The Mirrorball Man
Aventurier
What's frustrating is when the same players have no trouble remembering the name of every single character in every single TV show they watch.
Last edited:
D&D 5E Can my table focus on making things fun instead of optimizing?
- Thread starter jodyjohnson
- Start date
What's frustrating is when the same players have no trouble remembering the name of every single character in every single TV show they watch.
I think that's to be expected though since the names in TV shows tend to be common household names (give or take). The names in TV shows are also repeated over and over again so that they stick. Take the show "Arrow". In a one hour program, Oliver's name might be mentioned 10 or 12 times. Felicity's name might be mentioned 8 times and Diggle's name mentioned 4 or 5 times. Other characters get their names mentioned varying amounts of time, but typically it's probably 2 or more times per character that shows up in that episode.
In an FRPG, we might hear the name of an NPC once or twice in a four hour session depending. The reason that it is mentioned so much in TV is because various characters talk to each other like in the real world (e.g. "Hey Fred, come over and help me out, will you?") whereas the DM mentions an NPCs name when he is introduced, but rarely in conversation. The style of conversation tends to be totally different because it is one person acting out the roles of multiple characters. Sometimes they address each other and the PCs by name, but IME, that's a minority of the time.
Last edited:
mflayermonk
First Post
I agree with Mistwell, just start the campaign without the PHB chapter 6 optional rules.
Its 8 pages that produce something like 80% of the D&D questions out there. You can slowly add it in, allow them all at once, or just play one campaign without them as you see fit.
Players are still powerful without those optional rules, but it might be at a level that you get more enjoyment out of the game.
Its 8 pages that produce something like 80% of the D&D questions out there. You can slowly add it in, allow them all at once, or just play one campaign without them as you see fit.
Players are still powerful without those optional rules, but it might be at a level that you get more enjoyment out of the game.
Removing feats for the most part only hurts martial type characters, very few feats impact full casters capabilities and honestly spells are where the real power is anyway. Removing multiclassing, does keep the option points down a lot, it gets rid of a possible optimization choice at every level.
But honestly optimization is a mindset, I was optimizing back in 1e and 2e, give me few choice points and it reduces the overall effect but won't change the fact it happens.
Where do I place my ability scores, or distribute points in a point buy?
What race meshes best with the class I want?
What is the best equipment I can use?
Do I go dual wield, weapon/shield, two-handed?
What subclass to take?
What spells to learn?
What ability scores to increase as I level up?
Without feats you still can optimize in 5e, and honestly it keeps some classes in competition without feats for instance the choice between fighter and moon druid or barbarian is much easier you don't go fighter.
But honestly optimization is a mindset, I was optimizing back in 1e and 2e, give me few choice points and it reduces the overall effect but won't change the fact it happens.
Where do I place my ability scores, or distribute points in a point buy?
What race meshes best with the class I want?
What is the best equipment I can use?
Do I go dual wield, weapon/shield, two-handed?
What subclass to take?
What spells to learn?
What ability scores to increase as I level up?
Without feats you still can optimize in 5e, and honestly it keeps some classes in competition without feats for instance the choice between fighter and moon druid or barbarian is much easier you don't go fighter.
Chocolategravy
First Post
If you want a story focused game, play a story focused system like Numenera. It has practically no PC optimization, very light party synergy optimization, and doesn't demand the system mastery that comes along with optimization, or in 5E's case, even flavor options like having to know what classes you're going to eventually take at character creation in order to meet the MC requirements. Numenera doesn't present you with a book of monsters to kill for XP, you don't even get XP for murdering people, and it doesn't require you to maximize your weapon damage or optimize your spell tacticals. It also has a HP and rest system that seems to be much closer to what people wanted from the 5E beta than what we finally got. Also, unlike 5E which only claims to have bounded accuracy, Numenera actually does. 5E is great for slaughtering hordes of monsters and optimizing for it, but if that isn't what you're looking for, then there are better tools to get the job done.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
War Caster shows up in almost every caster optimization I've seen. I've also seen Magic Initiate, Resilient, and even Ritual Caster, an Armor feat, and Healer depending on the build.
