D&D (2024) Things You Think Would Improve the Game That We WON'T See

[Minigiant]

On most of my builds Con is typically my 4th stat.

Constitution is generally the weakest stat in the game. There are weaker stats for specific builds but a Constitution above a 12 is generally a waste. The hit point boost you get is not generally worth the investment, you are better off raising your AC and on a caster getting defensive spells and if you actually need more hps get spells that give you temp hit points. The only class Constitution is really important for is a Barbarian and needing Constitution is one reason a Barbarian is such a weak class.

Other stats are not only competitive, they are for the most part better than Constitution. Constitution is tied to no skills at all.

Here are the 5 characters I have in DNDB right now that I did point buy with and the highest Constitution among them is a 12. Two of them went 1st-20th level (the Monk went to 20th but was not leveled past 19 on DNDB). 3 of them are hard melee characters going toe to toe in every encounter and soaking up attacks:

CON is the weakest stat? Have you looked at INT? The score that only has skills you only need 1-2 party members to care about.

And your Monk is proves my point.

Monk has a built in class features to elevate Dex and Wis scores above Con to care about 3-4 scores.

Druid doesn't.
Rogue doesn't.
Sorcerer doesn't.
Warlock doesn't.
Wizard doesn't.

Just go hard on Prime Score, set DEX and CON to 14. No brain cells sweating.

Why should the game be designed where the ability score have parity in their core usages?

 

[Older Beholder]

Not sure if it would make the game better, but something I'd like that we won't see...
Pull out poster sized maps for minis.

 

[ECMO3]

I mean even your Fighter build uses a V human and Hunter's mark to be well behind a Warlock (EB +Hex with Max CHA) for half the game.

First off that build is AHEAD of EB/AB+Hex at both strength and dex attacks at most levels. It is not behind that baseline.

Second it uses RAW including race, subclass and feats to be ahead of a baseline Warlock starting with a poor 14 in both strength and dex.

The point is this - the claim that you can't be competent with poor rolls is just plain false. As I said several posts ago you can mitigate this and be competent with the right feat, subclass and race selections

Extreme optimization to be behind a Warlock at range.

With sharpshooter she can be ahead of a basic Warlock EB/AB at most levels. She also ignores cover which is going to boost damage significantly in play, aside from having a longer range.

Here is how it stacks up:

1st level vs AC13:
Warlock EB Hex (no EB) 16 Charisma: 6 DPR (max range 120 feet)
14 Strength Axes TWF: 7 DPR (max Range 20 feet)
14 Dex Sharsphooter Heavy Crossbow: 7 DPR (max range 400 feet and ignores cover)

6th level vs AC15:
Warlock EB/AB Hex 18 Charisma: 18 DPR
16 Strength Axes, TWF, Hunters Mark: 19 DPR
14 Dex Longbow, Sharpshooter, Hunters Mark: 13 DPR

9th level vs AC 16:
Warlock AB/EB Hex 20 Charisma: 22 DPR
16 Strength War Magic, GWF, HM, Maul: 25 DPR (does not include secondary cantrip damage)
16 Dex Longbow sharpshooter HM: 16 DPR

14th level vs AC 18:
Warlock EB/AB Hex 20 Charisma: 29 DPR
16 Strength PAM+HM: 26 DPR
18 Dex, Longbow, Archery, Sharpshooter, HM: 31 DPR

18th level AC19
Warlock EB/AB Hex 20 Charisma: 29 DPR
18 Strength PAM+HM: 31 DPR
18 Dex, Longbow, Archery, Sharpshooter, HM: 31 DPR


That is pretty darn close with the fighter on top a lot and that is without considering the effects of action surge, the PAM reaction attack and not considering canceling cover on ranged attacks. Considering these three things this character will outrun the baseline at most levels.

To add this character is trying to keep up in both strength and dexterity attacks and doing really well at it, concentrating on one, while starting with a 14 would outrun the baseline by a mile.

