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

[Shiroiken]

I prefer the variant human to the regular human as a DM, because it meta-games your decision on race based on ability score generation. With dice, the regular human is only good if at least 3 (usually 4-5) of your rolls are odd, reducing the overall number of human PCs (assuming the variant human isn't available). With the array, the regular human is god-awful, ending with 4 odd ability scores, so unless you're a fighter with plans to pick up all the +1 ability score feats, it's a trap option. With point buy, the regular human is really strong, since you can set almost all your ability scores even (you might have 1 odd score), optimizing more characters, and having the reverse result as dice.

I have actually talked to my group about banning the regular human, which they suggested against (tbh, we've had exactly 1 regular human since 5E came out). The only time I'd be happy with the regular human is in a game with no feats, and even then, I'd likely pick something else.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I never said anything broke the game - nice strawman

If it's not "breaking the game", why are you so extremely concerned? It seems a bit much.

This thread, nor my thoughts on the topic are limited to rolling for stats.

Am I to understand you are, in fact, rolling for stats? It's all very well to say "Well I think this applies when people don't as well!!!!!!" but if you are, then, this is a really sketchy argument, because your entire basis is dubious as heck. Obviously, if you're not, we can take that into account re: your claims, but that was a politician-grade "non-denial" on your part there.

Since you've seemed to have totally missed the point of this thread - I'm saying starting with a feat at level 1 is too much because:

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.

I understand your "point", but it doesn't seem to be a very rational or reasonable argument, particularly as the converse applies - Feat effects become relatively weaker as you level up. Many races and classes are excessively better than others at levels 1-4 - and it is those levels where you seem very concerned. I mean, VTiefling with the Wings option is likely to cause more trouble than any Feat in that level range, but plenty of people run games which are untroubled by VTieflings or Aarakocra or, equally, VHumans.

Sure it, doesn't cost you an ASI, but plenty of other races get more than a Feat's worth of racials. It is problematic, I think, that some races don't get a Feat's worth of abilities, but that's a separate discussion.

So those aren't the actual problem at all.

The only actual problem is that it lets people target a specific Feat that benefits them and then pick 2x +2 to any stats, and that's only a real problem when you're rolling stats, and those +2s and the Feat really kick in.

 

[cmad1977]

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."?

Answering the OP.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Answering the OP.

Thanks for clarifying!

 

[aco175]

I have never had this problem at my table. I think only one player ever took a feat where most do not play with them. Last convention I went to though had multiple pole-arm wielding v-humans.

I think the power granted by the added feat to make human a better choice over other races is ok. If the premise of the game is a human dominated land then they should be more represented. Same thing with making other races less of a choice. My group never really played with monster races as PCs, but I do not think they should be better then the PHB races just through power creep.

 

[Fenris-77]

This all feels a little hot-take for my tastes, although I'll acknowledge that Frogreaver was probably titling for clicks, which is fine. First, even with the feat baked in, I don't have a lot of players decide to go variant human, and the overwhelming reason why not is actually the lack of darkvision. That's a 'my table' kinda thing though, and not super useful in addressing the larger issue. Personally, I think the only think about VHuman that is even remotely OP is starting one of the core combat feat trees at first, which really only means restricting access to a small number of feats and everything should be fine.

On a broader scale, I think it's important to acknowledge that a lot of players aren't playing max-efficiency whiteroom builds when they play D&D. Unless that's your group, the VHuman isn't going to be an issue. This is also in a lot of cases a far more conceptual problem than an actual problem, as many campaigns don't play over the level spread necessary to build any of those combat feat trees completely, or at least not and also compliment them with maxed out core stats. Even if you do play long enough, the combat builds are still mostly going to be overshadowed by casters at high levels anyway. Given the above, the problem at hand seems a little more niche than people see to think. That's my two cents anyway.

 

[Zardnaar]

Baking a human racial feat into the variant humanwoukd also fix it.

There's 5 feats that are out if whack with the others, and a few more that are a bit out of whack.

Feats allow speciazation. The other races are mostly a grab bag of abilities that keep the min/maxing within sane levels.

Mountain Dwarf for example. Leans heavily towards beatstick but any class in that role already has medium armor.

 

[aco175]

Could the problem be the power of the feats? My group does not use them mostly, especially the ones that I hear about breaking the game more then the others. Is the problem the power of feats or the additional feat makes the vhuman that much more powerful.

 

[FrogReaver]

Could the problem be the power of the feats? My group does not use them mostly, especially the ones that I hear about breaking the game more then the others. Is the problem the power of feats or the additional feat makes the vhuman that much more powerful.

If you don't get a feat till right before tier 2 and must trade +2 in your main stat for it - at that point in time feats are actually pretty balanced IMO - even the ones people traditionally deem strong.

 

[FrogReaver]

Baking a human racial feat into the variant humanwoukd also fix it.

There's 5 feats that are out if whack with the others, and a few more that are a bit out of whack.

Feats allow speciazation. The other races are mostly a grab bag of abilities that keep the min/maxing within sane levels.

Mountain Dwarf for example. Leans heavily towards beatstick but any class in that role already has medium armor.

I think I could get behind limiting it to a human only feat