Chocolategravy
First Post
Warcaster has some nice benefits but isn't necessary. Casters can hit the same numbers without it. Muggles however can't hit the same numbers without feats.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
I disagree. In my experience, the magic classes get about equal benefit from feats, and removing them will impact optimization for both.
MonkeezOnFire
Adventurer
I don't think just banning certain mechanics will help the OP much. He has said he's frustrated that much of his game time is taken up by optimization that he does not find very interesting. As long as there is any choice available to the players there will be discussion about how those choices should be made. I don't think taking away a subset of their choices will help much, and may only frustrate these players creating bad blood.
I suggest that you discourage/ban metagame talk at the table. Let them optimize all they want, but only in their spare time. This will be a hard sell but if you sincerely explain to them that you don't enjoy it and they are decent people they should understand. You can even say something along the lines of "don't you want to show off by doing instead of telling?"
Ideally, you should also work to keep them engaged in the game so that they don't drift into thinking about the metagame. This is one of the most difficult tasks of the GM and is easier said than done. Start by reducing the references to metagame concepts during play. For example only give experience at the end of sessions so players won't be thinking about character progression.
I suggest that you discourage/ban metagame talk at the table. Let them optimize all they want, but only in their spare time. This will be a hard sell but if you sincerely explain to them that you don't enjoy it and they are decent people they should understand. You can even say something along the lines of "don't you want to show off by doing instead of telling?"
Ideally, you should also work to keep them engaged in the game so that they don't drift into thinking about the metagame. This is one of the most difficult tasks of the GM and is easier said than done. Start by reducing the references to metagame concepts during play. For example only give experience at the end of sessions so players won't be thinking about character progression.
Out of 5 non-multiclass PCs that just made level 4 in our game, 3 of them took feats: Alert, Mobility, and Sentinel. The Fighter now has 2 feats. All of these feats were taken for melee and not for spell casting. The Wizard (myself) waffled between 18 Int and Magic Initiate (for Hex and Eldritch Blast), but I decided that this was a short term solution to a long term issue of me rolling bad and the Wizard being wimpy. With more spells at his disposal, this problem should start disappearing.
But, all of these feats (at least in our game) were taken in order to boost melee capabilities, not spell casting capabilities. The Cleric rarely casts a spell in combat and has a Str of 16 and took Alert in order to go early and often (and the player also was playing the PC cleric in LMoP who got ambushed a lot, so I'm thinking that influenced the decision as well). The Bard has low AC, so Mobility will be used to get in, melee attack, and then get out. And the Fighter took Sentinel since he has the Parry combat maneuver and Heavy Armor Master already and can absorb a lot of damage. He wants to be sticky and having foes fighting him instead of someone else. Now that the concept of 4E healing surges is gone, the more foes that attack him, the better since he can be healed ad infinitum (or at least until the party runs out of healing).
So yeah, from my experience so far, spells appear to be better with stat boosts than with feats. There is always an exception, but nothing shouts out, especially until the stat gets to 20.
Eventual Ritual Caster for Sorcerer?
Eventual Warcaster for Valor Bards or front line Clerics?
Sure, this makes sense as does several other combinations. Whether a given player sees the value before level 12 depends on many things including party makeup.
But, all of these feats (at least in our game) were taken in order to boost melee capabilities, not spell casting capabilities. The Cleric rarely casts a spell in combat and has a Str of 16 and took Alert in order to go early and often (and the player also was playing the PC cleric in LMoP who got ambushed a lot, so I'm thinking that influenced the decision as well). The Bard has low AC, so Mobility will be used to get in, melee attack, and then get out. And the Fighter took Sentinel since he has the Parry combat maneuver and Heavy Armor Master already and can absorb a lot of damage. He wants to be sticky and having foes fighting him instead of someone else. Now that the concept of 4E healing surges is gone, the more foes that attack him, the better since he can be healed ad infinitum (or at least until the party runs out of healing).
So yeah, from my experience so far, spells appear to be better with stat boosts than with feats. There is always an exception, but nothing shouts out, especially until the stat gets to 20.
Eventual Ritual Caster for Sorcerer?
Eventual Warcaster for Valor Bards or front line Clerics?
Sure, this makes sense as does several other combinations. Whether a given player sees the value before level 12 depends on many things including party makeup.
Similar Threads
