New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 192
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Banned
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Spastic View Post
    It doesn't limit concepts though.
    I want to play a Knight of the Mystic Fire (a canonical Paladin order of Mystra, that uses both Arcane and Divine magic).

    How do I do that in your game?

    In my game I would play a Paladin (likely Devotion) and MC with Divine Soul Sorcerer. Mixing arcane and divine spells, with smites, auras, and heavy armor and Paladin goodness.

    How do I get the same concept running in your game?

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Malifice View Post
    I want to play a Knight of the Mystic Fire (a canonical Paladin order of Mystra, that uses both Arcane and Divine magic).

    How do I do that in your game?

    In my game I would play a Paladin (likely Devotion) and MC with Divine Soul Sorcerer. Mixing arcane and divine spells, with smites, auras, and heavy armor and Paladin goodness.

    How do I get the same concept running in your game?
    The answer is you don't and you aren't supposed to. You could create a character that is new and unique with an interesting personality and backstory. My players and I run what works for us and you can stop being such an a**hold because we don't use an optional rule. You don't limit a players creativity by restricting MC and Feats, you just have them use a less expansive toolbox. This leads to my players running actually interesting characters who are more than just a concept that has been adapted into the game. Also, now that I've thought about it, if you wanted to make and Arcane/Divine warrior, Hexblade is just about what you want so you could make it work with some refluffing.
    Last edited by Mr.Spastic; 2018-12-17 at 02:48 AM.
    Mathematically speaking, D&D is a game where a level one character can be killed by a horde of cats.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    I'd like to start with Classes. Which classes are most impacted in games that:
    • Do not allow multiclassing (Type A-)
    • Do not allow feats (Type B-)
    • Do not allow either multiclassing or feats (Type AB-)

    Rules/mechanics analysis and commentaries are welcome, as are opinions that talk about how a certain feature might be viewed as more/less valuable in certain game types. OTOH, "I would never play in that type of game" statements are not really helpful, so if that's all the input that can be offered, start by not playing in this thread.
    I've theory crafted tons of classes. So far, I've never done any multiclassing. Might do a Sorcerer or bard dip on my hexblade at some point because I'm missing buttons in our short rest light Tomb of Annihilation campaign. I could live easily without it.

    A-

    I'd say the charisma based classes are overall the ones who lose most flexibility by disallowing multiclassing. They have the easiest time doing it now and with great synergies between them either shoring up on utility (bard), martial prowess (Paladin), short rest/at will viability (warlock) or casting flexibility and spell selection (Sorcerer).

    Wizards, druids and clerics lose quite little.

    B-
    Martials take a heavy hit. I'd definitely consider allowing the bonus ASI for rogues and fighters to be feats. Rangers and Paladins are better off than fighters. Sword and board is pretty much the supreme choice for all martials. Before modifiers: With a greatsword and GWF you do an average of 7,something. With dueling and a longsword you do 6,5.

    Full casters are not very affected. In particular sorcerers as mentioned. Moon druid is stronger for longer in comparison to martials.

    Monk and frenzy barbarian are a lot better this way. So is war cleric. I still wouldn't play a frenzy barbarian. I'd be more prone to do a monk.

    In B- the pala multies become super super strong. A few dips into Wiz/sorc becomes better for all non-spellcasters due to scag cantrips and low level spells being comparatively better. Battlemaster+rogue is relatively better... In general the rogue dip is better for martials since they have less bonus action competition.

    AB-
    Much of the same as B-, but accentuated. Moon druid really shines. Frenzy barbarian climbs a tier. Monk maybe climbs two tiers. Casters are very very strong.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Spastic View Post
    The answer is you don't and you aren't supposed to. You could create a character that is new and unique with an interesting personality and backstory. My players and I run what works for us and you can stop being such an a**hold because we don't use an optional rule. You don't limit a players creativity by restricting MC and Feats, you just have them use a less expansive toolbox. This leads to my players running actually interesting characters who are more than just a concept that has been adapted into the game. Also, now that I've thought about it, if you wanted to make and Arcane/Divine warrior, Hexblade is just about what you want so you could make it work with some refluffing.
    You sound like you take it personally that Malifice is pointing out that certain characters aren't easily done without multiclassing. Malifice isn't being anything negative by pointing that out, it's part of the point of the thread, so drop the name-calling and act civilised.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Banned
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Spastic View Post
    The answer is you don't and you aren't supposed to.
    Hold on there mate. You were the one making the claim that your refusal to allow MCing doesnt limit creativity and options.

