Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="redrick" data-source="post: 6678654" data-attributes="member: 6777696">First of all, I think when folks say "ban at my table", the word might seem stronger than what is often happening. I mean, if I "ban" feats at my table, I do so with the cooperation and buy-in of all the players. I hope. We are deciding to play a game with certain restrictions. Now, it is fine to say, "some players will want to use feats, and some won't", and D&D 5e works very well this way, but some players will use feats if they have them, but not mind not using them if they don't have them, and if I want a simpler, less complex game, and my players are on board, why not? It allows a group to play a slightly different game, without having to completely learn a new set of rules.One of the great things about feats in 5e is they got rid of feat trees. If you want what a feat provides, you take it. You don't need to worry about taking earlier feats to "unlock" a cool 2nd or 3rd tier feat. This makes them much simpler, and makes it easier for a player to know what they're getting when they take a feat. If a feat really doesn't work for you, you can talk to your DM and swap it out. It shouldn't have cascading effects for your character.Multiclassing in 5e brings back in some of that "feat tree" quality. In order to get action surge, you need to take two levels of fighter. In order to get Assassinate, you need to take three levels of rogue. Players start investing multiple levels of choices into getting one specific combination. What happens when that combination doesn't work the way they intended? Or when a character becomes so dependent on that particular power move that the player gets frustrated whenever that move is unavailable?Anyway, as I said, we play with multiclassing at my table. But I could totally see wanting a game where it wasn't an issue.(In continuing your example, if wizards didn't make sense for the tone or setting of a game that I were running, I would not hesitate to ban them. Obviously, we would discuss ahead of time with other players, and if players said, "a game without wizards is not a game I want to play," I would either run a different game or they would find a different table. It's not about disliking something. It's about establishing an overall tone and feel of a game that everybody wants.)</blockquote>

Verification