D&D (2024) 75 Feats -- not nearly enough

[MonsterEnvy]

Perjaps they should gpo all in on supporting your preference by including zero feats and zero magic items

How many pages do you think 75 feats and who knows how many magic items take up? Providing the GM with "guidance" on how to fix the game after not taking the heat for banning a defacto default standard with significant page count is not a solution to the initial failure in design that needs "guidance" for the GM to fix

I like both magic items and feats. Magic Items and Feats will be in different books too.

Also I am not sure I get your point.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I personally think Level 1 Feats and Level 4 + Feats that all have an ability score in them is fine as a system. Maybe they can bring higher level feats in later.

 

[Neonchameleon]

While presenting OD&D as a hacked wargame would be accurate, there's little evidence that's how 5e is played or presented.

But it's what the mechanics are - right down to an over heavy focus on combat and things that are actively hostile to telling the overwhelming majority of stories, like classes, levels, consequence free damage, and consequence free resurrection.

Testing for 5e should reflect how modern gamers use it, not how power gamers wish it was

This sounds like One True Way-ism to me. A lot of people use it in different ways, and trying to dismiss some of them by calling them "power gamers" doesn't help anyone.

I would however say that the game should be tested as is not how some wish it was. But the people who play the game as is and take the premise of actually adventuring and exploring dungeons and fighting dragons at the risk of their lives while not being suicidal get sneered at as "power gamers".

 

[Kobold Stew]

power gamers simply know the game better.

Wow. I couldn't disagree more with this.

I accept this is your view, and I often learn from what you post. But this really shows me what a diversity of views there are.

 

[tetrasodium]

Taking spotlight from their teammates because they're "better gamers" is a problem.

The game is built as a cooperative storytelling dice system. It should continue that.

No, that is a spotlight hog, possibly one with social skills that are rather tone deaf to those around them. In fact there's no better evidence for that than a video from TreantMonk himself explaining the origin of the "god wizard" as a concept... It starts with charge build Goliath fighter.

Spoiler: Origin of the God Wizard

Spoiler

There's a reason why 3.x outrage over "OP PCs" & similar tends to point towards various other Codzilla types & stuff like the vasrious charge/shocktrooper/spiked chain trip builds rather than the one with the most flashy eye catching name... Specifically because it's hard for a PC to steal the spotlight & make anyone feel overshadowed when that PC is at their best when making cranking everyone else past 11 on the dial.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

power gamers simply know the game better.

Yeah, count me in as someone who fundamentally disagrees with you here. They sometimes understand the math better. Is that what you mean? They are aware of the broken combos more? Maybe. But know the game better? No.

Also - there are plenty of people who understand all of those things and chose not to power game. Are you sure that you're not doing that ENWorld faux-pas of acting like a PLAYSTYLE CHOICE is somehow superior to others?

If they want to play Legolas, they will scour the 37 books to find best class(es), feats and prestige class(es) to make that concept work.

On a certain level. They don't necessarily wind up with anyone who's at all like Legolas. Just "the most powerful archer that D&D can make".

only problem it can arise if they find some game breaking combo and do not want to work with DM to "normalize" that combo or ability.

Yup. That's a problem.

If anything D&D playtesting should be run exclusively by powergamers, because the game needs to get broken 1st in order to get fixed.

I agree that Powergamers ought to have a PASS at the rules, if only to talk about what NOT to do. Though I would use Optimizers here - there are CharOp-minded people who aren't really Powergamers, and those are the people that I would prefer handle it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

But the people who play the game as is and take the premise of actually adventuring and exploring dungeons and fighting dragons at the risk of their lives while not being suicidal get sneered at as "power gamers".

I don't think that this happens. People only seem to be "sneered at" for being "power gamers" when they make characters that exploit the system to the detriment of the table. In a group that has a "power gaming" DM and other "power gaming" players and is having fun playing a powerful game - there's no Sneering.

(I mean, maybe if it gets described on a forum, like here, there will be people that scoff at the "power table" - but those people can shut up).

As long as everyone is having fun, there's no problem.

 

[Horwath]

Yeah, count me in as someone who fundamentally disagrees with you here. They sometimes understand the math better. Is that what you mean? They are aware of the broken combos more? Maybe. But know the game better? No.

you cannot break the game without knowing the game.