    Yet here you are, expressly admitting it does limit creativity and options, and conceeding this concept cant be made in your games, and apparently Im not supposed to make a Knight of the Mystic Fire, despite them being around in the game for decades.

    You could create a character that is new and unique with an interesting personality and backstory.
    The Stormwind fallacy? Really?

    Is there any reason a Knight of the Mystic Fire cant also have an interesting personality and backstory?

    Heck, I posted above a Half Drow Darkmoon Knight, devoted to Elistraee and seeking to unite the Promenade of the Dark Maiden in Underdark with the surface temple to the Drow Goddess in Waterdeep, who is also the Half elven son of Vicona De'Vir (of Baldurs Gate fame, who adventured with both the Bhaalspawn and Drizzt). He's the last remaining male of house De'vir (the house wiped out by house DoUrden on Drizzts birthday). He was born in Neverwinter to a Drow mother, and Mintarn Human (a mercenary) father, and has been exploring ruins of ancient Illefarn his whole life. He follows Elistraee (as does his mother, after turning her back on Shar and Lolth berore that).

    Is that not enough of an intresting personality and backstory for you?

    Hes a Multiclassed Ancients Paladin and Hexblade (Elistraee is his patron) who was gifted a Magical sword by the Dark dancer, and the grace to wield it (Hex warrior). He's training in the arts of music, dance, song and swordplay (About to MC as a Swords Bard) as a Bladedancer.

    Backstory and character dont live seperate from choice of class (or multiclassing); they inform it. In this PCs case, I felt ([Ancients] Paladin/ Hexblade/ Swords Bard/ Divine Soul Sorcerer) best fit the fluff/ theme/ mechanics of the character I was trying to represent

    My players and I run what works for us and you can stop being such an a**hold because we don't use an optional rule.
    Im not being an *******, and there is no need for that kind of abuse. You stated something as fact (denying multi-classing doesnt limit character options). I'm highlighting the falseness of that statement (if it wasnt already self evident from the statement).

    If it works for you (and your table), then great. I already said just that above. But dont make a claim (it doesnt limit options) that you cant back up (because you've now had to admit that it does limit options).

    Also, now that I've thought about it, if you wanted to make and Arcane/Divine warrior, Hexblade is just about what you want so you could make it work with some refluffing.
    With sufficient re-fluffing you could possibly make that work to some small degree. My current Paladin has levels of Hexblade (fluffed as the Dark Dancer) Blade lock (Moonsword) to fill the 'Dark elven woman of the moon, gifts young man a great sword of silver' cliche.

    It doesnt work anywhere near as good at matching the fluff as a Paladin/ Divine Soul does though (an Arcane/ Divine Paladin), so it limits options. There are not only fluff things that shutting down MCing does, but intresting mechanical things as well.

    Again; before you hurl abuse anymore, if it works for your games go nuts. Just dont make the claim it doesnt limit options, when it (self evidently, by very definition) does limit options.
    Last edited by Malifice; 2018-12-17 at 03:14 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    Despite the fact that it is considered an optional rule, including multiclassing and feats seem to be (almost) universally accepted as the default way of playing D&D 5e. Much of the game balance and optimization threads I've seen hinge on either or both of these options. But what about games played without them?

    I'd like to start with Classes. Which classes are most impacted in games that:
    • Do not allow multiclassing (Type A-)
    • Do not allow feats (Type B-)
    • Do not allow either multiclassing or feats (Type AB-)

    Rules/mechanics analysis and commentaries are welcome, as are opinions that talk about how a certain feature might be viewed as more/less valuable in certain game types. OTOH, "I would never play in that type of game" statements are not really helpful, so if that's all the input that can be offered, start by not playing in this thread.
    In a game that doesn't allow feats, the fighter takes a relatively large blow to their performance. One of their strong suits is additional ASIs, but they are only dependent on two attributes in STR/CON or DEX/CON. What do you do after those are both maxed? Usually the answer is a feat.

