D&D 5E How to Break 5E

[pming]

Hiya.

You make too many assumptions I think

(1) You have to have a sucky DM. Plain and simple. One that can't/doesn't/refuses to think for himself in regards to what is the best ruling for his game...in other words, a DM that basically goes by RAW only and that's pretty much it. DM's don't (ok, shouldn't) let the rules get in the way of the game. If rules suddenly "mess up" his world/campaign flavour, then change the rules.

(2) You are assuming Feats are in Use, as well as Multiclassing. Both OPTIONAL.

(3) ...uh, I guess that's it.

So, basically, if you have a DM who only plays RAW as hard-core as possible, and one who allows both OPTIONAL rules of Feats and Multi-Classing, then sure. I guess you can "break" the game. Probably because the game is designed without Feats or MC'ing being considered as well as the expectation of DM adjudication for, well, pretty much EVERYTHING in the game.

IMHO, if you (general "you") are going to DM a campaign and decide to allow both Feats and MC'ing, then you have the responsability to make sure that the added options don't unbalance anything else. Fix them, tweek them, disallow some MC combos or Feats, etc. It is the DM's job to do this...not the rules! Get rid of all the options, and THAT is the base game. Anything above that...and "balancing" becomes far more DM-involved. And a DM who refuses to do that should fold up his DM screen and move over to the player side, letting someone else take over the reigns of DM.

IMHO, of course.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[aramis erak]

You can only cast it once a day though?

Not if you have slots from other sources. It adds the spell to your spells known, and in the multi-classing section, it notes any slot can be used for any known spell.

The once a day at spell level 1 is above and beyond your slots, as I understand it, and isn't a slot, per se. Still, it adds to the known spells

From magic initiate: "In addition, choose one 1st-level spell from that same list. You learn that spell and can cast it at its lowest level."

The drow magic and tiefling magic, for comparison, simply allows casting; they doesn't grant knowledge of the spells.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm the DM and it's very rare my group have had more than 1-3 encounters per day. They almost never take short rests.

This is because we like our fights exciting. To be any challenge, a fight must be difficult. After one or three such fights, a PC is depleted, more or less.

I consider the 6-8 encounter expectation fundamentally flawed. Who in their right mind want to fight three goblins, and then another three goblins, and so on, just to see if you can do it without spending any significant resources?

I don't know about you, but playing according to the 6-8 expectation would bore us to death...

It varies the other day we had 2 encounters some adventuring days we have made it to 14. The 6-8 encounters is what the designers expect.

 

[Zardnaar]

Hiya.

You make too many assumptions I think

(1) You have to have a sucky DM. Plain and simple. One that can't/doesn't/refuses to think for himself in regards to what is the best ruling for his game...in other words, a DM that basically goes by RAW only and that's pretty much it. DM's don't (ok, shouldn't) let the rules get in the way of the game. If rules suddenly "mess up" his world/campaign flavour, then change the rules.

(2) You are assuming Feats are in Use, as well as Multiclassing. Both OPTIONAL.

(3) ...uh, I guess that's it.

So, basically, if you have a DM who only plays RAW as hard-core as possible, and one who allows both OPTIONAL rules of Feats and Multi-Classing, then sure. I guess you can "break" the game. Probably because the game is designed without Feats or MC'ing being considered as well as the expectation of DM adjudication for, well, pretty much EVERYTHING in the game.

IMHO, if you (general "you") are going to DM a campaign and decide to allow both Feats and MC'ing, then you have the responsability to make sure that the added options don't unbalance anything else. Fix them, tweek them, disallow some MC combos or Feats, etc. It is the DM's job to do this...not the rules! Get rid of all the options, and THAT is the base game. Anything above that...and "balancing" becomes far more DM-involved. And a DM who refuses to do that should fold up his DM screen and move over to the player side, letting someone else take over the reigns of DM.

IMHO, of course.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

I am the DM most of the time. I have seen most of the things here at the game table over the last year but the players do not usually marry the lot together. Right now for example we have a Life cleric1/Land Druid 5 in the party but none of the other stuff.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Not if you have slots from other sources. It adds the spell to your spells known, and in the multi-classing section, it notes any slot can be used for any known spell.

