If I love min/maxing, What to do? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

OldTrees1

2021-06-13, 12:45 PM

As always it is easier to optimize if you have a character concept you want to create. What kind of character did you want?

If you like min/maxing then you probably enjoy characters with lots of build choices.

Warlock has 2 subclasses and invocations give plenty of build choices.

Multiclassing is another way to get more build choices.

Variant Human gets to start with a feat. It is unlikely to be the race you want, but it is a good default while you start to think about options. Some other races like Elf and Half Elf have similarly broad build choices based on their Elf subrace (Half Elf can swap out the Skill Versatility in Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide).

I am not suggesting you default to a Variant Human Warlock X / other class Y. However it might be a good theoretical exercise for you to learn 5E while you think about your answer to "What kind of character did you want?".

KorvinStarmast

2021-06-13, 12:58 PM

As on the tin, how to get the min/maxing experience in 5th? I’m not too well versed, but if I wanted to min/max in 5th how would I do that?

Cheers!
What are you trying to min, and what are you trying to max?
Tell us that and we can help you. :smallsmile:

If what you want to min/max is skill proficiencies and skill expertise, Half Elf Lore Bard. Eventually take the skill expert feat, and the skilled feat.

Be that spell casting, fast talking, jocular skill monkey that you've always wanted to be.

Edenbeast

2021-06-13, 01:13 PM

As on the tin, how to get the min/maxing experience in 5th? I’m not too well versed, but if I wanted to min/max in 5th how would I do that?

Cheers!

Grab a bottle of beer, and try to pour as much beer in a glass as possible (and avoid foaming or spilling on the table). That's how we roll baby.

Nhym

2021-06-13, 02:14 PM

Min/maxing is a process, not a result. Therefore, literally anything can be 'min/maxed' within its given parameters. If you are referring to min/maxing as creating extremely powerful characters out of 5e rules, I'd suggest (obviously from anyone who knows me in this forum) a Shepherd Druid. They can single-handedly break games and past level 5 can fill almost any role, with their absurd amount of choice available. For further reading: my guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xXgYqPxkEHaCisQ0tteFF-KtsmfJxkOQojeWwHf22n4/edit?usp=sharing).

Waazraath

2021-06-13, 02:30 PM

Grab a bottle of beer, and try to pour as much beer in a glass as possible (and avoid foaming or spilling on the table). That's how we roll baby.

Mhhhh, this is min/maxing for volume, if I'd min/max for pleasure I'd optimize the amount of foam to exactly 2 fingers (depening on the beer or course).

On a more serious note: make up a concept you'd like to play. Then dive in the books to see what you can come up with, while hitting good results in the field you find important.

Dork_Forge

2021-06-13, 02:41 PM

Step 1: Establish what you want to do e.g. I want to be a ranged damage dealer, I want to be a healer etc.

Step 2: Establish what your primary options for that thing is, this will usually be a class/subclass combo

Step 3: Establish what auxiliary options you have, these include race choices, feats and specific spells.

Step 4: Maximise the stats pertinent to your goal, whilst ideally dumping the rest as little as possible. Hard dumps are always ahrmful, the amount of harm just varies

Basic guide that I hope helps, keep in mind that ASIs are few and far between so if you are running a feat heavy build you'll probably want a Variant Human for example.

Max Caysey

2021-06-13, 03:03 PM

Theodoxus

2021-06-13, 03:24 PM

Well, it's true that the vast majority of fiddly bits (the +1's and 2's from feats and synergies have been replaced in 5E. So I suppose in that respect, you're mostly looking for things that will provide advantage on your checks. In the case of stealth, you could go lightfoot halfling for the ability to hide behind medium+ creatures. You could go wild elf for the ability to hide while lightly obscured. You'd look for things like Gloomstalker Ranger that makes you invisible to regular darkvision. You'd might want to grab a level of Rogue as well for Expertise, to double your Proficiency Bonus on your Stealth checks. Magic items like Cloak of the Elvenkind that grants advantage on Stealth checks wouldn't be remiss.

There's Shadow Sorcerer that can create darkness around them and automatically see through their own darkness. Warlocks have access to an invocation that grants them permanent superior darkvision "Devil's Sight". Shadow Monks can create darkness, teleport within dim light or darkness, and cast Darkvision on themselves.

That's just the easy to find stuff. You can really delve deep into a stealthy/shadow build, adding Twilight Cleric into the mix... Or grab Trickery instead for more rogue-like shenanigans. Goblins can bypass Rogue, getting a bonus action Hide and Disengage...

While the fiddly bits are gone, there's still a lot of build synergy to hunt out if you have a specific idea in mind. (And really, go check out LudicSavant's thread to see a TON of builds that have done this - you can then decide if you want to play it straight or modify for something even more specific.)

Waazraath

2021-06-13, 03:36 PM

First of all thanks for all the responses. I totally see, how I should have worded my question more precisely. So, I'm going to do that.

I like the process of min/maxing. That minigame where you search through all manner of splatbooks for that extra +1 modifier that ultimately increases the efficacy of what ever build/concept your are trying to achieve. Now, it is my understanding, from reading different posts, that is had basically been removed from 5th. Simply put, the customization options have been severely reduced... and that despite archetypes being a thing... not much happens after level 3 in terms of making a unique character, in terms of what choices you make... Nor is it possible to hunt for modifiers from obscure classes, feats or spells, simply because they are not there.

So, all in all, a vastly different, less customizable system than 3.X. So, if I want to still do the minigame of hunting for modifiers (do the numbers game) as one of my friends called it, then what options do I have in 5th, or more precisely what/where do I get as close to the feeling of the 3.5 customization/ character creation as possible?

Its not only about building a strong character, its more that I'm seeking options that I can really dive into. I don't want to be effectively done with my character creation at level 3...

Like, lets say stealth were my thing. I would in 3.5 go whisper gnome, take stealthy, Darkstalker, max out Dex, Hide and Move silent and go into dungeon delver or Exemplar when I could... And then possible ad tools and items to increase my skill modifiers and possible go skill focus (hide/move silent). What options are there for doing the same in 5th?

You basicly do the same as in 3.x, only with less books. Going with your stealth optimization, go for a class with max dex, get the skill, find a way to get expertise in the skill (through feats or class) and/or other ways to boost it (e.g. mark of shadow elf variant, or Ambush Battle Master maneuver), consider the option to get the pass without trace spell (several ways to get that through race or class), decide if you want a caster class or not, and if you want to be a caster look at the spell selection and pick the good stuff there (which can be a wide variety of stuff like polymorph, improved invisibility, enhance ability, gasous form, or spiderclimb, to name a few).

You can make a stealth build in a number of ways, with a number of (sub)classes, and a number of different combat styles.

OldTrees1

2021-06-13, 03:49 PM

So, all in all, a vastly different, less customizable system than 3.X. So, if I want to still do the minigame of hunting for modifiers (do the numbers game) as one of my friends called it, then what options do I have in 5th, or more precisely what/where do I get as close to the feeling of the 3.5 customization/ character creation as possible?

Its not only about building a strong character, its more that I'm seeking options that I can really dive into. I don't want to be effectively done with my character creation at level 3...

Like, lets say stealth were my thing. I would in 3.5 go whisper gnome, take stealthy, Darkstalker, max out Dex, Hide and Move silent and go into dungeon delver or Exemplar when I could... And then possible ad tools and items to increase my skill modifiers and possible go skill focus (hide/move silent). What options are there for doing the same in 5th?[/QUOTE]

Customizations after 3rd level:
Multiclassing, Feats, Warlock Invocations, Spells know/prepared, Totem Barbarian Totems (you can mix so technically you get more choices), Lore Bard spells known, Rogue Expertise(6th).

On the other side, you might find yourself hitting "good enough" without much customization.
Dex 16 Wis 14 Wood Elf (nature based hide in plain sight) Rogue 11 with Expertise in Stealth and Perception starts off at 1st level with a +7 Stealth and +6 Perception. At 11th level they get 21 Stealth and 20 Perception as their minimum due to Reliable Talent. There is no Darkstalker feat but I just rule it as innate as you Stealth bonus gets high enough. You could be Arcane Trickster to learn Invisibility too.

