My paladin is now level 4 and has 19 strength and 15 charisma. I know it is probably better to take the ability score increase and get another +1 on the majority of rolls I’ll be making but that’s just so boring!

I’m taking Shield Master instead.

Does anyone else have this conflict?


Most people seem to be misunderstanding. I don’t mind having to make “tough choices” in general, only when the obviously correct choice is boring and the suboptimal one is the cool fun one.

  • eerongal@ttrpg.networkM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    i’ve personally (as DM) let players have both a feat and an ASI at the appropriate levels. Honestly doesn’t hurt balance that much overall, just makes for slightly more powerful PCs.

    • Dalimey@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I heard one DM say that they let the players choose, either they get to pick a feat, or they pick an ASI and the DM chooses a feat for them. The reason being that it means that the player has the chance to pick one of the big power spike feats (GWM, PAM, Sentinel, War caster) or get an ASI and get something thats not quite as big an impact mechanically, but helps develop the flavor of their character ( think like actor, charger, heavily armored). I haven’t tried it, but I want to give it a shot some time.

      • EssentialCoffee@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We got a book off DM’s guild several years ago that was something like ‘Talents’, which were basically like a minor feat. Something like that would be cool to flavor in periodically.

        I have one that lets me add my Charisma bonus to smites.

    • TheFunVacuum@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      OP, this is a good homebrew rule to talk to your DM and fellow players about. Some tables prefer to keep it as-is, citing that it picking between the two makes for a meaningful choice. Others, me included, prefer to have their cake and eat it too. It’ll make your campaign feel a little bit more high fantasy, with a party of adventurers that all have 20 in their main stats. For many, that’s a positive.

      If your DM is comfortable adjusting encounters for a party with maxed stats and a couple extra feats, it’s (imo) a great rule to run with.

    • TotallyNotADolphin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same. I feel like the ASI give the pc more of a gradual power bump, and the feats let’s them make the character more “their’”, whether they choose something for RP, supporting a particular playstyle/build or something else. As a player I sometimes feel bad for having to decide between being stronger or making a fun character