D&D (2024) Using general Feats when your ability is already 20

[ECMO3]

I'll chime in on the discussion of super-high ability scores and a PC stealing most of the spotlight:

It doesn't happen much in my experience. Having one or even two 20s will give a PC an edge, no doubt, but the game is too complex and too swingy with the d20 for that to account for any sort of long running, consistantly felt edge, with the SOLE exception possibly being a CON 20.

CON 20 can make things feel very off-balance with other PCs have CONs 14 or 12. In one game with had a Barbarian with STR and CON 20... so great offense numbers of course but also stellar durability! Or other martial, a Paladin, had STR 16 and CHA 20 IIRC, so was decent at offense (great when he nova'd!) and had a great AC due to plate armor, but his durability with CON 14 just couldn't match the Barbarian. Consequently, he felt like the proverbal glass-cannon to the player.

Meanwhile, the DM could never get the barbarian down! To make the issue worse, he even took the Tough feat so by the end of the game (level 12), he had something like 180 hp and good AC around 19 IIRC. Meanwhile, the Paladin had about 100 hp or a bit more. So, even though he had a better AC (22 I think?), he just couldn't tank enough to front-line like the Barbarian--especially when you add in the damage resistance due to rage!

Overall, their abilities were about the same average, because the barbarian was low-average in most of the stuff, but two 20's; while the Paladin had generally higher scores, but just the CHA 20 at the end.

So, despite the barbarian having STR 20 and the paladin STR 16, offensively they were well matched due to smites. But that second 20 in CON just made the barbarian impossible to bring down.

Other party members felt it, too, because creatures would down them more easily, while the barbarian was still up in the end.

CON is the only real score where I've seen this sort of issue come up, personally.

I'll take your word for it. I don't think I have ever seen a PC start with a 20 Constitution in 5E. I've seen them start with an 18 using non-RAW methods of rolling that don't allow you to move abilities, but usually they are putting bonuses elsewhere and putting their best score elsewhere.

Generally when I am playing point buy I am going with a 10 or 12 Constitution, occasionally I will run an 8 with either a Dwarf or the Tough Feat. The only time I ever run higher than a 12 on point buy is if I have something that keys off of it, like Rune Knight or Damphir.

I am an oddity though, most other Players do make it one of their higher stats, often the second best. For me, I find putting a lot of emphasis in Constitution at the expense of other abilities makes you weaker in the social and exploration pillars. I also don't play Barbarians FWIW.

 

[Flights of Fancy]

I'll take your word for it. I don't think I have ever seen a PC start with a 20 Constitution in 5E. I've seen them start with an 18 using non-RAW methods of rolling that don't allow you to move abilities, but usually they are putting bonuses elsewhere and putting their best score elsewhere.

I've seen a few times at best, if that. CON 20 isn't common at 1st level! The barbarian above started with CON 20 and STR 20 because they player rolled two 18's and took mountain dwarf, using the PHB original +2 STR and CON... Crazy build.

Generally when I am playing point buy I am going with a 10 or 12 Constitution, occasionally I will run an 8 with either a Dwarf or the Tough Feat. The only time I ever run higher than a 12 on point buy is if I have something that keys off of it, like Rune Knight or Damphir.

Even with point-buy CON is nearly always the 12 or 13, if not the 14.

I am an oddity though, most other Players do make it one of their higher stats, often the second best. For me, I find putting a lot of emphasis in Constitution at the expense of other abilities makes you weaker in the social and exploration pillars. I also don't play Barbarians FWIW.

Yes, it is nearly always the second or third highest score in my experience. You do sound a bit like an oddity but that is refreshing!

Here is my issue (and I think a failing) with social and exploration pillars: you generally only need a single PC to be good at each, and they can carry the group. Combat, OTOH, is something every PC participates in, requiring hit points and thus a decent or good CON.

 

[jgsugden]

....I am not going to say it never happens, because people on here claim it has happened to them, so it obviously is there at times. But it does not happen in most of the games I play and I don't believe it happens in most or even a significant percentage of games overall. I also think that people that have experienced it and tables that are most worried about this typically play 5E using point buy, so when it comes to 5E I think it rarely happens even at the tables of people who have witnessed it being a problem and consider it a problem.

Do you think being hit by a bus would be bad? I mean, it rarely happens, so why would we think it is bad?

The rolled stats discrepancy happens at a small percentage of the time because: 1.) Many, if not most, tables use point buy or other 'fixed' systems. 2.) Rolled characters tend towards not having the gross differences in stats.

Thus, even in the minority of tables that have the rolled stats, it is a minority of those tables where you see the discrepancy.

Frequency is not the issue.

It it the impact when it does happen. Like how being hit by a bus is rare, but there is a significance to it happening.

If you're saying you don't see a significant impact at the table when one PC is rocking a 20 and a similar PC caps out at 14, you are in the vast minority. I've played with a lot of DMs and a lot of players - when it happens, it is always something that has a significant impact, either in terms of players feeling underpowered next to the 'star', or the DM having to work to rebalance the field. It is consistent.

 

[ECMO3]

Do you think being hit by a bus would be bad? I mean, it rarely happens, so why would we think it is bad?

Exactly, This is really the perfect analogy!

I ride buses and I cross the street with buses, I drive on roads with busses and when I was deployed overseas I actually drove a bus myself.

We live in a world with busses, those busses sometimes are in accidents, but most peoples lives are not ruined or even impacted by buses hitting someone and people don't arrange where they go or how they live their lives because people have been hit by a bus.

Getting hit by a bus is bad when it happens, but it happens very, rarely and as such does not affect the vast majority of people who live in the world with busses

2.) Rolled characters tend towards not having the gross differences in stats.