You could improve that by increasing Dex/Wis to 20. You could take Shadow Monk 3 to get Pass Without Trace (+10 Stealth for a party for 1 hour) once per short rest.

So Wood Elf Rogue 12 / Monk 4 (not in that order) might be your stealth min/max.

Edit: or Mark of Shadow Elf Rogue (Arcane Trickster) 11 with Skulker feat.

2D8HP

2021-06-13, 04:05 PM

First of all thanks for all the responses. I totally see, how I should have worded my question more precisely. So, I'm going to do that.

I like the process of min/maxing. That minigame where you search through all manner of splatbooks for that extra +1 modifier that ultimately increases the efficacy of what ever build/concept your are trying to achieve. Now, it is my understanding, from reading different posts, that is had basically been removed from 5th. Simply put, the customization options have been severely reduced... and that despite archetypes being a thing... not much happens after level 3 in terms of making a unique character, in terms of what choices you make... Nor is it possible to hunt for modifiers from obscure classes, feats or spells, simply because they are not there.

So, all in all, a vastly different, less customizable system than 3.X. So, if I want to still do the minigame of hunting for modifiers (do the numbers game) as one of my friends called it, then what options do I have in 5th, or more precisely what/where do I get as close to the feeling of the 3.5 customization/ character creation as possible?

Its not only about building a strong character, its more that I'm seeking options that I can really dive into. I don't want to be effectively done with my character creation at level 3...

Like, lets say stealth were my thing. I would in 3.5 go whisper gnome, take stealthy, Darkstalker, max out Dex, Hide and Move silent and go into dungeon delver or Exemplar when I could... And then possible ad tools and items to increase my skill modifiers and possible go skill focus (hide/move silent). What options are there for doing the same in 5th?

Nope, not remotely true anymore, while not as much as 3.5, 5e has lots of "splat" books.

Oh, and play a multiclass Rogue/"Gloomstalker" Ranger wood elf (a shadow Monk is another option), get "Xanthar's Guide to Everything" as your first splat book.

stoutstien

2021-06-13, 04:26 PM

First of all thanks for all the responses. I totally see, how I should have worded my question more precisely. So, I'm going to do that.

I like the process of min/maxing. That minigame where you search through all manner of splatbooks for that extra +1 modifier that ultimately increases the efficacy of what ever build/concept your are trying to achieve. Now, it is my understanding, from reading different posts, that is had basically been removed from 5th. Simply put, the customization options have been severely reduced... and that despite archetypes being a thing... not much happens after level 3 in terms of making a unique character, in terms of what choices you make... Nor is it possible to hunt for modifiers from obscure classes, feats or spells, simply because they are not there.

So, all in all, a vastly different, less customizable system than 3.X. So, if I want to still do the minigame of hunting for modifiers (do the numbers game) as one of my friends called it, then what options do I have in 5th, or more precisely what/where do I get as close to the feeling of the 3.5 customization/ character creation as possible?

Its not only about building a strong character, its more that I'm seeking options that I can really dive into. I don't want to be effectively done with my character creation at level 3...

Like, lets say stealth were my thing. I would in 3.5 go whisper gnome, take stealthy, Darkstalker, max out Dex, Hide and Move silent and go into dungeon delver or Exemplar when I could... And then possible ad tools and items to increase my skill modifiers and possible go skill focus (hide/move silent). What options are there for doing the same in 5th?

3.X had a more limited character progression if you think about it. You had to plan out everything you needed right from the get go or you could easily end up with an under performing character or worse.
5e has a more own ended style where min/maxing anything can be achieved in different ways. There isn't one true 'best' stealth concept. In any ways it makes the mini game more rewarding.

Kane0

2021-06-13, 04:59 PM

First of all thanks for all the responses. I totally see, how I should have worded my question more precisely. So, I'm going to do that.

So, if I want to still do the minigame of hunting for modifiers (do the numbers game) as one of my friends called it, then what options do I have in 5th, or more precisely what/where do I get as close to the feeling of the 3.5 customization/ character creation as possible?

You need access to Xanathat's Guide to Everything and Tasha's Cauldron of Everything if you're going to start splat diving, plus Sword Coast Adventurers Guide, Volos Guide to Monsters and Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica if those are available to you. Same goes for the Eberron books.

On top of that, Unearthed Arcana is years worth of monthly playtest material from WotC so if that is available you better set aside an afternoon for light reading.

Once you have your sources pick out what you want to optimize and start digging. There are still a number of variables to configure even if its not to the levels 3.5 had. You have race, subrace, class, subclass, background, ASIs, spells, class features and potentially magic items and epic boons as well.
Of you want number of options a spellcaster is still your best bet, but the good news is that you have more casters to choose from as each brings something different to the table (yes, even sorcerer). Martials still get some nice options like Battlemaster dice or a swathe of Ki options if thats what you want instead.

Personally if you want the most build levers and dials to fiddle with I recommend Warlock to start, as they are a caster that can be gished, multiclasses well and has additional building options in the form of pact boon and invocations which will have you making decisions into the latter end of your career as they can be swapped out level-by-level like spells.

borg286

2021-06-14, 12:48 AM

In 3.5 the casters ruled. That is still the same only we are limited by concentration. Spell selection still remains the key to making a powerful caster, which is often the leader w.r.t. nova damage. My renaissance man build in my sig goes into a build that targets hitting all the roles. Imagine the factotum, only he isn't half as good, but actually all good at all roles.
The bonuses being turned into non-stackable advantage, concentration limiting the number of spells that can overlap on a single character, the AC/DC/bonuses/stats having a fairly hard ceiling makes 5e much less breakable. 3.5 just let the arms race raise the stakes. 5e learned from how quickly 3.5 and 4e became absurd and targeted the slow release cycle.

Waazraath

2021-06-14, 01:51 AM

{Scrubbed}

Eldariel

2021-06-14, 03:28 AM

Fixed that for you. Seriously, this isn't an issue at all anymore, at most at the highest levels (think 13+) and only with a table that has a play style that favours casters, and/or people crossing the limits of what spells are intended to do. (edit: added stuff in italics by me)

This isn't really true, casters are just as strong as always. The broken parts shift as with every edition but they are still there (in this edition, Animate Dead, Conjure Animals and company are the worst offenders). And as with every edition, it's also true that you can totally play any class as long as the table agrees to not break the game and agrees upon a level of power appropriate, or as long as people instinctively avoid the broken options (in this edition, basically any form of minionmancy is much stronger than anything else).

Waazraath

2021-06-14, 03:47 AM

This isn't really true, casters are just as strong as always. The broken parts shift as with every edition but they are still there (in this edition, Animate Dead, Conjure Animals and company are the worst offenders). And as with every edition, it's also true that you can totally play any class as long as the table agrees to not break the game and agrees upon a level of power appropriate, or as long as people instinctively avoid the broken options (in this edition, basically any form of minionmancy is much stronger than anything else).

{Scrubbed} If somebody likes optimizing, I think casters are a good place to start, cause many optimizers like 'more moving parts' to look for synergies - in that sense, casters have one 'extra set' (spells, next to race, feats, class features, subclass features - though spells are part of the latter two), and the most interesting classes are Arteficer and Warlock (cause they also have infusions and invocations, respectively).

{Scrubbed} to argue that "casters are as strong as always" mosly shows lack of experience from earlier editions.

Mork

2021-06-14, 04:12 AM

I agree that the caster fighter discrepency is way smaller in 5e than it was in 3.5 A well build 3.5 caster was better in every respect than a fighter, including swinging a sword. In 5e that is way less.

Anyway, as in 5e you don't have skill points and lots of feats you need to get the juice from somewhere else. I find a lof of fun in multiclassing. When to take which level of assasin rogue/gloomstalker ranger/twilight cleric can be a challange. Do you want elven accuracy, or sharpshooter first, or up your DEX first. That can be fun. Ask your DM about the variant class features in Tasha's, as they add another custimization option.
In my own game went a step further and broke up all the parts of different feats and assigned them a value beteween 1 and 12, instead of a feat you get to spend 12 point in that table, mixing and matching your feats. It adds a lot custimization, and it is not so much a power bump as an efficiency bump. (Still encounters need to be slightly adjusted in diffculty)

As always when min maxing. I would look at the rest of the party first. If a party member is doing the same thing, but not min-maxed, it's not fun for them. So try to min-max an area in which your party members are not investing. (AC/stealth skills/social skills/crowd control/single target damage/healing/ etc you name it)
EDIT: don't play minionmancer, even though can be quite strong. They bog down the game terribly unless you have enough sets of dice to roll all their attacks at the same time. 1 summon is doable.

