D&D 5E Durable and toughness

[eprieur]

Not sure if anyone did the maths on that recently (I did not see any thread on this) but I just did.

If you roll for stats each level (lol, Crom protect you if you do) but still, if you do, you would find durable to be more then good, you would find it to be THE feat to take.

Here are the maths.
D6 = 3.5 -> 4.47 (inferior to toughness).
D8 = 4.5 -> 5.81
D10 = 5.5 -> 7.15
D12 = 6.5 -> 8.49

HP Bonus at level 10 (and bonus over toughness):
D6 = 37.5 -> 46.25 (1.25 less then toughess)
D8 = 48.5 -> 60.31 (+1.81)
D10 = 59.5 -> 74.35 (+4.85)
D12 = 70.5 -> 88.38 (+7.88)

So by level 10, if you use D12 you will have nearly 8 more hp from durable then from toughness (you can of course stack them). You still get to roll the dice twice on short rest, which make durable much better.

My suggestion is
1) Make toughness less boring by maybe making it stronger versus durable at level 1.
2) Make durable usefull if you don't roll for HP (lol rolling for hp).

By rolling 2 dices you are also a bit 'protected' from the random god of rolling for hp and should have a more even distribution also.

 

[Blackwarder]

You know, your post would have been more interesting if it weren't filled with attitude against those who like rolling...

Warder

 

[eprieur]

You know, your post would have been more interesting if it weren't filled with attitude against those who like rolling...

Warder

Ok ok I'll quit the smartassery. Honestly I'm still amazed that people would roll for stats as is without house ruling. I just asked a co-worker and they still roll for stats and I'm like how can you guys do that? And he add that they roll but if it's lower then the mid amount they take the mid amount. Ah ok, you roll but it's better on average then to just take the average rounded up.

 

[Blackwarder]

My best character was a fighter with 3 hp on first level and 10 on fifth level, had to go on a quest to buff him up... sweet memories.

Warder

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

It does look pretty good, true.

However us non-rollers are getting a sweet deal with rounded up hps per level.

Giving a feat option to legally allow what a lot of rollers want to do is seems fair enough - it is costing them a feat and there's no guarantee of outcome.

It is presented first before toughness and on level 1 there's no HD rolled.

Nah, frankly I wouldn't envy the die rolling player who took this specialty.

 

[eprieur]

The thing is that durable is badly designed in many ways.

1) It's not an option for non rollers.
2) It's good if you roll to the point that you should probably take the feat and elect to roll using durable versus not to roll.
3) The bonus to short rest is wasted even though it's kinda cool and help with healing in general (and do not put more pressure on clerics which is something I like) since it's not strong enough on it's own for non rollers but it's very good for rollers.
4) It's not retroactive (see toughness). If you did not have the retroactive HP from toughness if you take it at level 5 who would? The only people who would take toughness are those that take it at level 1 if it was the case. That's what is happening with durable. You take it at level 1 even if you don't roll your starting hps because it starts to be usefull at level 2 and you need it before you roll for hp. If you take it at level 3 you wasted 1-2 levels (grey area if you roll before you get the feats or vice versa also). It's the only feat currently working like that and they will probably change it for those reasons and more.

 

[the Jester]

The thing is that durable is badly designed in many ways.

1) It's not an option for non rollers.

So what? Point buy isn't an option for "rollers", but it will still be in the books.

If you don't like rolling hps, fine, but don't insist that the game include nothing for those who do. If something is a bad option for hp-rollers, while something else is a bad option for flat-hp-takers, great, everyone has an option that caters to their taste. What's wrong with that?