on Skype. Everyone gets a cam, and points it at their dice box.
 

That is called video chatting on Skype. Everyone gets a cam, and points it at their dice box.
Yeah, that would do. But what i meant was more in line of a some sort of digital dice roller built into a world/map interface that would allow groups to both play/abstract and roll openly. With the DM of course.
 

Roll20 does that, but the dice are digital, so you miss the visceral feeling of rolling the dice. It's basically a random number generator in graphic polygon form. I don't mind, but some do.
 

Can I suggest fixed HP of Max (HD) -2? So a Barbarian always gets 10 HP per level and a Wizard 4 HP per level. This gives the players a better sense of differentiation between the classes and prevents the issue of faking high HP rolls.
 

I use point buy and fixed HP. Removes any issues of diparity between the players, and gives everyone a level playing field. Also ensures no ubermensch or 30lb weakings at the table - everyone has enough to be good at stuff, and has weaknesses.

If I was to use a roll stats system, I would prefer 4d4 in order (4-16, average 10). After rolling the player can add +1d4 to one or two stats of choice.
 

I've played in a no-feats game and strongly prefer it. However, I do think the game is tolerably balanced with feats and that you run into some concerns without them. It definitely tilts the playing field toward casters, and this is likely exacerbated by the SCAG cantrips. I suspect rogues become your best consistent direct damage dealers (plus warlocks for ranged). Your fighters and barbarians aren't going to keep up. In general, I think the classes are more balanced in combat with feats, but despise the hyperspecialization that comes along with them.

And on that note, I don't get the people saying martials "lack options" or "fun things to do" without feats. For starters, my fighter (as in old-school D&D) was always able to use the best weapon for the job, whether it was a longsword and shield, two-hander, polearm or longbow. All of my physical stats were high (due to bonus ASIs), so I could be good in both melee and ranged. My damage output per attack didn't suddenly drop from 2d6+15 to 1d8 when it was time to use a bow. I chose maneuvers that were versatile as well, and I used more of them; it wasn't always Trip Attack for advantage to set up -5/+10. Likewise, feats (at least those I've seen people take) don't actually provide martials with "more options" or "fun things to do." Quite the contrary: They make the martial do one thing way better than anything else.
 

I think a featless game isn't really a problem. The primary purpose of feats is to distinguish one's character from other members of her class and/or race. If I were going to run a featless game I might explore other avenues of character individuation, such as implementing some kind of specialization with weapons and/or subsets of skills.
 


It seems to have got lost in the ether but I would prefer a feats-only game. Not only no ASIs but also no racial stat mods. Just give humans 2 feats and 2 skills and other races one feat and their racial abilities.
 

Remove ads

Top