The once a day at spell level 1 is above and beyond your slots, as I understand it, and isn't a slot, per se. Still, it adds to the known spells

From magic initiate: "In addition, choose one 1st-level spell from that same list. You learn that spell and can cast it at its lowest level."

The drow magic and tiefling magic, for comparison, simply allows casting; they doesn't grant knowledge of the spells.

I absolutely agree with this ruling. It doesn't overpower the feat, the wording implies it should work that way, and it's just more fun.

That being said, Jeremy Crawford said in Sage Advice that it only works that way if the spell is on your class's spell list. Basically, according to him it doesn't get the benefit of the multiclassing rules--even though it should be pretty much the same thing.

I'm pretty sure he wouldn't mind if we house ruled it though.

 

[Zardnaar]

Inspiring Leader is mechanically a better feat than Healer. They're both usable equally often, but Temp HP for everyone proactively increases your survivability/insurance margin. Healer is better for getting downed PCs back up without expending any spell slots, but hopefully that situation won't arise very often and can be dealt with via Healing Word when it does. (Also, Healer isn't usable at range.)

Plus, Inspiring Leader combos well with the best way to break the game: minions and hirelings. Especially minions and hirelings with ranged weapons. Normally human guards with longbows, hobgoblins, and animated skeletons are all kind of fragile and easily slaughtered by Fireballs, Frost Giant boulders, etc. But an 11 HP hobgoblin can become a 27 HP hobgoblin minion by the time your party is level 11, thanks to Inspiring Leader, at which point he has a pretty decent chance of surviving Fireball long enough to make some death checks and/or be stabilized by other hobgoblins. Without Inspiring Leader attrition is much worse among your minions, which hurts morale and therefore combat effectiveness and may lead to betrayal.

Troops want two things: victory and loot. With Inspiring Leader you can give them victory, and keep most of the loot for yourself.

Inspiring leader requires a high charisma PC, healer feat is good for anyone and is great for a Rogue: Thief. It can also be used for a lot more bonus hit points using the stabilization rules in the game. If the PCs get dropped again the Rogue just restores them to 1hp as a bonus action.

 

[Mephista]

The drow magic and tiefling magic, for comparison, simply allows casting; they doesn't grant knowledge of the spells.

I thought it did, assuming they were on your spell list already? Example - tiefling warlocks can cast Hellish Rebuke and Darkness using their spell slots, while a tiefling bard could not.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

I thought that magic initiate allowed a non-caster to have a 'party trick' spell. If used for a caster class, it kinda doesn't work. It's a way of saying this non-caster has gained some small measure of casting ability. For a caster, they're pretty much magic initiates by default, it's just they can cast more spells than one trick pony boy can. I may be missing the point.
But then, to me, breaking the game comes when there is too much meta gaming - it means the players are at one remove and not invested in the character - looking at the world from an over the shoulder perspective rather than through the characters' eyes.
But hey. Each to their own and I'm learning as I go along.

 

[Wik]

I consider the 6-8 encounter expectation fundamentally flawed. Who in their right mind want to fight three goblins, and then another three goblins, and so on, just to see if you can do it without spending any significant resources?

I don't know about you, but playing according to the 6-8 expectation would bore us to death...

Another case of "different groups", I guess? Because my group does this all the time, and my players love it. We have 7 characters in the group, though (6 players, 1 NPC), so maybe that's a contributing factor.

Around half the encounters I throw at PCs are "under budget", often consisting of one monster of a CR around the party's average character level. However, not always. When the PCs were 1st or 2nd level, one of the toughest fights they had was a simple "snake in a sack" that hilariously nearly did in the gnomish thief.

The party's a bit higher level now (~5th), and these small fights can still be problematic. After all, crits happen. And just because it's a few small monsters, the whole "bounded accuracy" thing means low-level monsters can still hurt you... and contribute to an expenditure of resources. I mean, at 10th level, a few hobgoblins that get the drop on you can still cause a world of pain.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The way to break the game is to take the spirit of the game (a social gathering of friends to have a good time) and throw it out the window, instead taking a view that the game is some sort of competition between players and the DM where exploitation to "beat the DM" is the number one goal. D&D, a tabletop game, is not designed for that. Stick with MMOs if that's your thing.