Eldariel

2021-06-14, 04:44 AM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote} If somebody likes optimizing, I think casters are a good place to start, cause many optimizers like 'more moving parts' to look for synergies - in that sense, casters have one 'extra set' (spells, next to race, feats, class features, subclass features - though spells are part of the latter two), and the most interesting classes are Arteficer and Warlock (cause they also have infusions and invocations, respectively).

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote} to argue that "casters are as strong as always" mosly shows lack of experience from earlier editions.

Casters are insanely strong in 3e and on higher levels in AD&D too (on low levels they're the very definition of glass cannons but that's mostly due to dying to random stuff), and Wizard is about the strongest class in 4e too (though the curve is of course flatter). I never said "casters rule", I just said they're stronger than non-casters, which is an indisputable fact, not a matter of opinion. You can compare the options of a level 5+ character and e.g. notice that those that can cast Animate Dead or Conjure Animals are just way, way stronger numerically than those that can't. {Scrubbed} When you know what's broken you know better what to not do when you want to not break the game (and what to do when the point is to gain as much power as possible obviously, but that should mostly be relevant in like one-shot powergaming runs or PvP setups or tables where there's a conscious agreement to play on the power ceiling).

In other words, it's important to {Scrubbed} provide accurate information about the parts of the game that are largely balanced and the ones that aren't and then just work with your group and DM to make the game to suit the goals of your table. Saying there's no imbalance in 5e is just not true. 5e has very obvious imbalances. They also don't spoil most games, because they happen to most prolifically exist in options that many people naturally tend to not gravitate towards. Tasha's summons are largely much more fair though they too are pretty darn strong for the investment. Don't throw a Shepherd Druid or a Necromancer Wizard at a random table without being aware of what they can do and making sure it's okay: otherwise the DM will have to challenge the minionmancer separately which makes it very hard to provide a fair challenge to the rest of the party, which can be very much so not fun to the rest of the players.

Waazraath

2021-06-14, 05:32 AM

I never said "casters rule",

The post I replied to (not yours) did.

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

Yes

I just said they're stronger than non-casters, which is an indisputable fact, not a matter of opinion.

{Scrubbed}

Eldariel

2021-06-14, 05:32 AM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

Numbers are not opinions. Math is math regardless of who you are. Caster options (the strongest ones) being numerically superior is math, not an opinion.

Waazraath

2021-06-14, 06:09 AM

Numbers are not opinions. Math is math regardless of who you are. Caster options (the strongest ones) being numerically superior is math, not an opinion.

{Scrubbed} Dnd has so much context (variables, if you want) that it doesn't have a clear numeric outcome when you compare classes in any meaningful mathemetical way.

MrStabby

2021-06-14, 06:10 AM

My first suggestion is to optimise for a role, not a number.

One thing a lot of beginners get wrong is to look at a metric like damage per round and obsess, or even notice, a couple of points of difference over more major differences like a +5ft movement speed to get into combat. So for example, if you want to optimise for damage then sure, look at DPR but think about how you will get advantage, avoid disadvantage, be able to pick and get to the most relevant target and so on. Often taking a feat like Fey Touched on a paladin to be able to get misty step to close with an enemy is better than +2 strength to hit a little bit harder.

Or if you want to optimise for stealth/scouting, think about not just your bonus to stealth, but about the threats to your role and how to circumvent them. Is it worth pushing your stealth rolls ever higher or is the greater threat that someone has cast an alarm ritual and being able to bypass this is more important? Or maybe think about investing in strength/athletics to climb better so you can avoid the busy hallways whilst scouting and have lower risk of being detected due to less exposure... also think about other ways of doing the same thing - do you really want to optimise for scouting by walking around when there are so many divination rituals and find familliar spells and arcane eyes.

Which does touch on spellcasting. One of the ways in which spellcasting is so powerful in 5th edition is that optimisation is pretty shallow - the way to be best at banishment is to select Banishment as one of your spells and keep your casting stat high. No need to invest in feats or abilities boosting your DC for the spell that won't also help fireball or spirit guardians or anything else. You really don't have to prioritise - simply being able to cast the spell means you are at maximum efficiency already. You tend to get your maximum impact as a spellcaster by diversifying so you have the best tool for the situation, rather than doubling down on one spell type. Even characers like draconic sorcerers that get a boost to damage from some elemental spells tend to be better off not commiting to their theme.

This isn't to say that optimisation isn't worth doing - if that's your thing. You can build more or less powerful characters, but generally you get better results by ensuring you get some deep capabilities but enough flexability and diversity to actually use them well. I mean it is great being the best grappler ever with advantage and stacked bonusses, but it counts for nothing if you cant reach your enemy to lay a hand on them or if they are immune to the grappled condition.

Eldariel

2021-06-14, 06:45 AM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote} Dnd has so much context (variables, if you want) that it doesn't have a clear numeric outcome when you compare classes in any meaningful mathemetical way.

Yet minionmancy gives you the ability to take particularly combat challenges way beyond what anything else enables by virtue of Bounded Accuracy while also removing significant HP pressure from the party and the minionmancer (by virtue of bodyblocking, OAs, etc.). Meanwhile, spellcasting is made to be basically the only efficient means to interact with noncombat challenges. There's almost no set of external variables that can come even close to closing the gap.

This is easy to subject to a hypothesis test too. Take literally any campaign path that involves Tier 2+, homebrew or official. Run two parties through it: one with 4 minionmancers, one with 4 anything else (control for player system mastery: the setup with fewest uncontrollables would obviously have the same players play both playthroughs and thus have advance information). See which performs better (measured by ease of clearing the various challenges). The only problem is, the outcome is obvious so there's no real point in going through the trouble.

It would take extreme houserules to not make this the case: as long as you are playing something resembling 5e/Next, bounded accuracy and advantage will be a thing and thus producing extra actions will largely be more valuable than anything.

And even such extreme houserules...while irrelevant to the balance of the system, I would really like to hear of them. Because it is somewhat frequent that people claim that in a given table balance issues don't exist but these claims consistently fail to be substantiated on any concrete level.

Gignere

2021-06-14, 06:52 AM

IMO the biggest advantage of minionmancy over martials is that it totally breaks the action economy.

When a single character controls up to 10 - 12 actions in a round or even more. There is literally nothing martials bring that even comes close.

Anymage

2021-06-14, 07:03 AM

Minionmancy is one thing that can throw balance out of whack, because it's hard to work around the action economy issues it presents. Still, martials can get in on that game too by just hiring a bunch of mercenaries. Spellcasters do have a lot more plot influence spells, and a handful of broken options that slipped through the cracks. Plus DMs tend to skew low on daily encounters which lets long rest classes go nova. That isn't quite the level of "spellcasters = minionmancers, and martials can't even begin to play that game" that's being stated.

On to the main topic, do remember that 3.5 optimizers were very cognizant of the difference between theoretical and practical optimization. One was theorycraft where the build was the enjoyable part and where trying to bring it to a game would just annoy the DM enough to have you suffer spontaneous existence failure. The other was just making sure your character was good at what you wanted them to be good at. 5e, with its lack of trap options, makes PO a lot less of a factor. Take things that you'd intuitively expect to make you good at something, you'll very likely be good at it. Playable optimization is a pretty easy benchmark to reach. And theoretical gamebreaking optimization, going on bookdives to find cool tricks is often the point on its own without needing to have the character see play.

MrStabby

2021-06-14, 07:03 AM

And even such extreme houserules...while irrelevant to the balance of the system, I would really like to hear of them. Because it is somewhat frequent that people claim that in a given table balance issues don't exist but these claims consistently fail to be substantiated on any concrete level.

If you play levels 1-4 and have long arduous adventuring days then this goes away... and as you advance beyond level 5 it swings more and more in favour of the PC that can put the most bodies on the table.

