D&D 5E Ban Variant-Human! Impact?

[TwoSix]

1. It doesn't cost an ASI that could be boosting your main stat
2. Feat effects at low levels are relatively stronger than they are at higher levels.

That's just as much an argument to give everyone a feat at level 1, not to ban variant humans. Half of the interesting combat feats are only viable because of VHuman.

 

[Dausuul]

The Human really needed to be designed as a happy medium between the Variant (too good) and the Standard (typically sub-par).

I think giving Humans two floating +2s and two bonus skill proficiencies hits that happy medium pretty effectively. If a feat is worth a +2 to a stat then the floating +2s are the same as the +1s and the feat math-wise.

Now this is a good idea! That offers a lot of options. You can get two 17s, and boost them both to 18 at 4th level; or you can get a 17 and a cheap 16, giving you extra points to spread around your other stats, and go for a half-feat at 4th; or you can get two 16s and a whole bunch of extra points... the more I think about this, the more I like it. Like the standard human, its primary benefit is superior stats; like the variant human, it's good enough that you don't feel like a chump for playing one.

That said, I find the variant human quite useful. For aesthetic reasons, I prefer games where the PCs are either all human or mostly human. By allowing variant human, I get that type of game without having to fight for it. But balance-wise, I agree it's one of the strongest options.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The standard Human is perfectly in line with the other Races, as has been pointed out. Not very sexy, but it lines up fine, and I have chosen standard Human when I've got all-odd rolls myself.

The only issue I have with the standard human is, since we use point-buy nearly all the time, is that most of my builds have 2-3 scores I want that are good, the rest I am happy with no bonus (but not a penalty, either, as I don't like dump stats in my builds). That basically means those +1 ASI in the 3-4 non-important scores really aren't that useful for me. At best, I can maybe finagle an addition +1 bonus to one of the important ones for me, which in the end means I am not getting a lot over what other races can get.

For example:

Here is a standard human array via point-buy to focus on a MAD character:
16, 16, 14, 11, 10, 10

Same concept but with a race gaining typical +2, +1 ASI's:
16, 16, 13, 10, 10, 10

What do I gain for the extra +3 ASI's? A 14 over a 13 (+1 bonus) and an 11 over a 10 (no effect).

Yet, the other race will gain all the other features as well...

A +1 ability modifier increase is not really worth all those other racial traits. If I play a race with 2x +2 ASI (like mountain dwarf), I lose even the +1 ability modifier increase!

So, IME, unless you are playing a very balanced character build where you want bonuses in most, if not all, of your ability scores, the standard human is very much sub-par when it comes to what you gain from it. To me, this is why the variant human is so popular over the standard one, because the feat and the skill really help balance things out compared to the other races.

 

[cmad1977]

No.

 

[Parmandur]

The only issue I have with the standard human is, since we use point-buy nearly all the time, is that most of my builds have 2-3 scores I want that are good, the rest I am happy with no bonus (but not a penalty, either, as I don't like dump stats in my builds). That basically means those +1 ASI in the 3-4 non-important scores really aren't that useful for me. At best, I can maybe finagle an addition +1 bonus to one of the important ones for me, which in the end means I am not getting a lot over what other races can get.

For example:

Here is a standard human array via point-buy to focus on a MAD character:
16, 16, 14, 11, 10, 10

Same concept but with a race gaining typical +2, +1 ASI's:
16, 16, 13, 10, 10, 10

What do I gain for the extra +3 ASI's? A 14 over a 13 (+1 bonus) and an 11 over a 10 (no effect).

Yet, the other race will gain all the other features as well...

A +1 ability modifier increase is not really worth all those other racial traits. If I play a race with 2x +2 ASI (like mountain dwarf), I lose even the +1 ability modifier increase!

So, IME, unless you are playing a very balanced character build where you want bonuses in most, if not all, of your ability scores, the standard human is very much sub-par when it comes to what you gain from it. To me, this is why the variant human is so popular over the standard one, because the feat and the skill really help balance things out compared to the other races.

