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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Silam" data-source="post: 9889059" data-attributes="member: 7055898">Maths are always right but these particular equations are wrong…1 x 48 is only true in the context of single class characters, which is fine if you want to argue that multiclassing is an optional rule, but then we should consider that feats are also optional and you can play perfectly fine with only ASIs. In which case, levels 1-12 are a comparison between 1 x 48 subclass choices versus 6 ^ 3 possible +2 bumps, most of which are nonsensical anyway since you probably won’t bump Charisma on a Barbarian, etc.And that brings us to the more important point: what is sensical?Given the way 5e is balanced, and the way it is commonly played, most tables do play with both MC and feats, and yet most builds spend a significant chunk, if not the majority, of their feat slots on ASIs. And as far as ASIs go, each class is going to focus on just one or two abilities, so it’s not like they are actually considering all 6 stats to bump. So then the feat complexity of 5e is more like choosing between 1 to 3 stats for most feat slots, and then throwing in 1 or maybe 2 feats or half-feats with the remaining ASI/feat slots. Out of those feats, the vast majority will not be considered at all because they are clearly for a different archetype than you’re building for. A martial character will consider among maybe half a dozen feats. Same for a caster. Then there are feats which emulate other classes which you would only consider if you’re trying to minimize multiclassing but still get stuff from outside your archetype (e.g., armor proficiencies or metamagic adept) and those aren’t that common, given how prevalent multiclassing actually is…On the class side, from levels 1-12, you could be considering 12 x 11 x 10 x 9, etc, combinations if you dipped 1 level per class, but that’s exaggerated. You could consider taking 3 levels per class, in which case the math comes up to 48 x 44 x 40 x 36, but that too is likely exaggerated for most people. Or you could take fewer classes and more levels in each and have correspondingly fewer permutations, but most likely, you’re still considering more than just 1 x 48 options.Anyway, the point is, we can all come up with equations all day and they will be "right" for a given context. The question is always whether that context is pertinent. Let’s not devolve into throwing numbers that correctly describe not very relevant contexts…</blockquote>

Verification