D&D 5E Too many choices? (Options Paralysis)

[Ashrym]

Maybe if there were fewer traps (even if there were correspondingly more clearly-marked hazards) we'd see the term less?

It's more likely if there was less elitism, onewayism, if-you're-not-first-you're-last-ism, how-it-should-be-ism, or any other ism's a person wants the comment would be used less.

There are options that I would consider poor too, but the term is overused nonetheless.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I haven't really run into too many options paralysis, but maybe because I'm a systems analyst in real life, so I'm sensitive to analysis paralysis, and know how to avoid it lol. There are a few times when I'll feel torn between a couple options though.

also, I don't think there is any such thing as a trap option. Let me back up. There is, but only when min/maxing, cuz math is impartial. But I think most people don't worry about min/maxing in their gameplay, so for them, there is no trap option. And there is no firm "this is how I plan my PC from level 1 to 20". In fact, i did a poll on that a little while ago, and the overwhelming number of people don't plan at all past the next level, but make their level up choices based on what has happened in the game. Also, I never play end game levels anyway. Campaigns always end by the teens, so there's no point in me personally planning out a level 20 PC.

I'll give a recent example. I was playing a barbarian. I wanted to play a character like Barak from the Belgariad. So after getting to level 3 and choosing the bear totem, I multi-classed into moon druid for 2 levels, then back to barbarian. Was that optimized? Probably not. Did it have the feel I wanted? Absolutely.

One of the most common examples I use in these forums is my favorite AD&D PC I ported over to 5e: a halfling fighter. Did I spend my ASIs on str or dex maxing? Nope. I used the first two for skulker and dungeon delver feats because in AD&D, he was a fighter/thief, and in 5e, a straight fighter with those feats gave the same feel during play.

And finally, the most recent example of getting torn between choices is going on right now, when my gloom stalker halfling ranger will hit level 4 soon. Do I go with the DEX ASI? Or do I go mobile feat because in our sessions, mobility was a frequent thing to make up for the base 25' halfling movement speed? Or to I take sharpshooter? There are value in all three, and none are a trap option.

 

[Tony Vargas]

There are options that I would consider poor too, but the term is overused nonetheless.

Y'know, sometimes terms used to describe valid points that go un-addressed for long periods of time become trite, hackneyed, and over-used, precisely because the underlying issue is never solved. And, sometimes catchy labels slapped on completely bogus complaints become over-used, because that repetition is a way of manufacturing credibility.

So is 'Trap' over-used? Yes.
Does that prove that it's for the latter reason, rather than the former? No.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Maybe if there were fewer traps (even if there were correspondingly more clearly-marked hazards) we'd see the term less?

There aren't very many actual traps, though. A trap option isn't merely suboptimal. A trap option is one that looks beneficial, but has such a minimal benefit that it's actually a hindrance or -- worse -- isn't actually beneficial at all. A trap option is one that is deceptive or misleading. 3e's Power Attack is the classic example, since you took -1 to hit for +1 to damage. Mathematically, that's a terrible idea because a +1 to hit is worth more than a +1 to damage. While an individual player might want to gamble on that, it still meant that your character was spending a feat slot to learn a mathematically bad ability.

The only major trap options I can think of in 5e are the Beastmaster Ranger and Four Elements Monk, due to the poorly designed pet and poorly designed spell system, respectively. Arguably the Warlock Invocations that let you cast a spell once per day for a Warlock spell slot should be included, but you can exchange them for better options later.

As for minor trap options? Spare the dying (a healer's kit with 10 "potions" of this cantrip costs 5 gp), true strike (only useful in an ambush or when you have a high level spell attack), friends (consequences too high in most situations), stoneskin, etc.

I think Barbarian over level 8 isn't particularly compelling, I think Sorcerer in general is narrow, and I think a single class Warlock is too shallow, but I don't know that I'd call those trap options so much as my subjective opinions.

 

[Tony Vargas]

A trap option isn't merely suboptimal. A trap option is one that looks beneficial, but has such a minimal benefit that it's actually a hindrance or -- worse -- isn't actually beneficial at all. A trap option is one that is deceptive or misleading.

Yep, they're basically 'Timmeh cards' - something about them is more appealing than what they actually deliver, mechanically or in play. That's what I meant about it'd be nice even if we just 'upgraded' traps to "clearly marked hazards."
(WARNING: if you play this character you will sit out 2/3rds of each game session! Keep your mobile device handy!")


Sometimes a campaign can make a perfectly good option into a de-facto 'trap,' too - that's why you sometimes here things dismissed as 'situational.' Yes, mechanically, it can be awesome, but it can be side-lined by circumstance.