    Among the fighter subclasses, the one that gets uniquely butchered by a lack of feats is the eldritch knight. Their two most important spells are shield and absorb elements, both of which require a somatic component and no material component. That means that even if their weapon or shield was a spell casting focus, they still wouldn't be able to cast these spells without having a free hand. This is specifically bad because both spells are also done via a reaction. Warcaster fixes this problem entirely, but in a game without feats this is clearly not an option.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjolnirbear View Post
    Off-topic, I have doubts about Mearls' stats, but only because my anecdotal experience says otherwise. Actually, on second thought I have another reason: one of his databases include AL, which starts every character at 1st.
    They get 6 digit responses to their surveys.

    They had to shut the latest one down early because they were getting too many responses.

    Your anecdotal experience is very limited.
    If you are trying to abuse the game; Don't. And you're probably wrong anyway.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Malifice View Post
    *snip
    The problem we are having is from our different philosophies on character creation. I don't see it as limiting options because I don't create characters to fulfill a concept. You clearly create characters from the concept down starting with an idea and finding mechanics that work for that idea. By your logic I would be limiting your options because certain concepts would only work with a MC. However I create character from the opposite angle starting with mechanics and building upon it with character and story to make it interesting. The difference is that you start woth a finished product and fill on the gaps. The way I create characters is inherently limitless which is why I said the denying multiclass doesn't limit character concepts. Also your language and tone have been very rude and I have been nothing but covil in this debate apart from when I called out you acting like an a**hole. You come across as being very arrogant and entitled and do nothing but deny what I am saying without seemingly understanding it. I get your point and your not nessecarily wrong but that's not my interpretation. It does deny some options of character creation but from my point of view this isn't the problem your language and tone would suggest.
    Mathematically speaking, D&D is a game where a level one character can be killed by a horde of cats.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Banned
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Spastic View Post
    The problem we are having is from our different philosophies on character creation. I don't see it as limiting options because I don't create characters to fulfill a concept.
    Were not talking about you, we're talking about your players.

    Your players might have a concept that mechanically works best (or mechanically only works) via multi-classing.

    I see no reason to stop them from exploring that concept, and helping them get that concept off the ground.

    Heck, (as DM) if a player came to me with the concept of an 'Arcane Paladin' I'd point them to Sorc/ Paladin, and mention the Knight sof the Mystic fire as an option (Knight of the Order background). I'd work with the player to get the best mechanical representation of that concept at the table.

    That's just our differing styles, and what seems to work at your table, wouldnt work at mine. I prefer to enable my players, and enable their concepts, rather than shut down something for no real reason.

    You clearly create characters from the concept down starting with an idea and finding mechanics that work for that idea. By your logic I would be limiting your options because certain concepts would only work with a MC. However I create character from the opposite angle starting with mechanics and building upon it with character and story to make it interesting.
    Again, we're talking about you as if you were a player. You're the DM.

    The difference is that you start woth a finished product and fill on the gaps. The way I create characters is inherently limitless which is why I said the denying multiclass doesn't limit character concepts. Also your language and tone have been very rude and I have been nothing but covil in this debate apart from when I called out you acting like an a**hole. You come across as being very arrogant and entitled and do nothing but deny what I am saying without seemingly understanding it. I get your point and your not nessecarily wrong but that's not my interpretation. It does deny some options of character creation but from my point of view this isn't the problem your language and tone would suggest.
    What language have I used? You're the one calling people names. I actually referred to you as mate above, and said 'whatever works at your table, go for it.'

    You then called me an a-hole and had a tantrum.

    Im forthright in my comments, because you made a statement (limiting - or outright banning - multiclassing 'does not limit options'). It's self evidently a false statement. Im calling you out on it. If that angers you, so be it.

    If I limited all races other than human, am I limiting options and concepts? If I limited all classes other than Fighter, am I limiting options and concepts? If I only used the Basic rules of the game (only the 4 classes) am I limiting options and concepts?

    Yes, yes, and yes.

    By limiting (banning in this case) multi-classing you're limiting player options. Aint nothing you can say or do to make that statement any less true.

    Now (again, just so we're clear): If it works at your table, go nuts. Have a blast, what works for you, works for you. More fun to you. Go crazy.

    Just as long as you're aware you're limiting options is all.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    My apologies if it seemed like I was throwing a tantrum. It is currently 3:47 am and I misinterpreted some of what you were saying and am not the most coherent or reserved state right now. I'll just say a few things.

    I am completely aware that I am limitimg options for character concepts for my players.

    However...

    Both me and my players have the same thoughts on characters and don't see a lack of multiclassing as an issue or being restrictive.