This is not true. If you have 4 players using the RAW method of generation, 76% of the time at least one of them will roll a 17+ (before bonuses) and there is a 60% chance someone will have a 14 or lower as their highest score. The chance of both of those things happening in the same game (one PC with a 17/18 in one or more abilities and one PC with a 14 or below in every ability) is 42% or a little less than half the games overall. That chance goes up with more than 4 players.

So if you play a lot of D&D with players rolling abilities RAW you are going to see it frequently.

It it the impact when it does happen. Like how being hit by a bus is rare, but there is a significance to it happening.

Yes but this is exactly the point, when it happens,. I have said in some games with ability imbalance it happens, people here report it so I know the problem exists, just like I know people get hit by busses even though I have never been hit. But it does not happen to most tables who have a PC with high abilities, just like getting hit by a bus does not happen to most people who drive on roads with busses. This is exactly my point!

Further what I take issue with is it is "the overwhelming tendency" or there "insane amounts of widespread evidence" of it occurring often. Getting hit by a bus is a problem when you get hit, but there is not an "overwhelming tendency" to get hit by a bus and it does not occur often.

If you're saying you don't see a significant impact at the table when one PC is rocking a 20 and a similar PC caps out at 14, you are in the vast minority.

I believe I am in the majority of players who play in games where people roll and have widespread differences but don't see a significant impact in who has a "starring role", just like I am in the majority of drivers who drive on roads with busses and have not been hit by one of them.

I've played with a lot of DMs and a lot of players - when it happens, it is always something that has a significant impact, either in terms of players feeling underpowered next to the 'star', or the DM having to work to rebalance the field. It is consistent.

No it isn't. You say this is "always" something that either causes players to feel underpowered or makes the DM work more.

Yet I have pointed out a game I am DMing right now where this is not happening and in fact I started this thread about that very game. I am not working harder because of this and one of the underpowered players IS the 'star' in that game despite TWO PCs having much better abilities. How can you say this "always" happens when I am telling you it isn't happening in a game I am in right now?

Further as I stated, player personality is the biggest driver by far of who is the "star" player.

Side Note: Ironically my wife, before we were dating, did actually get hit by a Greyhound bus in 1993. It ruined her Ford Escort, but luckily no one was injured. So she actually does have experience getting hit by a bus, even though I don't personally.

 

[ECMO3]

Here is my issue (and I think a failing) with social and exploration pillars: you generally only need a single PC to be good at each, and they can carry the group. Combat, OTOH, is something every PC participates in, requiring hit points and thus a decent or good CON.

I agree with this generally, but I usually find other ways to mitigate comparatively low hit points. First, I don't play with really bad hit points, I am not dumping CON below 10 unless I am also getting tough or tough+Dwarf.

If I am running a 10 usually I am either using tactics to keep from losing hit points (play conservative using movement, spells and actions to not take damage), this can make me less effective in combat at times, but usually this is on a spell caster with some really good spell combos. The other way I do it is by making AC extremely high - like Bladesinger high. A very high AC with low hit points beats very high hit points with a low AC most of the time.

 

[Flights of Fancy]

If you're saying you don't see a significant impact at the table when one PC is rocking a 20 and a similar PC caps out at 14, you are in the vast minority. I've played with a lot of DMs and a lot of players - when it happens, it is always something that has a significant impact, either in terms of players feeling underpowered next to the 'star', or the DM having to work to rebalance the field. It is consistent.

Sure, it happens, I guess, maybe... for similar PCs but one capped at 20, the other at 14, but like you said it is insanely rare. If it ever did happen, it would probably be hard on the player with the 14 score, sure. It shouldn't impact the DM one iota.

Anyway, for one thing, it means not only did the first player roll a nat 18, but the other player rolled 12 or lower all six times. Barring everything else, not many players will play a character with a maximum roll of 12. If that player does choose that, it is their choice and they should realize going into the game their PC will have to shine in ways other than ability scores.

It also means the second player decided to make a "similar" PC to the first player, and even after realizing there was another similar character with a much better ability, decided again to play their PC anyway.

Lastly, it means the DM also knew about this and didn't encourage the second player to make a different PC so they would as likely be outshined by the first player's PC.

Frankly, I don't imagine this ever happening once, let alone a second time (history repeating itself) within the same group. I would hardly call that consistent.

Anyway, I don't @ECMO3 is saying it wouldn't be significant, nor am I, we all agree the difference between 20 and 14 would be significant in this circumstances... I just don't see any sane way this situation should ever occur giving the odds not only of the rolls, but the choices made by the players and the even the DM. You claim you've seen such a thing happen so I won't doubt that, but honestly how often really?

And you'll probably argue frequency doesn't matter again. But it does. I don't worry about being hit by a bus even though that is significant, sure, because I know it will most likely never happen. So, I won't worry about the lightning-striking odds of two similar PCs with 20 and 14 and a player feeling unpowered next to the "star".

I agree with this generally, but I usually find other ways to mitigate comparatively low hit points. First, I don't play with really bad hit points, I am not dumping CON below 10 unless I am also getting tough or tough+Dwarf.

If I am running a 10 usually I am either using tactics to keep from losing hit points (play conservative using movement, spells and actions to not take damage), this can make me less effective in combat at times, but usually this is on a spell caster with some really good spell combos.

Oh, no doubt you can play a CON 10 PC or even lower, like you said you jsut have to play a different way.

The other way I do it is by making AC extremely high - like Bladesinger high. A very high AC with low hit points beats very high hit points with a low AC most of the time.

I've never found this to be the case due to how many ways you can take damage which have nothing to do with AC. But VMMY certainly.