At high levels thare are things that can be done (gate the caster to another plane and break their concentration before support comes through, banish them to break concentration etc.); some of them are also pretty fair (like multiple fireballs, fear spells, confusion spells (confusion can be particularly brutal vs conjure animals when upcast to hit all of them AND the PCs).). Of course this needs some counterspell backup to deal with opposing counterspells or dispel magics.

But it is true that you have to focus more and more on very specific types of encounter to balance these things.

Corsair14

2021-06-14, 07:47 AM

99% of the character build threads on here are about min/maxing/optimizing. Shouldn't be hard to find, 5th edition is the optimizers dream edition even more so than 3rd.

OldTrees1

2021-06-14, 08:12 AM

99% of the character build threads on here are about min/maxing/optimizing. Shouldn't be hard to find, 5th edition is the optimizers dream edition even more so than 3rd.

Could you elaborate on that in the context of what the OP is specifically asking about?

I like the process of min/maxing. That minigame where you search through all manner of splatbooks for that extra +1 modifier that ultimately increases the efficacy of what ever build/concept your are trying to achieve. Now, it is my understanding, from reading different posts, that is had basically been removed from 5th. Simply put, the customization options have been severely reduced... and that despite archetypes being a thing... not much happens after level 3 in terms of making a unique character, in terms of what choices you make... Nor is it possible to hunt for modifiers from obscure classes, feats or spells, simply because they are not there.

So, all in all, a vastly different, less customizable system than 3.X. So, if I want to still do the minigame of hunting for modifiers (do the numbers game) as one of my friends called it, then what options do I have in 5th, or more precisely what/where do I get as close to the feeling of the 3.5 customization/ character creation as possible?

Its not only about building a strong character, its more that I'm seeking options that I can really dive into. I don't want to be effectively done with my character creation at level 3...

If the goal is to optimize the longevity of the character generation minigame, how does 5E handle that?

My answer was a Warlock / something multiclass.

MrStabby

2021-06-14, 08:38 AM

Could you elaborate on that in the context of what the OP is specifically asking about?

If the goal is to optimize the longevity of the character generation minigame, how does 5E handle that?

My answer was a Warlock / something multiclass.

Hmm. Probably any spells known class. Ever two levels you make a relatively important decision about your character progression.

Corsair14

2021-06-14, 09:13 AM

[QUOTE=OldTrees1;25085476]Could you elaborate on that in the context of what the OP is specifically asking about?
QUOTE]

There's literally hundreds of threads about optimizing builds on here. The OP wants to min/max so I pointed out that its very easy. This edition encourages this style of play or at least forums like this do any way.

Willie the Duck

2021-06-14, 09:44 AM

If the goal is to keep the min-max decision train going, I think hexblade-paladin/sorcadin/coffeelocking combinations would be a good place to focus.

Max Caysey

2021-06-14, 10:07 AM

... 5th edition is the optimizers dream edition even more so than 3rd.

I gather that 3.5 had a lot of options that were basically traps, but quite a few of them had something good for a specific niche thing... thus still being viable for min/maxing certain things...

But, its my understanding that 5th has a lot fewer classes (and ACF), feats, spells, magic items than 3.5, so how is 5th a min/maxer's dream when its such a small game compared to 3.5?

Cheers!

Asmotherion

2021-06-14, 10:20 AM

Look into Sorcerer Warlock Multiclass, or Sorcerer Paladin Multiclass as a start.

But if you love min/maxing, you'll be disapointed by 5e in general. Better look into the 3.p system.

Corsair14

2021-06-14, 10:38 AM

I gather that 3.5 had a lot of options that were basically traps, but quite a few of them had something good for a specific niche thing... thus still being viable for min/maxing certain things...

But, its my understanding that 5th has a lot fewer classes (and ACF), feats, spells, magic items than 3.5, so how is 5th a min/maxer's dream when its such a small game compared to 3.5?

Cheers!

5th I think has just as many base classes if not more than 3.5. That really hasn't changed, sure you had splat books with things like the scout but many ignored the extra books just like many do in 5e. Prestige classes essentially were sub classes like 5e has with its archtypes except they had requirements that had to be filled before you took them which then limits your options, especially in early levels. In 5e you can automatically join a new class per level but the archetypes are automatic also at 2nd or 3rd. There are lots of feats in both which can amplify class abilities like what the warlock has with his automatic fire eldritch blast for example. I think archetypes are far more powerful than most prestige classes(again from memory, its been about 10 years since I played 3rd.) They got rid of many of the restrictions that prior editions had, got rid of penalties of prior editions, and essentially made super characters compared to what we had before. So yes, for a player willing to go look up the details and a DM willing to allow all the splat books, you can make some mean powerful characters more so than you could before.

Waazraath

2021-06-14, 10:46 AM

5th I think has just as many base classes if not more than 3.5. That really hasn't changed, sure you had splat books with things like the scout but many ignored the extra books just like many do in 5e. Prestige classes essentially were sub classes like 5e has with its archtypes except they had requirements that had to be filled before you took them which then limits your options, especially in early levels. In 5e you can automatically join a new class per level but the archetypes are automatic also at 2nd or 3rd. There are lots of feats in both which can amplify class abilities like what the warlock has with his automatic fire eldritch blast for example. I think archetypes are far more powerful than most prestige classes(again from memory, its been about 10 years since I played 3rd.) They got rid of many of the restrictions that prior editions had, got rid of penalties of prior editions, and essentially made super characters compared to what we had before. So yes, for a player willing to go look up the details and a DM willing to allow all the splat books, you can make some mean powerful characters more so than you could before.

Wait, wut, wut?! No way man... I mean... wow. 3.5 had the same number of base classes in the phb, except that missed the warlock. 5e has only 1 extra class (arteficer). While 3.5 has:
- at least 8 psionic classes (EPH + CP)
- 3 matial adepts (ToB)
- 3 alternative magic base classes (ToM)
- 3 Incarnum base classes (MoI)
- 7 base classes in Dragon Compendium
- base class options in all complete books, I think 3 per book (at least 7, disregarding CP)
- 4 base classes in PHB2
- and, and, and...

I mean... it's not a comparison. 1000's of feats, 1000's of spells, hundreds and hundreds of prestige classes (wáy more than 5e has subclasses)...

Edenbeast

2021-06-14, 11:18 AM

5e has only 1 extra class (arteficer).

Not even that... Check the 3.5 Eberron Campaign Setting, Chapter 2...

FabulousFizban

2021-06-14, 11:46 AM

become a DM

but also, to get the most out of a character you'll have to think differently about what a character is, which is a set of actions. Class, feats, spells, skills, backgrounds, they are all merely a means to an end. You see, a character can do five things each round in combat: Action, bonus action, reaction, move, and concentration, and you need to make sure you are doing something with each of them in order to optimize your action economy. Fundamentally, min/maxing is about optimizing action economy. Think of everything else as a vehicle to ensuring the most efficient use of your five options during combat.

This does not really apply to min/maxing an OoC character.

Eldariel

2021-06-14, 12:02 PM

Corsair14

2021-06-14, 01:26 PM

Wait, wut, wut?! No way man... I mean... wow. 3.5 had the same number of base classes in the phb, except that missed the warlock. 5e has only 1 extra class (arteficer). While 3.5 has:
- at least 8 psionic classes (EPH + CP)
- 3 matial adepts (ToB)
- 3 alternative magic base classes (ToM)
- 3 Incarnum base classes (MoI)
- 7 base classes in Dragon Compendium
- base class options in all complete books, I think 3 per book (at least 7, disregarding CP)
- 4 base classes in PHB2
- and, and, and...

I mean... it's not a comparison. 1000's of feats, 1000's of spells, hundreds and hundreds of prestige classes (wáy more than 5e has subclasses)...

I said base classes, not optional splat book add ons. Base being PHB and DMG. Not everyone goes and gets all the power creeping optional books. Base books alone 5e has more options available from the get go

JNAProductions

2021-06-14, 01:31 PM

I said base classes, not optional splat book add ons. Base being PHB and DMG. Not everyone goes and gets all the power creeping optional books. Base books alone 5e has more options available from the get go

Who plays 3.X with ONLY the core books?

