D&D 5E How much do you value your Con score?

[CTurbo]

I personally think having a good Con score is a priority in 5e. I mean I'm not going to bump it before maxing my attack/casting stat, but it's almost certainly second. Maybe it's because after all these years, I still prefer to play a tough melee character. It's easy to max Con with some characters like Fighter, Barb, and Rogue, but not so much with the MAD characters.

I've just noticed that 5e characters are already a lot squishier than 4e characters and low level characters with a poor Con score are extra fragile.

The reason I made this post is I've had a lot more time on my hands than normal and I've done a lot of reading people's guides and handbooks as well as a lot of the characters in the character build thread. I've noticed a lot of them ignore Con completely, and it got me wondering if I valued Con too much.

 

[KahlessNestor]

I temd to make my Con tertiary. But then I often play martial casters like clerics. Even the quick builds only make Con secondary in a few cases. My current fighter only has a 10 in Con because I was trying to make Oberyn Martel, so I needed Dex for AC and cool moves, Strength for the longspear, and Charisma for being cool and charming and hedonistic.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[jgsugden]

It is the third best ability score on most PCs. Some barbarians make it number two and a reasonable number of arcane spellcasters also make it number two, but few put it down at 4th best or worse.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

My players universally took Con as their secondary, with the exception of the barbarian who took it as primary.

Constitution is three times as useful in 5E as it was in 3E, since it not only gives you extra HP to stay alive, but it also improves the rate at which you heal overnight and the amount you heal by spending hit dice. Previously, it would increase your maximum, but recovery came from outside sources and did not discriminate on the basis of your stats.

 

[Shiroiken]

Sadly, Con has been made one of the universal "must have" ability scores. Anyone who has a negative score is either under restrictions (such as roll in order, or crazy bad rolls), has suffered severe in game penalties (like a curse from a deity or something), or is flat out suicidal. Most players I know consider anything less than a 12 to be crazy, with a 14 preferred. I do similar myself, given the option.

 

[flametitan]

If I can I try for at least a 12, but I don't value it over my primary stats.

 

[Prakriti]

Constitution is good for combat, but it has no skills tied to it, which severely diminishes its value in some campaigns. Considering the number of History, Nature, Religion, and Insight checks that my players have failed lately, Con really doesn't look all that impressive to me at the moment.

 

[mellored]

On a scale of 1 to 20, i'd say it's a 12 for ranged, 14 for the front line.

 

[Dausuul]

I don't have a problem with putting 10 in Con. That said, I tend to play spellcasters who don't rely too heavily on concentration spells, with other (high-Con) people to tank for me, so for the most part I only have to worry about the occasional stray monster that gets past the front line.

 

[CTurbo]

Wow I couldn't imagine only having a 10 in Con. How do you have any HP? Do you start the encounter dead, or do die after the first round? haha jk

There are 2 players that play with me that put 12 in Con and they're always getting knocked out and we're at level 4.

I always like my characters to have 16-18 at least.