D&D 5E How "optional" are rules like feats and multiclassing?

[Ancalagon]

Hello

(some quick context for the question: I've stepped away from running D&D games because the prep was too time intensive, and have been using other systems where I needed less time on the "crunch" and could spend more time on plot, NPC motivation etc. I haven't run a proper D&D game in 10 years, I grew up on 2nd ed then used 3e and 3.5, essentially skipped 4ed. So 5e comes out, getting a lot of buzz, I get it, I like what I see. But I've yet to use it - I was in the middle of running this big Warhammer frpg 2nd ed campaign. However now that this campaign winding down to a close, and I am thinking of my next campaign. Warhammer 2nd ed is a great system, but after 8 years with it I'm tired of it and want something new.)

So here is my question. I've read the rules and I like how they have tried to simplify things. Some rules are now optional. I see that the combinations of backgrounds and "pathways" allows great flexibility in single class characters, and as result multi-classing is now optional. I also see that feats are optional.

But are these options really optional? Are some classes going to be semi-crippled by losing access to feats - esp fighters who have extra feats? Does the game run okay without them?

Thanks for your replies - it's been a while.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The game runs fine without feats or multiclassing, especially for the first twelve levels (or so) while every character can make good use of their ability score boosts.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Yes. Totally 100% OPTIONAL. The core game is designed with the assumption that they are not in use (hence, the designation "OPTIONAL"), so adding them in is something that every DM needs to carefully consider. Personally, we tried them. Found them just as horrible as we did in 3.x/PF, and now don't use them. Same with the way Multiclassing works.

My suggestion is to give it a try in "bare bones" mode FIRST (no Feats, MC, or other options). Try this for a half dozen sessions or so to get a feel for the base game. Then allow "everything in the core books" (and whatever else you want). See how that changes your game, and try it for another half dozen sessions or so. Then make a decision about how much of each you want for your "real campaign".

PS: Peruse these boards a bit more. See how many heated debates revolve around creative ideas vs someone trying to "min/max"...er... I mean "clarify the rules" on using Feats and MC combo's. If you find those debates fun and exciting...you may want to use Feats/MC. If you don't...then save yourself the headache and just say no to Feats/MC. You can always add in exceptions for your campaign later...but it's much harder to take them away!

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Azurewraith]

They are pretty optional fighters can get a bit meh without the feats. As Saelorn said going up the levels will slowly diminish the importance of those ASI as will using rolled stats. A game i played in made it to 10th level of the 6players maybe half the party picked up 1feat and it wasn't noticeable, then there was me running round as a human variant fighter with sentinel PM GWM again wasnt really noticble outside of the 5ft corridor that i could 100% lock down didn't come up much.

 

[BoldItalic]

I would suggest disallowing them both to begin with, and play through levels 1-5 without them. After that, you and your players will a have a good feeling for how the classes work in the game and you can review the options.

If you then decide to allow feats, the fighter(s) will have the option to pick one at level 6 instead of taking an ability score improvement. (Everybody will have got one of those at level 4). If they do or don't, it won't make a huge difference to the way the game plays out, but if a particular feat appeals to a fighter player and helps to round out the way his character concept has evolved, it does no harm to allow it. Then, when you get to level 8, everyone else gets the option too and the players will be able to see from how it worked out for the fighter, whether or not they want to take a feat; if it's cool and fun or a bit meh.

Likewise for multi-classing. By level 5 or so, players should be well-established in their classes and starting to play a new class alongside it shouldn't be too much of a distraction, but ideally there should be a strong narrative justification for it in the context of the campaign. If you allow a player to multiclass too early, it will dilute the progression of both classes (or all of them, if they really go wild) and the player will not get the full flavour of what any of the classes mean.

By the way, don't be tempted to start the characters at higher levels in your first game. A session or two at level 1 will allow you and the players to develop their characters as roles and have a lot of fun without being distracted by learning too much in the way of game mechanics. Level 1 is fun if you are new to 5e (and even if you aren't ).

 

[Ancalagon]

I was thinking of starting at level 2 as it doesn't "fit" my campaign concept that they are complete beginners - I would have done level 3-4 but lowered to 2 because of the new system. I was however going to slow the progression a bit so that the characters don't reach mid-levels too quickly.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

They are completely optional. i second what others have said. Try it without - you'll find it plays beautifully.

Coming from wfrp you might want to use the lingering injuries table optimal rule from the DMG in due course perhaps, but then if you're looking for something different it will be a refreshing change to not have to deal with crippling effects.

It will partly depend on how min/maxy your players are, of course, but even then with any new system its best to go straight up first to get a feel.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Oh, and they will get to level 2 sooooo fast anyway. Most folk are considered level 0 really so level 1 is still a cut above.

 

[TerraDave]

Oh, and they will get to level 2 sooooo fast anyway. Most folk are considered level 0 really so level 1 is still a cut above.

Level 1 is basically 1 session (and so is level 2). And characters at those levels have a fair amount going on, more so then editions 3 or earlier (4e is sort of a special case). Your "simple" fighter has hd for self-healing (like other charecters) and another self healing ability, and action surge...the casters have at will cantrips...plenty of other cool level 1 and 2 abilities.

 

[Azurewraith]

Just on the lingering injuries find an expanded table or make your own. I'm a big fan of the feature but the stock list is to short and after 3sessions my players ended up with matching injuries which was a bit meh, a good injury can lead to some good rp.