D&D 5E Race Class Combos, Design, Roleplaying and the fear of the new

[Wulffolk]

It's always possible, and preferable, to advocate for the things that you like without disparaging the views of those who disagree with you.

That's not how the internet works!

I am right and you are wrong!

Not only are you wrong, but you are dumb too!

Just kidding. ;-)

I haven't read the entire thread, but you raised some interesting points in your original post. The problem with optimized race/class combos is one of perception. Even if EVERY Dragon-Born you have ever seen in your game has been a Paladin it does not mean that the entire Race gravitated towards Paladins. The Player Characters are the exceptions, not the rule.

One of the reasons that I see this kind of thing less in the games that I have run is that I have my players create a group concept before considering what character they will be playing. Are they all members of the same tribe of Barbarians? Are they a band of militia from that village over yonder? Or are they the the hired help of the local Wizard that prefers not to get his own hands dirty. The point is that they have some sort of commonality to build from. This reduces the Star Wars cantina effect, promoting a group with similar racial and cultural backgrounds while having diverse skill sets to compliment each other. I tend to encourage the players to only have one odd-ball in their group through the social pressures of RP in the game. Even cities tend to have biases and prejudices towards those that are obviously outsiders. If you are playing that odd-ball character you will probably need other members in your group that can blend in or act on your behalf.

 

[Lylandra]

Well, I think that's why 5e casters have the cantrip options that work and scale like weapon attacks. Spell slots are meant to be used for more spectacular, but also more unreliable, effects.

Yeah, that sounds reasonable. But from a psychological point of view it is quite off-putting to have your pretty limited resource (at least in 5e) be that relatively unreliable unless you really invest in it (and even then...). I don't know every 5e spell, but there surely are a lot of save/negates left, eh?

 

[OB1]

Yeah, that sounds reasonable. But from a psychological point of view it is quite off-putting to have your pretty limited resource (at least in 5e) be that relatively unreliable unless you really invest in it (and even then...). I don't know every 5e spell, but there surely are a lot of save/negates left, eh?

Yes but there are also quite a few save/half-damage as well.

I'd say that when facing a CR creature at your level, it becomes a risk reward thing. If you can cast a spell that the monster has a lower defense against (Dexterity for the Dragon) you'll have a good chance of hitting and having a much greater effect than what a basic attack would do.

But also, fighting a single enemy isn't really 5e's shtick. You are meant to be facing several enemies a few (or many) CRs below your current level which means that your magic will both be more effective and in the case of AOE spells, have a better chance that at least some will land.

 

[OB1]

Wasn't a challenge, but quick thought: no feats, array, and why sweat any difference other than which stats you invest in?

Okay, the following is with point buy.

Mora the Transmuter
Hill Dwarf Wizard School of Transmutation Lvl 20

ST 10, Dex 20, Con 20, Int 14, Wis 11, Cha 10

HP - 202
AC - 15 (18 Mage Armor, 23 MA+Shield)

Spell Attack - +8
Spell DC - 16

Saves - ST 0, Dex +5, Con +5 (+11 W/Transmuter Stone), Int +8, Wis +6, Cha +0

Spell Mastery - Shield, Misty Step
Signature Spell - Counterspell, Dispel Magic
Primary Combat Spells - Magic Missile, Animate Objects, Polymorph, Conjure Elemental, Create Undead, Firebolt

Mora is built to last, able to take punishment and keep her spells up. She is nearly impossible to pin down on the battlefield, misty stepping her way into safer areas and able to spam Shield every round if needed, while her Objects, Elementals or Undead do most of the fighting for her, supplemented by a steady barrage of Magic Missiles when needed. If she needs to get her hands dirty, she'll polymorph into an Ancient Brass Dragon and jump into the frey, relying on a +13 Con save and her legendary resistances to keep from losing concentration when she takes damage.

 

[smbakeresq]

Although I don't mind the current implementation, I would also be perfectly happy with a system in which the various races got ribbons only. No stat bumps, and no special abilities that have a significant impact on mechanics. You wouldn't need a STR bump to play a Wookie: if you want to play a strong Wookie you just allocate your highest score to STR. That would totally eliminate the pressure to min-max with race. But you can also play a weak Wookie if you so choose.

Although...that makes me think, stat minimums might be interesting. E.g., "Wookies cannot have below Str 12; if your Str is less than 12 replace it with a 12." Think about how this would effect race choice: if you were going to prioritize optimization over roleplaying you'd pick a class that doesn't need Str, in order to get the bump. So there would be an incentive (admittedly slight) to create Wookie wizards and rogues.

They used to have minimums and maximums. Look up an old article “The whole half-ogre”. IIRC in Dragon. The STR was 13+d6, with a 19 counting as 18(00) the best at that time. CON I think was 14+d4, but INT was 3d4? Or something like that. Dwarves for a while would max at 16 CHR to non-dwarves. Things like that. It didn’t hurt anything at all and made each race distinctive.

Point buy eliminates that so every is homogeneous.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[smbakeresq]

I do a lot of crazy things, but start a character with less than a 16 in their primary attack stat ain't one of them.

There is a player here and a thread too with a guy playing a wizard with 8 INT to test his knowledge of the rules and how effective it can be. With proper spell selection it would still be effective.


The bigger problem I have is people that have off stats of 8 that won’t role play that limitation at the table.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[Tony Vargas]

Okay, the following is with point buy.

Nod. AC & hps quantified and thus easy to compare, so can look solidly impressive - a testimony to the the power of those two stats relative to INT, too. There are good spells that take neither attack rolls nor require high save DCs - a testament to the versatility of the class, in general. You give up some of that versatility by avoiding those spells that do force saves (or just not being as good with them), but that loss is harder to quantify & compare.
So, say 20 INT, 18 CON, 16 DEX for the curve-following alternative. 2pts of AC, -20 hps, 2 off the DEX save, one off the CON. +11 & 19 DC on the other side. Better at the signature Dispel Magic, could choose from a wider variety of offensive spells that'd work more often for her.

:shrug:

 

[Guest 6801328]

They used to have minimums and maximums. Look up an old article “The whole half-ogre”. IIRC in Dragon. The STR was 13+d6, with a 19 counting as 18(00) the best at that time. CON I think was 14+d4, but INT was 3d4? Or something like that.

Oh, yes! I remember the "Whole Half-ogre." We had one of those in our campaign almost immediately. Played by the Matt whose Magic-user was killed by the barbarian.

Dwarves for a while would max at 16 CHR to non-dwarves. Things like that. It didn’t hurt anything at all and made each race distinctive.

Point buy eliminates that so every is homogeneous.

Agreed. It irks me.

My latest idea is that you point buy for 3 stats that you choose, and then you roll straight 3d6, in order, for the other 3.

 

[Yardiff]

What would the point buy portion look like?

 

[Guest 6801328]

What would the point buy portion look like?

Oh, I dunno. Something that would give you either 1 great score or 2 good scores or 3 decent scores.