    As I have mentioned, we prefer ground up characters where we take mechanics and build a character rather than building a character and finding mechanics.

    There is nothing wrong with what you are suggesting but we have all agreed that we won't play with MC. Part of why I snapped is because the way you conveyed said I should allow multiclassing made it seem that I have no respect for my players and that I was somehow suppressing them.

    That is all. Sorry for the miscommunication and bad eticate.
    Mathematically speaking, D&D is a game where a level one character can be killed by a horde of cats.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Skylivedk View Post
    I've theory crafted tons of classes. So far, I've never done any multiclassing. Might do a Sorcerer or bard dip on my hexblade at some point because I'm missing buttons in our short rest light Tomb of Annihilation campaign. I could live easily without it.

    A-

    I'd say the charisma based classes are overall the ones who lose most flexibility by disallowing multiclassing. They have the easiest time doing it now and with great synergies between them either shoring up on utility (bard), martial prowess (Paladin), short rest/at will viability (warlock) or casting flexibility and spell selection (Sorcerer).

    Wizards, druids and clerics lose quite little.

    B-
    Martials take a heavy hit. I'd definitely consider allowing the bonus ASI for rogues and fighters to be feats. Rangers and Paladins are better off than fighters. Sword and board is pretty much the supreme choice for all martials. Before modifiers: With a greatsword and GWF you do an average of 7,something. With dueling and a longsword you do 6,5.

    Full casters are not very affected. In particular sorcerers as mentioned. Moon druid is stronger for longer in comparison to martials.

    Monk and frenzy barbarian are a lot better this way. So is war cleric. I still wouldn't play a frenzy barbarian. I'd be more prone to do a monk.

    In B- the pala multies become super super strong. A few dips into Wiz/sorc becomes better for all non-spellcasters due to scag cantrips and low level spells being comparatively better. Battlemaster+rogue is relatively better... In general the rogue dip is better for martials since they have less bonus action competition.

    AB-
    Much of the same as B-, but accentuated. Moon druid really shines. Frenzy barbarian climbs a tier. Monk maybe climbs two tiers. Casters are very very strong.
    This is a well-done response. Thank you.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Malifice View Post
    Just as long as you're aware you're limiting options is all.
    I believe that the best DMs limit options all the time. When I choose which sources to allow, I'm limiting options. When I choose a setting, I'm limiting options. When I tell a player that they can't roll stats in private, I'm limiting options.

    The title of the thread makes it clear that options will be limited in some fashion by the choice to disallow the optional multiclassing and/or feat rules. That's not something that needs be be harped upon; the focus should be in how it impacts the options that remain.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    They get 6 digit responses to their surveys.

    They had to shut the latest one down early because they were getting too many responses.

    Your anecdotal experience is very limited.
    True. Still, hardly an unbiased way of collecting feedback.

    @Mr.Spastic: you've got to separate your feelings from what you believe to be true if you are to do any debating; at least if you want to grow from it.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mjolnirbear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2015

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    They get 6 digit responses to their surveys.

    They had to shut the latest one down early because they were getting too many responses.

    Your anecdotal experience is very limited.
    I know anecdotal experience is limited. That's why it's anecdotal, and that's *why* I said it's anecdotal. It's like me saying 'I haven't done enough research' and you repeating that I need to do more research. I'm picturing Snape drawling "Clearly" with a look.

    My understanding of is that, for his numbers, he was drawing on D&d Beyond data, and optionally on logged composite data from AL. My second comment is based on this understanding. If my understanding is in error, certainly a possibility, that would be one point. But I fail to see how surveys affect that point: furthermore you need to elaborate on what you mean by digitsdigits. Each survey has six data points? He has xxxxxx number of surveys to go through? Each survey has a 6-digit unique identifier?

    Surveys, in any respect, are *also* anecdotal. Take a survey asking men how big their penis size is, if you want an example of how much surveys are useful for collating data on penis size.
    Last edited by Mjolnirbear; 2018-12-17 at 04:39 AM.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2017

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    well, disallowing options, reduces options.. thats just basic logic..

    anyone who has read the feat section will know the 'best' feats are the martial feats, so inherently they would/could suffer the most. and without giving a breakdown on which feats i feel are the 'good' feats i think we can all agree more options is a good thing.

    multi-classing, is very much a pandora's box. it can as malifice stated simply be the medium by which a concept is realised mechanically, it can also be the road by which one, or a few players at a table seriously outpace the rest of the party and im sure we all agree that's not cool.

    however, all of that is purely subjective, i like feats for all, i'm not strictly opposed to multiclassing, i want ALL THE OPTIONS!!!

    you might not, and thats great! variety is as important as mediation, in all things. lets not get bogged down into a, 'my good is better than your good, your fun is wrong' argument.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2017

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Malifice View Post
    My character concept is Martial artist/ Assasin. A Ninja.
    Sounds like a Monk to me, there is even a Subclass that handles that.

