D&D 5E Are proficiency swaps too strong for some races?

[ScuroNotte]

You can swap out armor or a weapon for a weapon or tool. In the example, an elf can swap a long sword for a tool as per page 8. So if a player playing an Elf martial character who already gains martial weapons through the class, can swap the 4 weapons (longsword, shortsword, shortbow, longbow) for 4 tools. Or a martial Mountain Dwarf character can exchange 4 weapons and 2 armor proficiencies for 6 tools.
Or am I over reacting.

 

[Kobold Stew]

No, it's a big weakness, and it was in the UA. I'm prepared to allow a character to swap all-racial-weapon-proficiencies for a weapon or a tool, but not one-for one.

 

[ScuroNotte]

No, it's a big weakness, and it was in the UA. I'm prepared to allow a character to swap all-racial-weapon-proficiencies for a weapon or a tool, but not one-for one.

I am confused. If you will allow a swap of all proficiencies for 1 tool vs one for one as stated in the book, then you think the original intent as in the book it is too strong. Otherwise why the restriction.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I apologize -- I'm agreeing with you. The rule as written is problematic (it's a big weakness of the section).

Sorry that wasn't clear. You are not over-reacting.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I think really the fix is just to not let anyone swap away weapon proficiencies because of overlap with class proficiencies, or to allow only a single weapon-for weapon/tool swap.

 

[Undrave]

You can swap out armor or a weapon for a weapon or tool. In the example, an elf can swap a long sword for a tool as per page 8. So if a player playing an Elf martial character who already gains martial weapons through the class, can swap the 4 weapons (longsword, shortsword, shortbow, longbow) for 4 tools. Or a martial Mountain Dwarf character can exchange 4 weapons and 2 armor proficiencies for 6 tools.
Or am I over reacting.

It’s tools... they’re barely useful, I’m not sure what makes it broken??

 

[ScuroNotte]

I think really the fix is just to not let anyone swap away weapon proficiencies because of overlap with class proficiencies.

True, but that is not clarified. Also a player may point out that if they are already proficient in said weapon or armor, then it is a waste of a feature

 

[ScuroNotte]

It’s tools... they’re barely useful, I’m not sure what makes it broken??

Its not going to break the game but makes taking that race more appealing. They also can be relevant depending on game. Music instruments would allow a Bard to have a greater chance of using a magical musical instrument. Or a player gambler to be more proficient in more games. Or charlatan to gain disguise, forgery, calligrapher's to better infiltrate a ball/event. It is situational, but can affect game play or give 1 character greater advantage over another.

 

[ninjayeti]

With the possible exception of thieves' tools I see tool proficiencies as something that helps define your character, rather than something that makes your character more powerful. If a player wanted to be a alchemist/brewer/blacksmith/carpenter/cartographer/
cook/glassblower/etc. I think it's probably a pretty goofy concept, but it is not going to unbalance encounters or let them outshine the other PCs so I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

[Charlaquin]

It’s tools... they’re barely useful, I’m not sure what makes it broken??

Depending on how your DM handles proficiencies, a tool can be about as useful as a skill. Even in games where most tools aren’t very useful (which I concede is probably most games), Thieves’ Tools and Herbalism Kit are still pretty useful at least.

To answer the question though, I’d say yes and no. Some races are much stronger with this rule in play. But even mountain dwarves, who benefit from it more than any other race, are still far from broken. I imagine most players are still going to pick races for flavor first, and those who try to game the system won’t gain that much of an advantage from it.