Also - there are plenty of people who understand all of those things and chose not to power game. Are you sure that you're not doing that ENWorld faux-pas of acting like a PLAYSTYLE CHOICE is somehow superior to others?

aren't you doing that by saying that powergaming is inferior playstyle choice?

On a certain level. They don't necessarily wind up with anyone who's at all like Legolas. Just "the most powerful archer that D&D can make".

that's the general idea.
it would be kind of dumb to roleplay THE Legolas, unless the campaign is recreating LotR.
but yeah, point is making THE BEST archer rules can allow.

Yup. That's a problem.

well, we agree on one thing.

I agree that Powergamers ought to have a PASS at the rules, if only to talk about what NOT to do. Though I would use Optimizers here - there are CharOp-minded people who aren't really Powergamers, and those are the people that I would prefer handle it.

many would say that those two are the same, or that there is significant overlap.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

you cannot break the game without knowing the game.

Sort of. You didn't say that powergamers knew the game WELL. You said that they knew the game BETTER. You have two problems with this theory: 1) The suggestion that people will never choose NOT to break the game if they know it well; 2) The power gamers who learn broken combos from SOMEONE ELSE. 90% of Power Gamers that I've played with get their broken combos from reading about them on the internet. They don't invent them themselves.

Again, I think you might be oversimplifying.

aren't you doing that by saying that powergaming is inferior playstyle choice?

When did I say that? I'm pretty sure NEVER.

that's the general idea.
it would be kind of dumb to roleplay THE Legolas, unless the campaign is recreating LotR.
but yeah, point is making THE BEST archer rules can allow.

Sure. But that doesn't make them "more Legolas", as your sentence implied.

well, we agree on one thing.

I suspect that we agree on more than one thing. Just not the above things.

many would say that those two are the same, or that there is significant overlap.

There's overlap, sure. But generally when people talk Power Gamers they're talking At the Table. I've seen plenty of Optimizers who check out the power level of features to AVOID broken combos (broken in both directions) and build characters that are appropriate to their tables. Whereas, I've seen plenty of Power Gamers who take the work of Optimizers and use it to be the most powerful guy in the game.

I'm all for a playtest pass by a good, thoughtful optimizer. IF that's what you've generally been meaning to say, then I agree with you - even if I quibble over some of your assertions.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Wow. I couldn't disagree more with this.

I accept this is your view, and I often learn from what you post. But this really shows me what a diversity of views there are.

And if you want diverse I find anti-powergamers to be the actual problem cases ... because a very large proportion are fundamentally opposed to roleplaying.

D&D is, when you get down to it about playing someone who goes into life threatening situations exploring dungeons and fighting dragons.

A powergamer is someone who wants to play a character who, when they go into life threatening situations, has as good a chance of survival as reasonably possible. This is accepting the premise and responding in a fundamentally appropriate way.

Powergamers are legion, and the details of how they do this varies a lot. It strongly correlates with an understanding of the details of the mechanics of the game, and there is a group of powergamers that to be blunt can't see the forest for the trees.

Meanwhile anti-powergamers, to hold this position, need to reject one of the premises:

• The game is about people in dangerous situations fighting for survival
• If you are fighting for survival an appropriate response for many people is to try hard not to die. And a good way to do that is by being strong and prepared - in other words power gaming.

The first is rejecting the premise of the game, and the second is rejecting roleplaying. (What normally happens in these cases IME is a whole lot of railroading GM fiat to keep people alive and the premise isn't true,; characters are in as much danger as actors on a set)

Now none of this prevents local metagames and etiquette. Trying to play pun-pun in an actual game would be silly. And a big part of the point of game design is to try to make something that works for all players and doesn't lead to Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit situations.

I don't think that this happens. People only seem to be "sneered at" for being "power gamers" when they make characters that exploit the system to the detriment of the table.

I've seen it happen.

People get sneered at by bad game designers writing in thee rulebooks excusing their bad game design by calling it "rollplaying not roleplaying" to excuse their failure to design a robust system. And people do post in threads claiming that powergamers are a problem in and of themselves - as happened right here in this thread.