D&D 5E Are proficiency swaps too strong for some races?

[ScuroNotte]

You can swap out armor or a weapon for a weapon or tool. In the example, an elf can swap a long sword for a tool as per page 8. So if a player playing an Elf martial character who already gains martial weapons through the class, can swap the 4 weapons (longsword, shortsword, shortbow, longbow) for 4 tools. Or a martial Mountain Dwarf character can exchange 4 weapons and 2 armor proficiencies for 6 tools.
Or am I over reacting.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Increasing the spread in ability doesn't make sense. If we were talking about backgrounds, for example, and said that each background provided 2 skill proficiencies and 2 proficiencies in languages and tools, but sometimes they provided 6, it would pretty obviously be imbalanced, and the obvious solution would be to give everyone the 6, if they wanted it.

Glad somebody's hitting on the problem. It's not that all of those tool proficiencies are overpowered in the way that combat relevant abilities would be. They might not even come up often (or at all). But they create an extreme imbalance the same as if most backgrounds granted 2 tool proficiencies but some of them granted 6 with no trade-offs.

Now maybe some people don't care if it isn't going to matter for DPR or adventuring contribution. If that's the case, you might as well say proficiency in all tool proficiencies (and might as well throw in languages while we're at it) is included at 1st level for all adventurers, as I expect the claim would be that that isn't overpowered either would be just as relevant. Or better yet, say you can choose to be proficient in as many or as few language and tool proficiencies as you wish, for free.

I can't think of the exact term for the sort of balance I'm trying to talk about, but maybe that extreme example will help others figure out what it is.

 

[Zardnaar]

It changes the tier lists a bit.

S tier is now varient human,half elf, yuan ti, Mountain Dwarf and most elves.

Dragonborn. D tier.

 

[BacchusNL]

It changes the tier lists a bit.

S tier is now varient human,half elf, yuan ti, Mountain Dwarf and most elves.

Dragonborn. D tier.

Satyr can automaticly get added to that list but Halfling, Warforged, Kobold, Goblin, Gith and Simic Hybrid are also a lot more competitive now.

Dragonborn still a dumpster fire confirmed.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It changes the tier lists a bit.

S tier is now varient human,half elf, yuan ti, Mountain Dwarf and most elves.

Dragonborn. D tier.

How would you rant the custom lineage? It gives you +2 and a feat, (and two languages and a skill or darkvision) so you can start with a 18. Seem better than the variant human to me.

 

[Zardnaar]

Satyr can automaticly get added to that list but Halfling, Warforged, Kobold and Goblin and Simic Hybrid are also a lot more competitive now.

Dragonborn confirmed still a dumpster fire.

Yeah kinda forget about satyr but S tier is fine.

 

[jgsugden]

There is no risk to the game by having an elf know how to work wood, perform calligraphy, be an excellent cook, and play dice rather than know how to use 4 weapons. They're a long lived race, and it makes sense they might know more tool proficiencies than other races.

It is absolutely not a balance issue. Tool proficiencies do not unbalance the game, ever.

To draw upon my experiences as a DM: I often give PCs proficiencies as a result of things in their backstory, even if the background, class or humanoid type they've selected do not indicate it should be present.

Think back to the old days and ask yourself how you knew if a PC could cook, write pretty, know about history, or carve wood. The answer: The player made a suggestion and the DM either agreed or not. It wasn't a balance issue, and there were no mechanics. And it did not hurt the game one little bit.

Allowing these swaps gives players more opportunities to mechanically add nuance to their PCs. Good for them. That is all it does.

 

[Zardnaar]

There is no risk to the game by having an elf know how to work wood, perform calligraphy, be an excellent cook, and play dice rather than know how to use 4 weapons. They're a long lived race, and it makes sense they might know more tool proficiencies than other races.

It is absolutely not a balance issue. Tool proficiencies do not unbalance the game, ever.

To draw upon my experiences as a DM: I often give PCs proficiencies as a result of things in their backstory, even if the background, class or humanoid type they've selected do not indicate it should be present.

Think back to the old days and ask yourself how you knew if a PC could cook, write pretty, know about history, or carve wood. The answer: The player made a suggestion and the DM either agreed or not. It wasn't a balance issue, and there were no mechanics. And it did not hurt the game one little bit.

Allowing these swaps gives players more opportunities to mechanically add nuance to their PCs. Good for them. That is all it does.

It's still better than what every other race gets and in some cases is combined with racial armor or unbalanced stats.

Can you swap a +2 for a feat still?

 

[BacchusNL]

How would you rant the custom lineage? It gives you +2 and a feat, (and two languages and a skill or darkvision) so you can start with a 18. Seem better than the variant human to me.

Definatly S tier aswell. How it compares to Human variant depands on a few things, mostly how your stat-spread works out with the feat you are planning to pick up (and some what on how much you think darkvision is going to matter). And obviously if you can sell your DM on things like a Custom Lineage Elf who spend all his life practising the bow to get Elven Accuracy (for 18 dex and triple advantage) at level 1 then that's super powerful.

 

[BacchusNL]

It's still better than what every other race gets and in some cases is combined with racial armor or unbalanced stats.

Can you swap a +2 for a feat still?

RAW you can't swap the feat for 2 stats, I think, but +2+2 and darkvision is pretty much a Dwarf that was to lazy to ever learn anything

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That's not how most tables play it imo.

I don't see how. At the very least thieves' tools explicitly have real, consistent uses.

Not a single 5E campaign I have ever run has ever had a PC use a Disguise Kit. Not once. Because Disguise Self is a 1st level spell and thus relatively easy to get into the party.

That it is easily eclipsed by a spell does not mean it is useless. Again: my point is not that this is somehow crazy powerful. I'm saying it is, objectively, useful. There is explicit utility, as opposed to the claim (to which I had responded) that there is no explicit utility unless the DM overtly exceeds the rules themselves to provide it.

So suggesting that this rule always produces overpowered characters is just wrong. It all depends on the DM.

Did. I. Say. That.

Seriously: who naughty word said it was overpowered? I certainly didn't, and it's getting real damn annoying to have people inserting this idea that I'm saying it's overpowered when I literally never said that. I specifically talked about how dragonborn are underpowered. I have specified that there is utility to it, even if it is minor utility (I even gorram admitted that the feat in question is a crappy feat!), as opposed to the explicit claim that it has no consistent/identifiable utility whatsoever. This option adds versatility to races that don't need it, and nothing to races that could use it. That's naughty word. I don't see how there's any way to argue that that isn't naughty word.

It's a reasonable point of view if you differentiate "is weaker than everything else" from "sucks."

...okay, fair. I apologize for saying "the thing I like is objectively weaker than all other (regular) possible options" in a single word. A failure of my usual sesquipedalian loquaciousness.

I've played several dragonborn characters and never felt underpowered, but it's definitely the weakest race (and therefore isn't a good benchmark for determining what's overpowered.)

See above: did I say that other things were overpowered?

I SPECIFICALLY said things like "weaker than the bulk" etc. As others have said, a point about this was specifically to make more combinations more viable....and yet the weakest race on offer got nothing. Can we at least gorram agree on that?

Is this a joke thread?

No.

Are people seriously worried

No. But not being "seriously worried" is not the same as not being annoyed, frustrated, or feeling like my preferences are consistently marginalized within the official rules.

Remember: Balance isn't like in physics - it isn't a point. It is a range.

Agreed. Wish more people thought so.

If things are balanced, they can be fun to play, and do not ruin the fun of others when played.

I completely agree with this statement.

Every character option in 5E fits in that range.

I do not completely agree with this statement, and that is why I posted.