    My current PC is a 'Darkmoon Knight of Elistraee.' He's a half-drow, who was gifted a 'Moonblade' (a singing silver Greatsword that radiates moonlight) by his Patron...
    A greatword-weilding holy knight, I can't imagine what class that might be... its a Paladin.

    I want to play a Knight of the Mystic Fire (a canonical Paladin order of Mystra, that uses both Arcane and Divine magic).

    How do I do that in your game?
    Cleric - either Arcane or Light (medium has enough metal armours to provide the Knight look).

    I firmly believe there isn't a character concept that can't be handled by the basic classes. We did this for years in earlier editions, just because 3rd eds prestige classes and rampant multiclassing made it easier doesn't mean we lost the ability to do it.

    Don't get me wrong, I love feats and multiclassing, never play a character without feats, and rarely one without multiclassing, and would seriously hesitate about playing in a game where both was banned, but pretending there are any character ideas that cannot be realised by the basic classes is just folly.
    Last edited by Glorthindel; 2018-12-17 at 05:01 AM.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glorthindel View Post

    I firmly believe there isn't a character concept that can't be handled by the basic classes. We did this for years in earlier editions, just because 3rd eds prestige classes and rampant multiclassing made it easier doesn't mean we lost the ability to do it.
    I agree to a point, but I also think it's important for the players to make character concepts that fit the mechanics of the game rather than trying to force the mechanics to fit their character concepts. IOW, learn what the game (and the DM) will allow, and then come up with a concept that works within those bounds.

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Azgeroth View Post
    i think we can all agree more options is a good thing.
    I do not necessarily agree. Not all options are good ones, and if they simply create the illusion of choice through trap options, then I'd rather they not be available.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mjolnirbear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2015

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glorthindel View Post
    I firmly believe there isn't a character concept that can't be handled by the basic classes. We did this for years in earlier editions, just because 3rd eds prestige classes and rampant multiclassing made it easier doesn't mean we lost the ability to do it.
    Whereas I disagree. You can approximate many, but then I say "gish".

    And you say EK.

    I say EK is a fighter with a couple magic tricks. You say bladesinger. I say I hate elves, and also a bladesinger is a wizard with a couple melee tricks. You say paladin, I say 'too much nobility, also not arcane'. And you, as a reasonable DM, maybe say you'd be willing to reflavour a paladin to something arcane, switch out spell lists... But while generous, that requires a DM buy-in, which à) only works at your table and b) is less likely to be granted by a DM that won't even let you multiclass and c) I want cantrips too.

    None of your hypothetical answers were wrong even. Those are all great ways to make a gish. But you can't cover every option.

    I've never played a ninja. You immediately mentioned shadow monk, which is, again, an excellent ninja. But while the teleport is admittedly cool, I want mine slightly armoured and be a backstabber and expert stealther. But he needs to be able to do weird things like cast magical darkness, and see in magical darkness. Only one class can do that.

    I want to play a lycanthrope. Obviously I can't play the monster manual werewolf, not most games and not one that doesn't allow feats (edit: to clarify, if feats are unbalanced, then so darn well is MM lycanthropy). But I can build one. Two levels of druid and one of barbarian, and I have a bear claws, a savage bite, and resistance to a lot of damage.

    And there are things that can come up mid-game.

    How do you do an experienced fighter, who then makes a bargain with a tricksy Fey? How about a paladin who takes up a life of prayer and healing and takes a vow to touch no weapon? Perhaps after six levels of wizard, you realize you're still too squishy and feeling a little sickly, so you put down the book for a while, and go out to get some sun and broaden your horizons and learn to take a punch.

    Both the gish and the lycanthrope concepts are real, not contrived, thought processes I've had. I really hate elves. I am extremely dissatisfied with EK. And I haven't got to play a lycanthrope yet but I can legally (and fairly) approximate it if only I can multiclass.

