D&D 5E How do you feel about games without Feats and Multiclassing?

Charlaquin · May 7, 2021

To answer the question, I almost always allow feats and usually allow multiclassing when I’m DMing, but I have run games without them. I much prefer Feats to be an option as a player and don’t really care about multiclassing that much, but I’m perfectly willing to play in games with or without either.

DEFCON 1 · May 7, 2021

TwoSix said:
It sounds like you're making the point that the character play/improv part of the RPG is pretty much unconnected to the mechanics (or at least a different layer), which I would largely agree with.

Yep. They are almost completely unconnected. Which is why anything related to the board game only truly matters when playing the board game and not when playing the character. But we purposefully suspend our disbelief and try to make them connect together as though one matters to the other.

We see 'STR +4' on our character sheet, and we suspend our disbelief by thinking that actually makes our character "strong". But it doesn't. It never has. Our character isn't "strong" just because the number says so. After all... I can roleplay my character as not being able to lift anything whatsoever regardless of what is written on the sheet. Just like players ALL THE TIME use Intelligence as their "dump stat" and yet play their character the same exact way using their own skills as a player to come up with ideas and solve problems. That -1 in INT meant nothing to the character.

And that's exactly why mechanics themselves are nothing but ideas that we use to imagine and roleplay how our character is. But they do not ACTUALLY influence our characters at all. They inform us how we should imagine and roleplay... but they do not actually force us to.

fearsomepirate · May 7, 2021

I don't like multiclassing because it's invariably a path to munchkinism. Feats are fine, because IMO you just don't need as many ASIs as they give you. Some of the feats are stupid (crossbow expert), but not stupid enough to house-rule.

Steampunkette · May 7, 2021

I'm cool with feats and multiclassing.

I absolutely refuse to let anyone take Sharpshooter or Great Weapon Fighter. And if someone is munchkinning up a ridiculous build I'll flatly tell them "No" because I'm not looking for extreme power gaming at my table.

That's just how I do.

Undrave · May 7, 2021

DEFCON 1 said:
I agree with what you are saying here up to a point. "Warriors" have less mechanical distinction in the board game than "Spellcasters" do. Because spellcasters have an entire third of a book granting possible game mechanics they can select from and add to their sheet. The Feats section of the book does not in any way compare to the Spells section in terms of variance and width of options, but it does grant something additional to Warriors that they otherwise wouldn't have. So if you do not use Feats, the warrior characters have less game mechanics to use during play. I agree with that.

The part I don't agree with is when you attribute this mechanical distinction to "defining your character", because your character is all in how you play it. An awesome roleplayer can take an AD&D Fighter with almost no game mechanics and make it more compelling and interesting and useful of a character than a bad roleplayer using the full suite of Pathfinder options to bust out the numbers on the sheet nine ways to Sunday.

AUGH again... "Just role-play your warrior more

" is NOT an excuse for limited parity of option. I'm sorry but I can role-play just as well (or just as bad, I'm not that great) regardless of my class. Everybody in D&D gets to define their character through their mechanical choices IN ADDITION to their role-play choice, and it's nonsense to have one character archetype gets shafted in one aspect or the other.

You can infer a lot about the personality of a spell caster if they role-play their spell selection, just the same as you can through a Fighter's fighting style choices. Someone who picks Sentinel and someone who picked Heavy Weapon Mastery, or a Cleric who picked Inflict Wound over Cure Wound, don't have the same personality or goals.

Arilyn · May 7, 2021

I enjoy feats a lot. They give teeth to my roleplaying and provide back up my character's personality.

Right now I have a fighter (echo knight). He is all about the balance between the physical and mental, and his wisdom is higher than his strength, which is a 14. His ultimate goal is to get his stats in as much balance as possible. Because he has a focus on wisdom, it felt odd not to have proficiency in wisdom saves, so he has Resilience - - wisdom.

Without this feat, my fighter not having proficiency in wis saves would clash with my picture of him. I guess he could keep pushing up wisdom but then he'd be neglecting his other stats, and he's working on bringing them into balance.

Burnside · May 7, 2021

Neither is very important to me and neither would make or break my decision to play in a game.

As a DM I allow both. I do think both have drawbacks/issues, but they are not so serious that I would consider banning them. I have played in a long campaign where feats were banned - it was still a great campaign.

I see feats used in almost every campaign, though not used by every player. I very rarely see players wanting to multiclass, so I have much less experience with the effects of doing so.

As a DM, I find that feats are not OP as long as ability scores aren't inflated. In other words, if you use point buy or standard array, most of the "balance problems" with feats go away.

DammitVictor · May 7, 2021

As a general rule, I won't play 5e at all. I vastly prefer the game with feats and multiclassing, but speaking honestly... under the specific conditions under which I'll play 5e, I would play it without either.

AbdulAlhazred · May 7, 2021

Stattick said:
How do you feel about games without Feats and Multiclassing?

I was rather shocked by the high number of people in another thread saying that they LOVED games lacking Feats and Multiclassing, and that they won't play/run games with either of them. Made me wonder how many people feel that way... but I didn't want to clutter up that thread with this question. Plus a new thread allows a poll.

As to the question itself, I wouldn't consider playing in a 5e game without Feats and Multiclassing. That's a hard pass for me.

In terms of 5e, I don't play preferentially, but in the couple of games I've been in we didn't use MCing. Didn't really seem needed. 5e's feats are OK, though I think there may be better designs. Even the best of them are hard to justify vs an ASI though.

In the design of my own game, all of these things have been eliminated. There is only the one category, 'boons', which is just 'stuff you acquire in the process of the story'. It could be an item, a new 'power', etc. Each significant power up you get raises your level by one. There is simply no need to subdivide them into different categories. The only division is in terms of origination. A few are class-based, being granted automatically at level 1. Likewise you can alternatively pick background/species/culture based starting boons, though you will always get at least the core class boon.

From there everything is narrative, you get what comes out of the telling of the character's story. If you WANT something, find it in the fiction. Some things will generally work better with each other or with specific classes/power sources, so generally characters will focus to a degree based mostly on class.

jgsugden · May 7, 2021

TwoSix said:
You're passive-aggressively trying to make me out to be a poor role-player. I would really, REALLY appreciate if you didn't do that simply because I enjoy the mechanical aspects of the game as much as the freeform thespian aspects.

No. I'm noting a flaw in your statement from my perspective and you're selecting to take it personally. Disagreeing with you is not attacking you. If you trun it into an attack, that is something for you to work through on your own.

I suggest you revisit the merits of my statement. Note that I discuss how rules limit, and can also inspire, roleplaying.

D&D 5E How do you feel about games without Feats and Multiclassing?

How do you feel about games without Feats and Multiclassing?

I'll only play WITH Feats and Multiclassing.

I'll only play WITHOUT Feats and Multiclassing.

I'll play either way.

It's complicated.

Cake.

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

DEFCON 1

Legend

fearsomepirate

Hero

Steampunkette

Rules Tinkerer and Freelance Writer

Undrave

Legend

Arilyn

Hero

Burnside

Space Jam Confirmed

DammitVictor

Trust the Fungus

AbdulAlhazred

Legend

jgsugden

Legend

Similar Threads