And comparing the two... 5E has one more class. Twelve in the PHB compared to 3.5's eleven. (Discounting NPC classes, which would increase it to sixteen.)
But 3.5 also has (at least on the SRD) fifteen Prestige Classes.
It also has over a hundred feats, compared to a dozen or so in the PHB of 5E.

Waazraath

2021-06-14, 01:40 PM

Not even that... Check the 3.5 Eberron Campaign Setting, Chapter 2...

"extra" in addition to those in the Phb, not "extra" as in "a base class that 3.x doesn't have" ;-)

Xervous

2021-06-14, 01:49 PM

jaappleton

2021-06-14, 03:27 PM

KorvinStarmast

2021-06-14, 03:43 PM

It also has over a hundred feats, compared to a dozen or so in the PHB of 5E. Try three and a half dozen 5e PHB feats. (42). :smallwink:

JNAProductions

2021-06-14, 03:59 PM

Try three and a half dozen 5e PHB feats. (42). :smallwink:

That feels a bit high-away from my books at the moment though.

Still less than half of 3.5’s PHB.

KorvinStarmast

2021-06-14, 04:06 PM

That feels a bit high-away from my books at the moment though.

Still less than half of 3.5’s PHB. I counted them. :smallwink:
What about 3.0's PHB?
That's the point of comparison.
Once you toss in Xanathar's, you've got another two dozen. :smallwink: (about, afb the moment). And if you toss in Tasha's (maybe a fairer case of 'it's nearly .5 now' you have another dozen or so.

Not such a big difference. :smallcool:
ALERT
ATHLETE
ACTOR
CHARGER
CROSSBOW EXPERT
DEFENSIVE DUELIST
DUAL WIELDER
DUNGEON DELVER
DURABLE
ELEMENTAL ADEPT
GRAPPLER
GREAT WEAPON MASTER
HEALER
HEAVILY ARMORED
HEAVY ARMOR MASTER
INSPIRING LEADER
KEEN MIND
LIGHTLY ARMORED
LINGUIST
LUCKY
MAGE SLAYER
MAGIC INITIATE
MARTIAL ADEPT
MEDIUM ARMOR MASTER
MOBILE
MODERATELY ARMORED
MOUNTED COMBATANT
OBSERVANT
POLEARM MASTER (includes 2018 errata)
RESILIENT
RITUAL CASTER
SAVAGE ATTACKER
SENTINEL
SHARPSHOOTER
SHIELD MASTER
SKILLED
SKULKER
SPELL SNIPER
TAVERN BRAWLER
TOUGH
WAR CASTER
WEAPON MASTER

truemane

2021-06-14, 04:24 PM

Metamagic Mod: closed for review

truemane

2021-06-15, 07:37 AM

Metamagic Mod: thread re-opened.

MrStabby

2021-06-15, 08:15 AM

When people think min/max, they often think about damage numbers.

Problem is, racking up atrociously high damage numbers often means stepping on the toes of your allies and inadvertently making them feel weak.

However, min/max can mean any aspect of the game.

Nobody is going to complain you're healing for too much. Nobody is going to complain that you're making sure all their attacks hit, or all the enemy attacks miss.

I have to disagree with this just a bit.

I have seen players get frustrated when there is a lot of support and their sword and board fighter gets outclassed by the great-weapon fighter - where to-hit support and advantage obviate and downside to the GWM feat usage and where control has meant that a shield was useless as enemies made few attacks anyway.

Less so with healing, but I have seen a twilight cleric and a life cleric in the same party and the life cleric was getting seriously annoyed that they couldn't use their specialism as people took too little damage.

I think there can be a lot of these things in the game - my personal one that I hate is when your shtick is being good at fighting and your party has someone optimised for helping the party avoid fights (which is why I have given up playing any non charisma focussed non caster).

Sometimes your awesome thing is about offestting the really bad things that enemies can do to your party. Another part member that stops those bad things happening too effectively still leaves you with nothing fruitful to do.

OldTrees1

2021-06-15, 08:16 AM

Reminder: The OP was wondering how to maintain the character gen build choices minigame beyond 3rd level. What are more ways to do that?

Feats
Multiclassing
Warlock Invocations
Sorcerer Spells Known
Totem Barbarian Totems

New:
Artificer Infusions are an example
Hunter Ranger gets choices at 7th, 11th, 15th

stoutstien

2021-06-15, 08:16 AM

Hard to compare 3.x and 5e feats. 3.x feats are a core part of the progression of PCs and 5e are purely optional and extra.

KorvinStarmast

2021-06-15, 08:54 AM

I have seen players get frustrated when there is a lot of support and their sword and board fighter gets outclassed by the great-weapon fighter - where to-hit support and advantage obviate and downside to the GWM feat usage and where control has meant that a shield was useless as enemies made few attacks anyway.
The correct way to use shield master (which Crawford then flip flopped on) was a great way around this. Knock 'em down (if you are big enough) and then attack with your one handed weapon. BA can come at any time during the turn where the PC attacks. (The only 'as specified' was in Monk's flurry of blows ...)
They are a shield MASTER, for goodness sakes. :smallfurious:
OK, since that appears to no longer be AL legal thanks to people complained... I'll stop there. Can't help our OP with that effort.

Min Maxing: my approach is to try and optimize for team synergy. I have found that you need a small team to do that with (four, maybe five) before it gets too hard, and you have to have three or four like minded players to do it successfully.

@stoutstein:

Hard to compare 3.x and 5e feats. 3.x feats are a core part of the progression of PCs and 5e are purely optional and extra.
fair point.

JNAProductions

2021-06-15, 08:56 AM

The correct way to use shield master (which Crawford then flip flopped on) was a great way around this. That BA can come at any time during the turn where the PC attacks. They are a shield MASTER, for goodness sakes. :smallfurious: OK, since that appears to no longer be AL legal thanks to people complained... I'll stop there. Can't help our OP with that effort.

How are you using a shield and GWM in the same turn? Is there a one-handed Heavy weapon I don't know about or remember at the moment?

KorvinStarmast

2021-06-15, 08:57 AM

How are you using a shield and GWM in the same turn? Is there a one-handed Heavy weapon I don't know about or remember at the moment?
You aren't.
Where did you get that idea?
The original complaint was how GWM was overshadowing the sword and board fighting style without there being the disadvantages GWM usually brings with it (lower AC).

I have seen players get frustrated when there is a lot of support and their sword and board fighter gets outclassed by the great-weapon fighter
That is what I was responding to.

Waterdeep Merch

2021-06-15, 09:15 AM

Max Caysey

2021-06-16, 05:18 AM

5e optimization is less about modifier hunting and more about finding synergistic abilities. You run out of ways to add +'s to things pretty quick. After that, if you're interested in optimization, paying attention to specific class/subclass/feat combinations and how they interact with others becomes key.

This is precicely my concern... Lets say you have two rogues, one maximizes stealth and the other doesn't... how big a difference is there on their ability to be stealthly? Are they equally good at it?

The art is then about figuring out when and where to take things. If you take a feat early, you can't boost an ability score. If you multiclass, you're ditching a standard progression and need to make sure that you either get equally powerful abilities in exchange or can deal with the lack of them for X number of levels.

That sounds fine tho...

There's also a level of optimization in 5e that comes from being clever in play. A lot of 3.x players bemoan the lack of concrete numbers in 5e, but this is also a place where being very clever in the narrative can often let you accomplish things just because there *are* no actual rules governing them beyond whatever makes sense to the DM. This sort of assumption goes hand in hand with why character building doesn't really involve scaling your numbers too much. Think about ways to utilize the options that you've got for things other than the numbers they represent.

Hmmm so right here is one of my pet peeves... I don't want to DM to adjudicate when something is a success, I really want my ability to use the rule to my benefit be the thing that determines that... Or else there will crop op continuity errors like we see in movies, where plot armor is a thing (think Starwars), because all of a sudden climbing this sheer cliff wall is not what my DM had intended... or he loves some NPC too much. That was a thing I really liked about 3.5... the DC was presented. Sure the DM could change them, but most presented DC were really the difficulty class of certain actions... and really demanded no DM intervention... like climbing or hide/move silent... You knew that if you had a high number here, you could auto succeed in certain things... I would hate having to ask my DM if he feels like letting X action be successful. At leaasat, thats what is sounds like to me...

Xervous

2021-06-16, 05:26 AM

Hmmm so right here is one of my pet peeves... I don't want to DM to adjudicate when something is a success, I really want my ability to use the rule to my benefit be the thing that determines that... Or else there will crop op continuity errors like we see in movies, where plot armor is a thing (think Starwars), because all of a sudden climbing this sheer cliff wall is not what my DM had intended... or he loves some NPC too much. That was a thing I really liked about 3.5... the DC was presented. Sure the DM could change them, but most presented DC were really the difficulty class of certain actions... and really demanded no DM intervention... like climbing or hide/move silent... You knew that if you had a high number here, you could auto succeed in certain things... I would hate having to ask my DM if he feels like letting X action be successful.

Quite frankly that’s not what 5e is about. If you want that burrito you’re going to be disappointed waiting in line at this hotdog stand. 5e is very much ‘ask your GM’.

Dare I say What’s the DC to climb a tree?

Waazraath

2021-06-16, 05:29 AM

This is precicely my concern... Lets say you have two rogues, one maximizes stealth and the other doesn't... how big a difference is there on their ability to be stealthly? Are they equally good at it?

2 rogues. Assume 1 wants to be really stealthy, while the other doesn't really care about it because it wants more social skills and the face role, but takes the stealth proficiency for the heck of it (rogues have plenty of skills). The first is a Mark of Shadow elf (from the Ebberon book) arcane trickster, the second a half-elf. Both max out dexterity (cause thats what you do as rogue, usually), the first takes expertise in stealth, the second doesn't (cause takes expertise in deception and persuasion or the like).

At level 5, assume both took a +2 to dex at level 4, we have the following stealth modifiers:
- rogue 1: +4 (dex) + 6 (skill + expertise) + 1d4 (racial), for 1d20 + 12,5
- rogue 2: +4 (dex) + 3 (skill proficiency) = 1d20 + 7

That's quite a big difference, though even rogue no.2 can get impressive stealth checks - it just needs to be lucky. Rogue 1 will almost always succeed in DC 15 checks, and more often than not succeed in dc20 checks.

At later levels, this difference will get bigger, cause rogue 1 can use spells to enhance stealth (enhance ability, or invisibility, or the like), while the swasbuckler gets other features (useful, but not related to stealth).

stoutstien

2021-06-16, 05:43 AM

This is precicely my concern... Lets say you have two rogues, one maximizes stealth and the other doesn't... how big a difference is there on their ability to be stealthly? Are they equally good at it?

That sounds fine tho...

Hmmm so right here is one of my pet peeves... I don't want to DM to adjudicate when something is a success, I really want my ability to use the rule to my benefit be the thing that determines that... Or else there will crop op continuity errors like we see in movies, where plot armor is a thing (think Starwars), because all of a sudden climbing this sheer cliff wall is not what my DM had intended... or he loves some NPC too much. That was a thing I really liked about 3.5... the DC was presented. Sure the DM could change them, but most presented DC were really the difficulty class of certain actions... and really demanded no DM intervention... like climbing or hide/move silent... You knew that if you had a high number here, you could auto succeed in certain things... I would hate having to ask my DM if he feels like letting X action be successful. At leaasat, thats what is sounds like to me...

Wrong system for your preferences. Even in 3.5 the DCs weren't static and a DM could still railroad you if they so desired. 5e just moved away from the pageanty of pretending that isn't the case for all action resolution based games.
This is still a problem for a lot of players which is one of the reasons spells are so highly regarded because they are seen as specific abilities to use to address challenges where skills/ability checks are unreliable due to DM fiat. Best bet is to spend your time and resources on finding a table with like minded players rather than trying to eck out another .0000002% chance of success.

Max Caysey

2021-06-16, 06:11 AM

Quite frankly that’s not what 5e is about. If you want that burrito you’re going to be disappointed waiting in line at this hotdog stand. 5e is very much ‘ask your GM’.

Dare I say What’s the DC to climb a tree?

Thats what I feared... Cheers!

2 rogues. Assume 1 wants to be really stealthy, while the other doesn't really care about it because it wants more social skills and the face role, but takes the stealth proficiency for the heck of it (rogues have plenty of skills). The first is a Mark of Shadow elf (from the Ebberon book) arcane trickster, the second a half-elf. Both max out dexterity (cause thats what you do as rogue, usually), the first takes expertise in stealth, the second doesn't (cause takes expertise in deception and persuasion or the like).

At level 5, assume both took a +2 to dex at level 4, we have the following stealth modifiers:
- rogue 1: +4 (dex) + 6 (skill + expertise) + 1d4 (racial), for 1d20 + 12,5
- rogue 2: +4 (dex) + 3 (skill proficiency) = 1d20 + 7

That's quite a big difference, though even rogue no.2 can get impressive stealth checks - it just needs to be lucky. Rogue 1 will almost always succeed in DC 15 checks, and more often than not succeed in dc20 checks.

At later levels, this difference will get bigger, cause rogue 1 can use spells to enhance stealth (enhance ability, or invisibility, or the like), while the swasbuckler gets other features (useful, but not related to stealth).

Thats at least something... I thought the difference would be less to be honest.

Wrong system for your preferences. Even in 3.5 the DCs weren't static and a DM could still railroad you if they so desired. 5e just moved away from the pageanty of pretending that isn't the case for all action resolution based games.
This is still a problem for a lot of players which is one of the reasons spells are so highly regarded because they are seen as specific abilities to use to address challenges where skills/ability checks are unreliable due to DM fiat. Best bet is to spend your time and resources on finding a table with like minded players rather than trying to eck out another .0000002% chance of success.

I know not all DCs were static, and that the DM could change things up, but we ran most games fairly raw unless some really weird/unique situation came up... so like 90% of the time the DCs in the books where the DCs needed to succeed... At least in our non-epic games...

I like the idea that the rules are a canvas on which both the PCs and DM plays, and where the DM primarily is a storyteller where he employs the same rules against us... as we do against him. Now that's not to say that its a game against the DM, but against the challenges put forth by our DM. When I DM, I try to adhere to this as much as possible and bring in as little fiat as possible... I understand that not all feels this way, but that's just the way I prefer the game being played...

It seems from what I have been able to read and what people say here, that 5th is not a game I am going to like very much... that's not to say that an evening with friends can't be fun, but the game seems very removed from what I like about 3.5...

Waazraath

2021-06-16, 07:08 AM

Thats at least something... I thought the difference would be less to be honest.

Oh, no, and they can be a bit bigger if you really try, and multiclass (BM fighter for instance, or pick a race with pass without trace for an occaional +10 instead of an always on +1d4). At a certain point, it does come at a cost for general effectivity (though BM fighter is great for any rogue build since it allows a reaction attack, so you can do sneak attack 2 times per round).

Willie the Duck

2021-06-16, 07:53 AM

5e optimization is less about modifier hunting and more about finding synergistic abilities. You run out of ways to add +'s to things pretty quick.
This is precicely my concern... Lets say you have two rogues, one maximizes stealth and the other doesn't... how big a difference is there on their ability to be stealthly? Are they equally good at it?
If you are strictly going by modifier hunting, it can still be significant. A 'Strogue' who has the rogue class but is focused on beatdown may not have the stealth skill and only the 14 Dex they picked up to go with the medium armor they probably got proficiency in and will have a +2 throughout their career, while a rogue who only got expertise and maxed dex will still end their career with a +17 (and inability to roll 9 or less on the check). Still, the answer is mostly mu, as a 5e rogue who maximizes 'stealth' will do so by getting expertise and a max dex, but also by getting advantage on the check, access to Pass Without Trace and Invisibility, ways to distract guards and send them off to check out a noise so they can hopefully slip past without even making a stealth check, and rapid escape options to get back to their allies when things inevitably go square-wise despite their perfect stealth setup.

It seems from what I have been able to read and what people say here, that 5th is not a game I am going to like very much... that's not to say that an evening with friends can't be fun, but the game seems very removed from what I like about 3.5...
Fundamentally I think this is the real point that should be made. 5e, despite working on some of the same most basic frameworks (d20 in most cases with roll-high being the goal, all classes requiring the same XP totals to level, similar multiclassing mechanics, feats, etc.) is not, specifically, another crack at the 3rd edition system. It is inspired by it in many ways, but also by AD&D, and basic/classic, and 4e, as well as new (to D&D) innovations of its own.

If you want to play a game, it can do that. If you want to min/max, you can do that. If you want to play a stealth-focused rogue who is decidedly better at stealthing than a non-stealth-focused rogue, you can do that too. What you can't do is apply the exact same strategy one learned in 3e and expect to get the same results. That's the long and short of it.

Waterdeep Merch

2021-06-16, 11:11 AM

There is *some* guidance on DC's, but it's extremely basic and open to interpretation- an easy task is 10, normal is 15, hard is 20, very hard 25. There's also a basic rule that states that you shouldn't bother rolling for something if there's no real stakes for failure. I find that most 3.x players that dislike 5e specifically hate this because they fear the DM that arbitrarily makes everything hard to very hard and ignores the rule about not rolling everything. The last part is true, though, everyone forgets that's part of the rules.

In practice, though, this sort of tyrannical DM is fairly rare, and wouldn't be held back in more rigid systems like 3.x either way. It's far more common to find a very permissive DM that just lets things happen if it makes sense and your roll looks okay. That might be irritating in it's own way, of course. This is the *system* of Your Mileage May Vary. But in practice, things hew pretty close to sensible.

Bounded accuracy is another sticking point. It means low level threats never truly disappear, from skill checks to DC's to monsters. There will be a number of arrows shot by goblins that will eventually overwhelm even a level 20 party, even if that number is ludicrously high. This isn't a good or bad thing on it's own, it just means there are different expectations. Getting numbers so high that you will never fail isn't a thing here. This is *why* the rule about not rolling when the outcome isn't in question is there, to prevent the master level 20 rogue from falling out of a tree. But again, this rule is often overlooked and ignored. I'm guilty of it, too.

It's perfectly acceptable to look at this and say "not my cup of tea". If you want to be especially magnanimous, find a friend that can DM you for a one shot. Even bad systems can be a good time with your friends.

Xervous

2021-06-16, 11:27 AM

Willie the Duck

2021-06-16, 11:50 AM

Bounded accuracy is another sticking point. It means low level threats never truly disappear, from skill checks to DC's to monsters. There will be a number of arrows shot by goblins that will eventually overwhelm even a level 20 party, even if that number is ludicrously high. This isn't a good or bad thing on it's own, it just means there are different expectations. Getting numbers so high that you will never fail isn't a thing here. This is *why* the rule about not rolling when the outcome isn't in question is there, to prevent the master level 20 rogue from falling out of a tree. But again, this rule is often overlooked and ignored. I'm guilty of it, too.
It's perfectly acceptable to look at this and say "not my cup of tea". If you want to be especially magnanimous, find a friend that can DM you for a one shot. Even bad systems can be a good time with your friends.

I think, too, there is a certain subset of gamers that enjoyed the challenge in 3e/PF of finding ways to get that +11 stealth total mod at level X up to +17 or +503 through CharOp acrobatics. It has a charm (not one in which I regularly feel the need to partake, and when I do I have 3e, but it's certainly still there). I think it also seems to some like a little bit of a thumb in the eye that 5e very kinda-sorta* said, 'yeah, no way we're making that mistake again.'
*Because of all the many many varied exceptions throughout the ruleset, up to and especially the +10 to stealth that Pass Without Trace gives

LudicSavant

2021-06-16, 03:05 PM

This is precicely my concern... Lets say you have two rogues, one maximizes stealth and the other doesn't... how big a difference is there on their ability to be stealthly? Are they equally good at it?

They are not even remotely equally good at it.

The difference can be quite enormous. Not only can you make characters who can roll 30+ on stealth consistently, you can also have ones that augment it indirectly... Advantage, invisibility, the ability to see/scout through walls, the ability to teleport through walls, the ability to GTFO before anyone acts even if things go wrong and you get spotted, the ability to foil Darkvision or divination senses, the ability to grant everyone else in the party the ability to move stealthily with them (ex: Pass Without Trace and such), the ability to nerf enemy perception rolls, the ability to alter their own rolls after the fact, the ability to take actions without breaking stealth (like non-verbal component spells and the like), the ability to stay in contact with the party while scouting, the ability to pre-buff to take advantage of scouting (and thus knowing when they are about to encounter enemies), etc etc.

A basic stealth character is just a guy with Expertise on stealth checks. An optimized stealth character not only has a better bonus on stealth checks (and the bonus can get a lot better), but might also do things like turn the entire party into a ninja strike team that counters most of the things that can normally deal with stealth.

Rogues don't optimize quite as far as some other classes do, but you can still see a big difference. For example a Mark of Shadow Arcane Trickster could have +27+1d4 to stealth checks (with a minimum roll of 39 due to Reliable Talent), and grant +10 to stealth to all their allies too (via Pass Without Trace). And you'd have a variety of tricks with spells, ranged ledgerdemain, and such. And then you could take feats that allow you to stack the number further. For example Martial Adept can give you Ambush for another +1d6 to stealth 1/short rest, plus the option to get an extra off-turn sneak attack. Lucky could allow you to reroll any skill check. Metamagic Adept could allow you to use Magical Ambush without revealing your hidden position. Skulker could allow you to attempt to hide even while being observed. Multiclassing adds yet more possibilities for further boosting your stealth.

So yeah... it's definitely a long ways from being "equally good at it."

ZRN

2021-06-16, 03:37 PM

A basic stealth character is just a guy with Expertise on stealth checks. An optimized stealth character not only has a better bonus on stealth checks (and the bonus can get a lot better), but might also do things like turn the entire party into a ninja strike team that counters most of the things that can normally deal with stealth.

LudicSavant's right here, and his thread of eclectic builds (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?583957-An-Eclectic-Collection-of-Fun-and-Effective-Builds) gives some really good examples of the kind of optimizing that works well in 5e.

You CAN stack abilities and spells to get a higher +X to a particular skill, but the more impressive thing that you can do, which was IMHO somewhat harder in 3.x, is come up with more well-rounded ways to be good at a particular skill. Expertise alone on a high-level rogue is probably good enough to almost always succeed on a particular skill check, but finding ways to buff your team, or psychically communicate with them, see through walls, etc. makes it a lot more fun to actually play with the character you so expertly built.

Waterdeep Merch

2021-06-16, 03:38 PM

I dislike it for being a lazy attempt to have their cake and eat it too. They have copious DCs strewn piecemeal throughout the core books and many adventures yet they neglect to acknowledge or compile any of those details. For documents that should be providing guidance and setting expectations there’s heavy assumptions of the end user possessing prior experience to read between the lines in so many sections.

In other words people manage to run good tables in spite of the dearth of guidance, not because of it. They’re the same ones who probably wouldn’t need the guidance anyways.

It stands to reason that it isn't all that necessary for most people, then, given the ubiquity of 5e, but I also believe they needed a few notes to completely marry this table-agnostic ideal in a more satisfying way that wouldn't have caused anywhere near as much irritation. And it shouldn't have been in the DMG, either- a little note of what sort of things would be considered easy, normal, or hard for each skill in the "Using Ability Scores" chapter of the PHB could have grounded it in a way that would have helped both players and DM's readily grasp what a reasonable DC should look like. Wham, you don't need tables anymore- just look at the examples, decide where that leaves the current situation, and tweak the appropriate DC to taste. This turns it into a tool a player can use to gauge their own success more accurately without needing tables and modifiers.

A DM can absolutely just do this for their players, of course. It's not even that much work. But I've also rarely seen DM's offer concrete DC's like that and OP probably shouldn't expect them either.

I think, too, there is a certain subset of gamers that enjoyed the challenge in 3e/PF of finding ways to get that +11 stealth total mod at level X up to +17 or +503 through CharOp acrobatics. It has a charm (not one in which I regularly feel the need to partake, and when I do I have 3e, but it's certainly still there). I think it also seems like a little bit of a thumb in the eye that 5e very kinda-sorta* said, 'yeah, no way were making that mistake again.'
*Because of all the many many varied exceptions throughout the ruleset, up to and especially the +10 to stealth that Pass Without Trace gives

The big reason for 5e's breezy math is that it turned out that most people don't like doing that, but the operative term there is *most*. There's always going to be a niche for super heavy crunch games with a rich variety of eldritch bonuses and combinations, and unique builds that can offer plenty of choices and changes throughout your career. I like them on occasion myself.

I'm coming to the opinion that it's best to not judge games based on what you want them to do, and rather by what they actually do. I was very hard on PF2e going back to the playtest, and I was still really hating it when I gave it a real playthrough after it launched proper. It wasn't until afterwards that I realized that my issues weren't with what the game was doing, but with what it wasn't doing. Once I eschewed those expectations, I can honestly say that it's perfectly fine as a combat engine for those that like getting big numbers and making choices at every level. That one's still not really my thing, but it wasn't fair judging it's inability to offer the simulationism or interesting out of combat abilities I'd found in it's predecessor, because that was never their focus. Like eating a green apple and getting upset that it isn't sweet like a red apple.

What I'm trying to say is, don't expect 3.x in 5e just because they both say D&D on the cover. They each try to accomplish very different things and have very, very different philosophies.

Theodoxus

2021-06-16, 06:54 PM

The correct way to use shield master (which Crawford then flip flopped on) was a great way around this. Knock 'em down (if you are big enough) and then attack with your one handed weapon. BA can come at any time during the turn where the PC attacks. (The only 'as specified' was in Monk's flurry of blows ...)
They are a shield MASTER, for goodness sakes. :smallfurious:
OK, since that appears to no longer be AL legal thanks to people complained... I'll stop there. Can't help our OP with that effort.

Min Maxing: my approach is to try and optimize for team synergy. I have found that you need a small team to do that with (four, maybe five) before it gets too hard, and you have to have three or four like minded players to do it successfully.

@stoutstein:
fair point.

Just curious, Korvin, what do you do when the Shieldmaster using toon opens with a BA to push a target prone and fails, so decides to disengage instead? Take away player agency and force them to make an attack? Make a paradox and let them disengage, since the attempt failed, so no harm no foul?

I rule that you can't create even the possibilities of paradox. The easiest way to avoid that is to rule that BAs that require an action, must be provoked by that action, not merely the promise that you'll obey the rules.

I think that is what Crawford was waffling on. Realizing that allowing the BA to go off on 'a promise to then make an Attack' doesn't always work.

JNAProductions

2021-06-16, 07:00 PM

Just curious, Korvin, what do you do when the Shieldmaster using toon opens with a BA to push a target prone and fails, so decides to disengage instead? Take away player agency and force them to make an attack? Make a paradox and let them disengage, since the attempt failed, so no harm no foul?

I rule that you can't create even the possibilities of paradox. The easiest way to avoid that is to rule that BAs that require an action, must be provoked by that action, not merely the promise that you'll obey the rules.

I think that is what Crawford was waffling on. Realizing that allowing the BA to go off on 'a promise to then make an Attack' doesn't always work.

If a player says "I cast Fireball," and you say "Okay, the enemy mage uses Counterspell," would you let the PC take back the action because it failed?

Same thing with Shield Master-if you use the BA Prone attempt, you have to attack. You don't have to commit to a specific target or anything, but in the same way you can't (once you have Extra Attack) attack once, miss, and then do something else with your action, you're stuck taking the Attack action if you use Shield Master's Prone attempt.

LudicSavant

2021-06-16, 07:07 PM

Just curious, Korvin, what do you do when the Shieldmaster using toon opens with a BA to push a target prone and fails, so decides to disengage instead? Take away player agency and force them to make an attack? Make a paradox and let them disengage, since the attempt failed, so no harm no foul?

I rule that you can't create even the possibilities of paradox. The easiest way to avoid that is to rule that BAs that require an action, must be provoked by that action, not merely the promise that you'll obey the rules.

I think that is what Crawford was waffling on. Realizing that allowing the BA to go off on 'a promise to then make an Attack' doesn't always work.

The Storm Sorcerer's movement ability can explicitly work before the 'promised' Cast a Spell action, so that logic has to be resolved regardless of what you do with Shield Master.

Theodoxus

2021-06-16, 09:57 PM

The Storm Sorcerer's movement ability can explicitly work before the 'promised' Cast a Spell action, so that logic has to be resolved regardless of what you do with Shield Master.

And if Shieldmaster were likewise worded that way "you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature immediately before or after you take the Attack action." that would be fine. Heck, a simple errata to change the wording to exactly that would be warranted. I wouldn't be surprised if Tempestuous Magic used this precise wording to avoid the ambiguity and paradox creating problem that SM has.

"Immediately" has a specific meaning. "If you take the Attack action on your turn, [then] you can use a bonus action to try to shove..." Currently, the [then] is implied in simple English. Since it is only implied, we have this weird ambiguity. Though 5E is chock full of them, as a feature so DMs can make Rulings, rather than something codified because 4th Ed or something.

To be clear, I'm not opposed to the BA before Attack in general. I'm opposed to the ambiguity that forces DMs to remove player agency. Adding 'then' to the phrase kills the BA before the attack. Adding the 'immediately' phrasing from TM allows either before or after. It's the one I'd prefer, as it grants the player more options.

Maybe this is splitting hairs though...

stoutstien

2021-06-17, 07:48 AM

Just decouple the shield Master shove from any action requirement whatsoever. It's an unnecessary limitation that doesn't add anything to the game.

KorvinStarmast

2021-06-17, 08:12 AM

Just curious, Korvin, what do you do when the Shieldmaster using toon opens with a BA to push a target prone and fails, so decides to disengage instead? Take away player agency and force them to make an attack? What's a toon? We aren't discussing a video game.

Just decouple the shield Master shove from any action requirement whatsoever. It's an unnecessary limitation that doesn't add anything to the game. I am happy with eating a bonus action with it, just as a second attack does in generic two weapon fighting, but the points about how clunky the words are in the rules aren't off base.

stoutstien

2021-06-17, 08:26 AM

I am happy with eating a bonus action with it, just as a second attack does in generic two weapon fighting, but the points about how clunky the words are in the rules aren't off base.

Oh I didn't mean remove the bonus action. I just meant remove the tie of that bonus action to any specific action requirement before, after, during, or whatever. Why should somebody who's the master of using a shield need to attack at the same time is beyond me. It's already too much of a reliant on the attack action for a few of the classes to begin with. If they want to dodge and shove or shove and disengage why stop them.

Ettina

2021-06-17, 09:18 AM

I like the process of min/maxing. That minigame where you search through all manner of splatbooks for that extra +1 modifier that ultimately increases the efficacy of what ever build/concept your are trying to achieve. Now, it is my understanding, from reading different posts, that is had basically been removed from 5th. Simply put, the customization options have been severely reduced... and that despite archetypes being a thing... not much happens after level 3 in terms of making a unique character, in terms of what choices you make... Nor is it possible to hunt for modifiers from obscure classes, feats or spells, simply because they are not there.

Firstly, you're assuming a single-classed character. While multiclassing is technically an optional rule, it's one that pretty much any DM I know allows. 5e also made multiclass spellcasters a lot more viable because while the spells you know and can prepare are determined as a single class, your spell slots are determined by pooling your classes together, and many spells have good upcasting options. Unless you specifically need the unique options given by higher level spells, you don't lose much for multiclassing multiple full-caster classes.

Secondly, there are classes with major decisions later in their progression, even if you don't multiclass. Warlocks get new invocations repeatedly in their progression (for the most part at the same time as spell levels increase) and which invocations you use can make a big difference to how your warlock plays. Many spellcasting classes have to choose which spells they know, which changes things a lot, too. Bards, in particular, can grab spells from other classes' lists (some of the best ones are half-casters like ranger and paladin, because you can get a 5th level spell meant to be a capstone ability) which can readily be build-defining.

And if you like hunting through obscure sourcebooks, well, 5e doesn't have as many sourcebooks as 3.5, but there's still enough that you can find some obscure ones. You can also see if your DM accepts UA, which is playtest material put out by WOTC - there's a lot of UAs out there by now, and some of them get pretty crazy.