    Someone will say I have a special snowflake syndrome. Whether I do or not, the fact remains that allowing feats (and multiclass) can both help you pin down a concept more precisely than if neither were and option. I'm playing the game to have fun; if the best way (to me) to play my character is blocked by a big Wall Of Nope when I can clearly see a perfect solution on the side where more options exist, the game will be less fun, and the restriction unreasonable to me.
    Last edited by Mjolnirbear; 2018-12-17 at 06:14 AM.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    arcane gish= Pact of the Blade Warlock, specially with the Hexblade patron

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    All of the options reduce the number of player options. 5e is already very content-starved and doesn't have a lot of moving parts, and if you remove feats and multiclassing, the actual mechanical choices basically boil down to maybe three or so for martials and "what do I want on my spell list" for casters. Which is, well, not good at all, because at this point the only thing left in the game is a combat system and some archetypes for characters, and at this point you might just pick a different system that's better and simpler.

    The more options there are, if they are meaningful and not trap options entirely, the better, because that means players can create their concepts closer to how they envision it, and not have to either bargain with the DM or mash their unique concept into one of the few existing frameworks.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Spastic View Post
    It honestly bothers me that people have been talking like this weakens the game and restricts character concepts. Sure, you have less access to some very fun and strong things that could shape interesting and unique character concepts but you can already make some very fun character concepts anyways.
    Classes shaping character concepts -- for some of us, that's exactly backwards, and that's part of the dispute here.

    For us, the system should be enabling character concepts, not shaping the character.

    E: and I see the subsequent conversation covered some of this in more detail.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    All of the options reduce the number of player options. 5e is already very content-starved and doesn't have a lot of moving parts, and if you remove feats and multiclassing, the actual mechanical choices basically boil down to maybe three or so for martials and "what do I want on my spell list" for casters. Which is, well, not good at all, because at this point the only thing left in the game is a combat system and some archetypes for characters, and at this point you might just pick a different system that's better and simpler.

    The more options there are, if they are meaningful and not trap options entirely, the better, because that means players can create their concepts closer to how they envision it, and not have to either bargain with the DM or mash their unique concept into one of the few existing frameworks.
    ^ This.
    Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2018-12-17 at 07:26 AM.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    All of the options reduce the number of player options. 5e is already very content-starved and doesn't have a lot of moving parts, and if you remove feats and multiclassing, the actual mechanical choices basically boil down to maybe three or so for martials and "what do I want on my spell list" for casters. Which is, well, not good at all, because at this point the only thing left in the game is a combat system and some archetypes for characters, and at this point you might just pick a different system that's better and simpler.

    The more options there are, if they are meaningful and not trap options entirely, the better, because that means players can create their concepts closer to how they envision it, and not have to either bargain with the DM or mash their unique concept into one of the few existing frameworks.
    Ignoring the "reducing options is bad" stuff and the "if you do that, pick another system" derail, what do you mean "maybe three options for martials" in the above? There are three (mostly) non-caster classes (Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue) and each of them offer at least five subclasses. That's no less than fifteen options.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2015

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    Despite the fact that it is considered an optional rule, including multiclassing and feats seem to be (almost) universally accepted as the default way of playing D&D 5e. Much of the game balance and optimization threads I've seen hinge on either or both of these options. But what about games played without them?

    I'd like to start with Classes. Which classes are most impacted in games that:
    • Do not allow multiclassing (Type A-)
    • Do not allow feats (Type B-)
    • Do not allow either multiclassing or feats (Type AB-)

    Rules/mechanics analysis and commentaries are welcome, as are opinions that talk about how a certain feature might be viewed as more/less valuable in certain game types. OTOH, "I would never play in that type of game" statements are not really helpful, so if that's all the input that can be offered, start by not playing in this thread.
    Hi!

    First of all... :)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lunali View Post
    Part of the reason why it seems so prevalent is that without multiclassing and feats, there's very little to talk about with regards to balance and optimization.
    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    And because there are a lot of concepts that don't fit well into any one of the extant classes... and custom classes are less commonly allowed than multiclassing.
    Both posts sum things up well imo.

    TYPE A
    You mainly limit how easy you can translate some character concepts into mechanics.
    It's overall a bit easier to manage (provided you can manage the short rest problem) and at least you avoid a few "cheeses" that could be bothersome depending on player wisdom, like Coffeelock.

