D&D 5E Houseruled: Feats, Rolled Stats, MCing Pick One

[Zardnaar]

As the title says.

DM says the player can use feats, multiclassing or roll for stats. BUT you can only pick one your choice.

Thoughts?

 

[Laurefindel]

My thoughts are that DM seemed to have had bad experiences with those, which I usually point as players issues rather than rule issues. Still, DM might be stuck with those players because reasons.

My thoughts are also that DM sees big power discrepancies between players, because if all players abuse the system equally, than it’s easy(ish) to adjust power level of antagonists.

otherwise, in my experience, multiclassing and feats mostly become broken with high stats, so the rule has some merits, but IMO feats and multiclassing, even together, don’t have enough bite to obscure single classes with straight ASIs if you don’t have the high stats to back it off.

 

[Flamestrike]

As the title says.

DM says the player can use feats, multiclassing or roll for stats. BUT you can only pick one your choice.

Thoughts?

Rolling for stats is a terrible idea and its about time they nixed it for good.

 

[Zardnaar]

Rolling for stats is a terrible idea and its about time they nixed it for good.

Feats are a bigger problem imho espicially the power 5.

 

[Flamestrike]

Feats are a bigger problem imho espicially the power 5.

No, they're really really not.

I presume by 'big 5' you refer to SS, CBE, PAM, GWM and (??). So the martial only feats?

And here we all are complaining that martials 'suck'.

Ironic.

 

[Zardnaar]

No, they're really really not.

I presume by 'big 5' you refer to SS, CBE, PAM, GWM and (??). So the martial only feats?

And here we all are complaining that martials 'suck'.

Ironic.

GWM, SS, Healer, Warcaster, Resilient:Con.

Healer shatters the attrition based 6-8 encounters expectation and/or easy mode.

Latter two make concentration rolls trivial. Some archetypes kinda suck without higher stas (valor bards, Monks in general ).

Monks probably need a bonus ASI (not feat), valor bard to MAD.

 

[Flamestrike]

Healer shatters the attrition based 6-8 encounters expectation.

How so?

 

[Malmuria]

Rolling for stats is much fun and the only way for me. Everything else is too clinical. I'd rather do 3d6 down the line than a point buy.
In 5e I have played variant human but honestly who cares. Multiclassing for narrative purposes is fine but otherwise just annoys me.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I'd probably walk. The DM is banning things but lacks a coherent enough rationale to be committed to which two things need to go, which makes me think they are on an arbitrary power trip.

But, for the sake of a hypothetical I'd take rolled stats. I have plenty of ideas for featless and singleclassed characters I'd like to try, but not rolling stats just feels dirty.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I really don’t get how anyone can think higher stats are a big deal in 5e. They don’t make that much of a difference.

Seriously, give every PC a 16 before mods, and play the game as normal. The difference will be somewhat noticeable at low levels, and you won’t notice unless you’re actively looking for it by level 8 or so.

The only major impact is more CharGen freedom. As someone who has started (after mods) with 15s in Dex and Int, 13 Con, 12 Wis and Cha, and 10 Str with one character, and another similar character started with 17 Dex, 14 Int, 14 Strength, 16 Wis, 15 Cha, 15 Con, the extra HP from Con was the biggest difference.

Ive played with PHB point buy, 32 point buy, 4d6 drop lowest reroll 1s, choose between two sets, and 10+1d6. In 3.5 an oddball DM I knew used d4s to roll stats, because they gave a “better distribution”, but no one else I’ve ever met did that, and I haven’t tried it in 5e.

Anyway, all my games have run the same with any of those, except that weird concepts are less frustrating to put together with the more generous options.

But I’d choose feats. MC builds are harder to deal with, and point buy works fine. But I only consider 5e satisfying in terms of breadth of options with feats.