D&D 5E Game design allow sub optimal class build. Confirmed by M Mearls

[Yunru]

Honestly, optimizing for anything other than combat can be very game-warping. Like my Charlatan Actor... who was(/is) a Changeling.

 

[Zardnaar]

We started rolling stats and then I noticed that we started to see things like Dwarf sorcerers start turning up and being built as melee characters or some of the more MAD classes being picked more like Valor Bards over lore bards using the default array.

We also had or 1st theme party turn up where everyone has built a dex based character vs the more common built one with overlapping support /buffing type party build.

Current party. Played today with 8 bottles of a wine/cider mix. They just hit level 5.

1 High Elf Battlemaster fighter
1 Wood Elf Monk (Shadowdancer)
1 Human Rogue (Mastermind)
1 Light Cleric
1 Human Ranger (Hunter)

The Monk found a staff of striking (+3 weapon grrr) and the Ranger is having a holiday on the Plane of Shadow so is functionally dead and need replaced (1st session as well).

They all went dex based so they could use stealth togather

 

[Plaguescarred]

Your way is selfish and comes at the cost of other people's enjoyment and makes the DM's life difficult. I find that repugnant. It's a social game, not a single-player game. What is ironic about your stance is that you're doing the exact same thing that you're criticising me for: my way or the highway. The only difference is that my way considers everyone's enjoyment at the table. Your's is solely focused on you.

This illustrate very well the point i was making when a suboptimal character somehow ruin the fun of others because of different table's expectations.

I personally find this a problem when people with different game's expectations play togheter, and in such situation i'll always blame the badwrongfun people working against tolerance, not the system allowing suboptimal character building or people wanting to. I think everyone should be allowed to make the character they want in accordance with DM's allowed material and think a character optimality shouldn't be a criteria to ban it because it doesn't meet some people's expectations.

For me D&D is not a performance game, it's a storytelling RPG so you shouldn't need to be performant to tell a good story. I even found that often suboptimal characters make even more distinctive stories!

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm the DM, so yes.

Your way is selfish and comes at the cost of other people's enjoyment and makes the DM's life difficult. I find that repugnant. It's a social game, not a single-player game. What is ironic about your stance is that you're doing the exact same thing that you're criticising me for: my way or the highway. The only difference is that my way considers everyone's enjoyment at the table. Your's is solely focused on you.

Ding ding give the man an apple. I booted 3 players for dumb which was ruining the party. They thought it was fun to.

1. Build PCs with 12 strength as your front line character.
2. Run away from combat as the front line character leaving the support characters to get slaughtered.
3. Fireball the party because its fun.
4. Use misty step a lot and spam cantrips burning up all your spell slots running away instead of doing anything useful.
5. Refusing to do any plot hooks and undermining the DM (I prepped 3 adventures sandbox mode they could pick what they wanted to do, they wanted to do none of it). One of the adventures was for a holy avenger and the Paladin was not interested.

And that was just some of the highlights. 1 of them may have been redeemable but he just went with what the other 2 (a couple) did. Mostly it was just 1 pumpkin influencing 2 other players his wife and friend.

I don't really expect people to play optimised characters just somewhat effective ones and to not undermine the groups enjoyment. When half of them just want to screw around and piss people off you are better off without them. I stopped the campaign mid session, basically booted them out of my house and never invited them back.

 

[Plaguescarred]

3. Fireball the party because its fun.
4. Use misty step a lot and spam cantrips burning up all your spell slots running away instead of doing anything useful.
5. Refusing to do any plot hooks and undermining thre DM (I prepped 3 adventures sandbox mode they could pick what they wanted to do, they wanted to do none of it). One of the adventures was for a holy avenger and the Paladin was not interested.

Counter-productive play is a different problem entirely and i agree must be addressed if game-breaking but we're talking about decently played suboptimal characters here, or at least i assume.

 

[One_Shots]

Counter-productive play is a different problem entirely and i agree must be addressed if game-breaking but we're talking about decently played suboptimal characters here, or at least i assume.

Deliberately making a bad character is counter-productive play.

 

[Plaguescarred]

Deliberately making a bad character is counter-productive play.

For you perhaps, but not for everyone. Not everyone evaluate productivity based on performance effectiveness and 5E more than ever proves it by removing minimum requirement of races, classes feats etc..

By counter-productive i meant disruptive play. Suboptimal characters are not any more disruptive than optimal one, players are by showing counter-productive behavior.

 

[ccs]

I'm the DM, so yes.

Your way is selfish and comes at the cost of other people's enjoyment and makes the DM's life difficult. I find that repugnant. It's a social game, not a single-player game. What is ironic about your stance is that you're doing the exact same thing that you're criticising me for: my way or the highway. The only difference is that my way considers everyone's enjoyment at the table. Your's is solely focused on you.

So what if I arranged my stats to your liking but only prepped/cast the # that an 8 Int would give?

Heck, even if you just handwaived the prep & assume I'm fully stocked, you can't MAKE me cast them.

 

[GreenTengu]

1. Build PCs with 12 strength as your front line character.

This is incredibly easy to do in 5e. Just make a dex based fighter that used rapier and shield, you don't need armor heavier than medium and will probably graduate to light once dexterity gets maxed out and still have the maximum possible AC. After that, just make sure your constitution is near or at maximum.

Really, that Fighter is going to be as good or better of a tank than the 18 Strength character until the 18 Strength character manages to gather 2000 gold to get the best armor in the game... and even after that, the character will only be down 1 point of AC with numerous other advantages.

And Rogues and Rangers are frontline fighters who can probably get away with less than 12 strength. Unless the character was a Barbarian or Paladin, I think the blame here is entirely with you, no other character on the frontline needs a Strength higher htan necessary to carry their armor and weapons.

 

[Plaguescarred]

And Rogues and Rangers are frontline fighters who can probably get away with less than 12 strength. Unless the character was a Barbarian or Paladin, I think the blame here is entirely with you, no other character on the frontline needs a Strength higher htan necessary to carry their armor and weapons.

Very true in my GREYHAWK campaign for exemple, the human rogue has a DEX 14 (it's his higher score, the player preferred to roll rather than use point-buy or standard array like the others) and he still pull his own both in and out of combat. Could he be better? Sure, but he's still effective and most importantly, has fun playing it.