 

[Minigiant]

First off that build is AHEAD of EB/AB+Hex at both strength and dex attacks at most levels. It is not behind that baseline.

Yes, at the hlgh levels that few play. That's why I said "half the game".

It's a high level, almost white room, optimized build.

If the community wants warriors to threats in melee and ranged, the game should support that from low levels. That would improve the game.

But it doesn't. It only does so easily for 1 warrior and relies on poorly designed feats, variant rules, and a stack of levels for everyone else.

This could be fixed. You could alter D&D rules or adjust the classes so a new player or a player focused on story can kit out a warrior better at melee and range than a braindead warlock with low optimization and having resources free to do other things. This is the D&D trope many claim they expect of warriors.

But this wont happen. It is literally something that we likely both think would improve the game that we wont see.

 

[ECMO3]

CON is the weakest stat? Have you looked at INT? The score that only has skills you only need 1-2 party members to care about.

And Constitution has no skills at all attached to it. That means in two-thirds of the game it is useless and in the one pillar it is useful in, the effect of a high constitution is minimal. 4 points in constitution gets you a whopping 10hps at level 5. That is like one more hit you can take before you go down.

Overall Constitution is the weakest stat. No class has Constitution as a prime ability and the Barbarian is the only class that needs to have a good (13+) Constitution and it is a secondary stat for them. Barbarian is also the only class that needs Constitution to multiclass.

Two classes have intelligence as a primary stat and other subclasses abilities key off intelligence. As a result I would say that yes Constitution is a weaker stat than intelligence.

And your Monk is proves my point.

My Monk played level 1 to level 20 with a 12 Con that whole time and never went down a single time in combat.

Sorcerer doesn't.
Warlock doesn't.

The Sorcerer-Warlock I linked had a 10 Constitution, a 14 Dex and a 14 Wisdom and played through level 10.

Wizard doesn't.

One Wizard I linked played to level 20 and is probably the strongest melee character I have ever played. She had a 10 constitution and like the Monk did not go down a single time in play over 20 levels.

The other Wizard I linked also has a 10 Con. She has gone down a bunch (3 times in 4 levels), but she has never been close to dying and was back up the next round every time. Alos I thnk 2 of those times she would have went down regardless of what her Constitution was.

Just go hard on Prime Score, set DEX and CON to 14. No brain cells sweating.

I have played 5E for 10 years and in that time I have only played 1 point buy character with a 14 Constitution (a Rune Knight). I have never played a point buy character with a 15 or higher constitution.

The idea that you need a high constitution is a myth.

Follow this advice for most characters in a point buy game and you will be pretty poor at 2 of the 3 pillars of the game and margianlly better at the combat pillar (and actually worse at that too if you dump Wisdom). Rogues and Bards in particular will have their social and or exploration pillars gimped if you put a 14 in Con on point buy. Those two classes can be awesome in the non-combat pillars of the game and this will make them "not awesome". Fighters can be good at the non-combat pillars, but investing in Con will kill this, especially on a strength build.

Dexterity I agree with you on, that is a must have for most classes and Wisdom generally is as well.

Why should the game be designed where the ability score have parity in their core usages?

I never said they had parity, what I said was Constitution was the weakest overall.

 

[ECMO3]

Yes, at the hlgh levels that few play. That's why I said "half the game".

No it is ahead at 1st level too, which is the level everyone plays.

It's a high level, almost white room, optimized build.

It is an optimized build with very low rolls.

If the community wants warriors to threats in melee and ranged, the game should support that from low levels.

It does. Keep in mind the example I gave had poor rolls with two 13s as the highest numbers rolled (before race). 16 Strength and 16 Dexterity to start after racial bonuses is average and easy to do on point buy. Do that instead of 14-14 and it beats that Warlock baseline in both at every single level from 1-20.

And that is beating the baseline, which you don't actually need to do to be effective.

 

[Minigiant]

And Constitution has no skills at all attached to it. That means in two-thirds of the game it is useless and in the one pillar it is useful in, the effect of a high constitution is minimal. 4 points in constitution gets you a whopping 10hps at level 5. That is like one more hit you can take before you go down.