    I would be a bit saddened myself to play such a game though, because I love dips for quick expanse of options. Just me though, and truthfully not a big deal. :)

    TYPE B
    I wouldn't care myself, but it would definitely impact some classes.
    Fighter as everyone said is the prime target, feats being a big chunk of customization for them.
    We could also quote Monk, for which Mobile is kinda the prime feat to take whatever happens: you can perfectly live without it past level 9-10, but at low levels it really gives breathing air to a class that doesn't usually have that high a resilience unless spending Ki on Dodge.
    And there is of course the Resilient feat which is near mandatory for many martials (Wisdom) and all casters except Sorcerers (Constitution).
    Note, I'm saying "mandatory" as far as optimization goes.
    Game is of course perfectly playable without them, I'd dare say potentially even more interesting because players would need to be even more smart about how they act. :)

    By the way on that note I think your idea of making "extra Fighters/Rogues ASI" feats a perfect way to "balance" games without feats. FWIW.

    TYPE AB
    Simple concatenation of the two above. Doesn't ruin anything, apart from making some concepts harder. But 5E is largely rich enough that most players can enjoy it as is. Only experienced players that already played dozens or more of characters may feel a little tight. ^^

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    Classes shaping character concepts -- for some of us, that's exactly backwards, and that's part of the dispute here.

    For us, the system should be enabling character concepts, not shaping the character.
    In classless game systems, I generally go from concept to mechanics. In class-based game systems like this one, I find it better to go from the class mechanics to the concept. Different approaches fit better into different systems.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    Ignoring the "reducing options is bad" stuff and the "if you do that, pick another system" derail, what do you mean "maybe three options for martials" in the above? There are three (mostly) non-caster classes (Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue) and each of them offer at least five subclasses. That's no less than fifteen options.
    So the choices you get to make are:
    1) Class
    2) Archetype
    3) Fighting Style, maybe

    There. Three choices. Oh, well, there's also your weapon and armor, I guess?
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    So the choices you get to make are:
    1) Class
    2) Archetype
    3) Fighting Style, maybe

    There. Three choices. Oh, well, there's also your weapon and armor, I guess?
    For all characters, with no Feats or Multiclassing, the basic choices are:

    Race.
    Background.
    Class.
    A couple of Skills.
    Archetype/Subclass.
    Weapons and/or spells.

    And according to some, that's enough to do any concept, any character?
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    For all characters, with no Feats or Multiclassing, the basic choices are:

    Race.
    Background.
    Class.
    A couple of Skills.
    Archetype/Subclass.
    Weapons and/or spells.

    And according to some, that's enough to do any concept, any character?
    In some cases, there is also subrace.

    I'm not saying that is enough to do "any concept, any character" -- I'm saying it doesn't need to do so. It is enough to hit the archetypes of D&D. Sure, you can get increasingly weird corner cases covered with added bits, but even then, you can't actually cover "any concept, any character" because a game's codification of imagination will always be more limited than unfettered imagination.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    For all characters, with no Feats or Multiclassing, the basic choices are:

    Race.
    Background.
    Class.
    A couple of Skills.
    Archetype/Subclass.
    Weapons and/or spells.

    And according to some, that's enough to do any concept, any character?
    So, six choices, of which four made at chargen, and the fifth is probably too.
    Wait, no, there's a seventh one, ASIs.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    RangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2017

    Default Re: How does not allowing multiclassing and/or feats impact the game?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    Classes shaping character concepts -- for some of us, that's exactly backwards, and that's part of the dispute here.

    For us, the system should be enabling character concepts, not shaping the character.
    That's understandable, but makes a class and level based game a totally bad fit. If you know the stats and abilites the character should have, just write them down on the character sheet. IMO, increasing the amount of options in a class based game is working against the strengths of system (which is making it easy for new players to just pick something and for designers to keep the options balanced).

    Also, not every imaginable character concept needs to be available for every game though. It's fine to set some limits if you envision something specific for the game. I mean, pot luck dinners can be great, but it's also ok to make a three course dinner with a menu that actually fits together, or just to organize the pot luck sufficiently so that not everyone bring dessert.


    For me, the character creation mini-game is not the most important of the game. I don't need to play that one specific concept to have fun. There are hundred concepts that I want to play, and probably some of them are going to fit into the current game even with limitations imposed on it. Thus, D&D works well enough. I have an easy choice of archetypes to play, and then I can develop the character further from there and enjoy playing the game.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •