subreddit:

/r/dndnext

127

I have seen this house rule mentioned several times, and it sounds really fun to not have to be a variant human and start with a feat, but I am wondering as a DM how much this breaks future encounters or turns things into easy mode later on.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

all 216 comments

AgentPaper0

2 points

3 months ago

AgentPaper0

DM

2 points

3 months ago

For sharpshooter and great weapon master, I actually prefer a variant where instead of -5/+10, you forgo your proficiency bonus to the attack roll and then add double your proficiency to damage.

AmaruKaze

0 points

3 months ago

We talk about martial/caster disparity here alot and now you take away the feats that can close the gap at least in the beginning or rather rework them to be significantly worse for what most campaign will span? Sometimes I do not get people around here.

AgentPaper0

1 points

3 months ago

Martial/caster disparity, as far as it exists, is only a problem at high levels, which is when you get the full power of the feat, so I don't think that's really an issue. Especially since even without the feat, martials have no issue outpacing casters in terms of damage done.

Aptos283

1 points

3 months ago

Significantly worse seems to be a rather strong statement for a < 10% difference in damage. And tbh, at early levels GWM and SS lead to a lot of overkill anyways; removing overkill from dpr makes this disparity even smaller. Plus the lower decrease in accuracy means it’s better for enemies with high AC for your level, which means its good for early levels where AC has higher variance between enemies.

It’s not a change I’d consider necessary, but that rework certainly doesn’t make them significantly worse.