Overall Constitution is the weakest stat. No class has Constitution as a prime ability and the Barbarian is the only class that needs to have a good (13+) Constitution and it is a secondary stat for them. Barbarian is also the only class that needs Constitution to multiclass.

Two classes have intelligence as a primary stat and other subclasses abilities key off intelligence. As a result I would say that yes Constitution is a weaker stat than intelligence.

We are talking about direct things.

I'm talking about ability scores independent of class or race.

Intelligence boosts Lore skills. That's it. A party tends to only need 1 maybe 2 loremasters. And Knowledge check are rarely vital to survival or success (A DM should never gate success behind a single check) so PCs can rely on the prof bonus from skills.

I have played 5E for 10 years and in that time I have only played 1 point buy character with a 14 Constitution (a Rune Knight). I have never played a point buy character with a 15 or higher constitution.

The idea that you need a high constitution is a myth.

Follow this advice for most characters in a point buy game and you will be pretty poor at 2 of the 3 pillars of the game. Rogues and Bards in particular will have their social and or exploration pillars gimped if you put a 14 in Con on point buy. Those two classes can be awesome in the non-combat pillars of the game and this will make them "not awesome".

Dexterity I agree with you on.

In my current games, no one has CON under 12. And the people with 12 are all the ones who rolled bad.

In PB, I find that most people save 5 or 7 of the 27 points for CON
In Rolling, they chuck their 2nd or 3rd best roll to CON.
In Array, CON gets the13 or 14.

Ran many a party of idiots with one genius. It's a meme of 5e.

High or Good Constitution isn't necessary. But CON and DEX are the only scores with scaling usefullness for all PCs. So many PCs have 2-4 ability scores they have low use for and whose bonus become less impactful as you level. If you think the 5% accuracy of going to 16 with your prime doesn't matter, the 10% of boosting one of your 6 saves on a flat roll doesn't either.

Especially with the Saving throw system being broke in 5e.

 

[Sulicius]

• removal of multiclassing
• removal of damage resistance to nonmagical weapon damage
• no longer using ability scores, just the bonuses
• removal of counterspell
• heavy rebalancing of magic items according to their rarity
• different identification/attunement rules per magic item rarity

 

[ECMO3]

Intelligence boosts Lore skills. That's it. A party tends to only need 1 maybe 2 loremasters. And Knowledge check are rarely vital to survival or success (A DM should never gate success behind a single check) so PCs can rely on the prof bonus from skills.

And a party needs no constitution masters at all. Your argument here is Intelligence is not important because you only have a few Intelligence skills, but then you have no constitution skills at all. If you need 1 or 2 loremaster that is 20-40% of the average party and unless you have a Wizard or Artificer it is not a given you are going to have that.

Constitution checks are less common than intelligence checks and Constitution, like Intelligence, is almost never vital to survival.

Also Intelligence is a prime stat for two classes.

To be clear I am not saying Constitution is less important than intelligence for every PC or every build. It isn't and I have played characters who took a 10 or 12 in Constitution and dumped Intelligence with their worst stat. What I am saying is when you consider all characters, including those that absolutely need intelligence, Constitution is generally a less imporant (aka weaker) stat.

In my current games, no one has CON under 12. And the people with 12 are all the ones who rolled bad.
In PB, I find that most people save 5 or 7 of the 27 points for CON
In Rolling, they chuck their 2nd or 3rd best roll to CON.
In Array, CON gets the13 or 14.

I agree that is common, but it is also a waste and non-optimal IME.

While there are a lot of non-optimal choices people make (like playing any Fighter for instance), most of those subpar choices have legit role play reasons. This one doesn't. Investing in Constitution generally just seems to be making a build weaker for no thematic reason.

Ran many a party of idiots with one genius. It's a meme of 5e.

But not an optimal one.

High or Good Constitution isn't necessary. But CON and DEX are the only scores with scaling usefullness for all PCs.

Dexterity yes, Constitution no. Unless you play a class or race that has abilities that use Constitution it is not very useful at all.

I have played a number of 1-20 point buy characters, form a variety of races and classes and never had much use for a Constitution above 12 at all.

Wisdom is more universally useful than Constitution. and unlike Constitution, Wisdom is often vital for survival both for perception and for Wisdom saving throws.

So many PCs have 2-4 ability scores they have low use for and whose bonus become less impactful as you level.

And Constitution is one of these.

If you think the 5% accuracy of going to 16 with your prime doesn't matter, the 10% of boosting one of your 6 saves on a flat roll doesn't either.

It is rarely that simple though. 12 on Constitution is ok and easy and there is not much of a downside unless you have a MAD build.

A 14 is a different story though. On point buy going to a 14 from a 10 is generally going to eliminate 5 points off of another "off stat" and going to a 16 is going to mean 9 points typically.

Now if you are playing a Fighter and can dump intelligence, sure it is workable. If you are a Rogue though you are killing yourself in your primary role.

For example: Your Rogue can go S8 D17 C10 I12 W14 CH14 and start out rocking a +3 Athletics, +5 Stealth, +6 Perception, +3 Investigation, +3 Arcana and +4 Deception that is before races and those only go up from there. This is while setting your self up for a half feat at level 4 and then by level 10 you can start boosting other stats or take feats to even do better.

On the other hand if you put one of those 14s in Constitution you are losing some substantial ability in the skill arena, and you are not really geting much of anything in return.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And a party needs no constitution masters at all. Your argument here is Intelligence is not important because you only have a few Intelligence skills, but then you have no constitution skills at all. If you need 1 or 2 loremaster that is 20-40% of the average party and unless you have a Wizard or Artificer it is not a given you are going to have that.

Constitution checks are less common than intelligence checks and Constitution, like Intelligence, is almost never vital to survival.

Also Intelligence is a prime stat for two classes.

To be clear I am not saying Constitution is less important than intelligence for every PC or every build. It isn't and I have played characters who took a 10 or 12 in Constitution and dumped Intelligence with their worst stat. What I am saying is when you consider all characters, including those that absolutely need intelligence, Constitution is generally a less imporant (aka weaker) stat.




I agree that is common, but it is also a waste and non-optimal IME.

While there are a lot of non-optimal choices people make (like playing any Fighter for instance), most of those subpar choices have legit role play reasons. This one doesn't. Investing in Constitution generally just seems to be making a build weaker for no thematic reason.



But not an optimal one.



Dexterity yes, Constitution no. Unless you play a class or race that has abilities that use Constitution it is not very useful at all.

I have played a number of 1-20 point buy characters, form a variety of races and classes and never had much use for a Constitution above 12 at all.

Wisdom is more universally useful than Constitution. and unlike Constitution, Wisdom is often vital for survival both for perception and for Wisdom saving throws.



And Constitution is one of these.



It is rarely that simple though. 12 on Constitution is ok and easy and there is not much of a downside unless you have a MAD build.

A 14 is a different story though. On point buy going to a 14 from a 10 is generally going to eliminate 5 points off of another "off stat" and going to a 16 is going to mean 9 points typically.

Now if you are playing a Fighter and can dump intelligence, sure it is workable. If you are a Rogue though you are killing yourself in your primary role.

For example: Your Rogue can go S8 D17 C10 I12 W14 CH14 and start out rocking a +3 Athletics, +5 Stealth, +6 Perception, +3 Investigation, +3 Arcana and +4 Deception that is before races and those only go up from there. This is while setting your self up for a half feat at level 4 and then by level 10 you can start boosting other stats or take feats to even do better.

On the other hand if you put one of those 14s in Constitution you are losing some substantial ability in the skill arena, and you are not really geting much of anything in return.

One thing I do agree with WotC (beyond beholders and mind flayers being awesome) is that point buy is not the assume default of stat generation, no matter how many people on forums act like it is.