I don't cotton to "point buy" or "array" formats: rolling dice is what it's all about.

I've never seen anybody play a variant Human in a game. Now obviously, people are doing that somewhere, but apparently the majority are doing standard Human, per WotC.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don't cotton to "point buy" or "array" formats: rolling dice is what it's all about.

I've never seen anybody play a variant Human in a game. Now obviously, people are doing that somewhere, but apparently the majority are doing standard Human, per WotC.

We stick to point-buy because otherwise the randomness can make characters that are really OP compared to others who roll poorly. To be frank, 5E is the first edition I've played using point-buy.

I'm just the opposite, I can only think of one or two times I've seen someone choose the standard human over the variant. I can't see (as per my post) why people would often choose the standard over the variant; maybe with rolling they would... I can't say.

 

[DND_Reborn]

No.

LOL to what? My post? The one above it? Your post came so fast after mine I am not sure what you are objecting to...

If it is to mine, why "No."?

 

[cbwjm]

Very little impact at my table. I've seen humans, I haven't seen variant humans. When I play I normally just go for standard.

 

[Esker]

What feat gives you as much as:

+1 to an ability score, flight at-will (50' or 25' speed, depending on armor), proficient with your unarmed strikes which do 1d4 damage, two additional languages? (Aarakocra)

+1 to an ability score, darkvision, advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects, a free attack cantrip (poison spray), two bonus languages, and the ability to use animal friendship and suggestion with snakes? (Yuan-ti pureblood)

+1 to an ability score; darkvision; proficient with two martial weapons, proficiency with light armor; a +5 (or slightly less) bonus to an attack, ability check, or save once per short rest, and a bonus language? (Hobgoblin)

Aaracokra is probably not the best example, since many people view at-will flight to be overpowered to the point that aarakocra are banned at their tables (including in Adventurers' League).

Some people also see Yuan-ti (in particular their magic resistance) as stronger than other races as well (compare to forest gnome, for example, which has a more limited form of magic resistance, and also gets a free cantrip and a situational ability involving animals; though I suppose you could argue that the difference is balanced by the fact that the Yuan-ti's stat boosts are less likely to both be especially high value at the same time, their cantrip is less good, and their animal ability more restricted in application).

Keep in mind too that variant humans get a bonus language and a bonus skill, so those should be factored out.

It seems to me that the power of a feat vs the sum value of a basket of other racial features will often be reasonably close, but the problem is that it's rare to find a build for which every single racial feature is useful. For most races, it seems to me, it's darkvision (possibly) and one other actually mechanically useful benefit, maybe a second that another build would use but yours doesn't have a need for, and then some highly situational or fluff features. Races without darkvision often get bonus skills and/or languages to compensate, which are nice, but usually not something that people tend to prioritize when choosing feats, IME.

I think what's really strong about the feat at level 1 is that you can grab something tailored to your build, instead of being handed a fixed array of benefits, only some of which you're going to use. That said, I mostly seem to see variant humans in campaigns that are expected to be played mostly at low levels.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Variant Human Impact

1. Combat feats are generally strong in combination with high stat and multiple combat feats. Variant human greatly speeds up that process. A variant human fighter for example can have all his offensive elements by level 8. A variant human Paladin gets there at level 12. However, if variant human is banned then the fighter takes till level 12 and the paladin till level 16. Those are the levels that most groups won't reach in practice.

2. Other combat feats are used to increase concentration saves. Caster's tend to love these so long as they get them without impacting their stat increases. Without variant human that would generally put casters around level 12 before we would see these kinds of concentration boosting combat feats.

3. Defensive feats like Heavy Armor master aren't nearly as good if you get it near tier 2 as opposed to the start of tier 1.

4. Feats like healer and inspiring leader also are not nearly as good if you must wait till level 4 and give up a primary ASI to obtain them.

In short - I think most practical feat issues are because Variant Human exists!

So have you actually tried running a game without Variant Humans yet? To see if your hypothesis is in fact correct?