D&D 5E Is the Variant Human ALWAYS better than standard human?

[merwins]

I rolled 10,13,13,13,13,15 for abilities.

For a variant human, I get two abilities over the hump, plus a skill and a feat. Maybe the feat bumps a third ability into the next break.

For standard human, I get FIVE abilities over the hump. This seems like a better choice with this set of abilities.

Any other perspectives on this? I have no idea what character I want to play, nor whether Human is the race I want to be. It's just something that occurred to me while going through my options.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Need more data. You're talking about essentially trading a feat for +1 to four ability scores, which means that in order for it to be "worth it" you'd need to be pretty MAD already. But that array isn't really good enough to support a MAD character. It's not like it's 17 17 17 17 15 11 or anything.

BTW, one of my relatively few house rules is designed for a situation very much like yours: in order for odd ability scores not to be pointless, at my table an odd ability score gives you an extra +1 to ability checks (but not saving throws or attack rolls). So Dex 15, for example, is mechanically distinct from Dex 14 in that it makes you better at sneaking.

My gut feel is that if I rolled the array you're looking at, I'd leave the odd scores odd and just use them to support a mildly MAD concept that requires a 13 for multiclassing. E.g. Str 13 Dex 13 Con 14 Int 16 Wis 13 Cha 10 Life Cleric 1/Enchanter X with Mobile feat (for Booming Blade, and to cancel out movement penalties from armor) as the party tank. I value Mobile in this scenario more highly than Str 14 Dex 14 Wis 14 Cha 11, but that's probably partly due to my house rule. Regular human would be a defensible choice.

 

[merwins]

Thanks! I hadn't considered multiclassing.

We're only using PHB material right now. I'd have to convince the GM that he wants to go slightly off the rails to get anything from other books (even the DMG).

And yeah, i know these stats "feel" like limbo. Overall, they're above average, but that's it. It's making it really tough for me to figure out what to do.

 

[Unwise]

I think the thing to do is look at level 4, where both would have picked up another ASI or Feat.

Human has +3 +2 +2 +2 +2 +0 and a Feat
V.Human has +3 +2 +2 +2 +1 +0 and a Feat and a skill, if they chose to even out their stats. So even if you for some reason wanted really balanced stats, the V.Human is just as good, if not better, trading a +1 to your second worst stat for one skill.

The main difference is that the V.Human has options, often better ones:
1) Another Feat is likely better than +1 in your third and fourth stats
2) +2 to your main stat is almost certainly better
3) You can take a +1 stat feat and still get your tertiary stat up to an even score, with the added feat benefit

I would love standard humans to have some benefit, but they just don't. I rolled very similar stats on my character but even under those optimal conditions, it was still just not worth it.

In one game I am in the DM gives humans +2 to every stat, but that cannot bring them above 14. That makes them the go to race for people that want to play MAD classes who didn't roll well enough to do so.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Any other perspectives on this? I have no idea what character I want to play, nor whether Human is the race I want to be. It's just something that occurred to me while going through my options.

You have one good score, and no weaknesses. Since AC is important, you either want to put your one good score in Dex, or you want to wear heavy armor (and presumably put your good score in Strength). An elf or halfling rogue or ranger would be fine (with good Dex), as would any sort of heavy fighter (with good Strength). Medium armor caps out at Dex 14, which you can reach with a secondary stat if you have a racial bonus.

Over all, there are very few things which I would rule out with that lineup. I would probably avoid playing a monk or paladin, since those both benefit greatly from having two good stats, and you wouldn't be living up to your potential until very late. You could do a dwarf wizard, but a wizard of any other race would be seriously hurting in the AC department.

For what it's worth, though, your rolls are very similar to those of a warlock in the game I'm currently running. His AC has consistently been the worst in the party (in the 13-16 range), but it's never really been an issue. All characters in 5E are resilient enough that they can get by with mediocre stats.

 

[jgsugden]

From an optimization standpoint, there are certain builds that do not get a lot of benefit out of a feat. For those few situations, it may make sense to go with the non-variant, but most classes find the bonus feat to be better. Getting the 'bump' when you have a lot of off abilities is nice, but you'll rarely find a time when you have so many odd abilities in states that really matter that the 2 bumps you get from the variant are not good enough to get the important bumps.

From a roleplaying perspective: Do what makes sense for the character and don't worry about optimal. If it makes no sense for the PC to be a master of anything, then having them start with a feat is a bit odd unless the feat is Lucky or another non-knowledge/skill based concept.

 

[Ganymede81]

I rolled 10,13,13,13,13,15 for abilities.

For a variant human, I get two abilities over the hump, plus a skill and a feat. Maybe the feat bumps a third ability into the next break.

For standard human, I get FIVE abilities over the hump. This seems like a better choice with this set of abilities.

In 5th Edition, odd ability scores are nowhere near the problem they were in earlier editions as the +2 to a stat can be split up to top off two different odd stats.

 

[Evenglare]

ALWAYS?. If you are part of the internet, nothing is "always" anything (corollary when someone says "Am I the only one who... " the answer is always NO you are not. ). It's foolish to even ask a question like that. How could a variant ALWAYS be better if you roll? An easy proof by contradiction is that you know that you can roll a whole selection of stats that are even numbers, right? That's the nature of randomly generating ability scores.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

We're only using PHB material right now. I'd have to convince the GM that he wants to go slightly off the rails to get anything from other books (even the DMG).

Multiclassing rules are in the PHB, though they are officially listed as optional, so it would still be up to your DM if anyone is allowed to multiclass or not.

 

[merwins]

Multiclassing rules are in the PHB, though they are officially listed as optional, so it would still be up to your DM if anyone is allowed to multiclass or not.

Yes. Sorry. Hemlock had suggested something called Booming Blade, which didn't look familiar to me. I think it's from Sword Coast? That's why I made that comment about PHB only.