D&D 5E A simple questions for Power Gamers, Optimizers, and Min-Maxers.

[The Crimson Binome]

Do you see this as a good thing, either thematically or systemwise?

Yes, I wish games would do more to encourage this sort of thing. If elves are thematically supposed to be good rangers, then I want the mechanics of the system to reflect that. It would be boring if every race was equally good at everything, and it would be inauthentic of the mechanics didn't support (or actively went against!) the narrative.

The example which comes to mind is in 3E, where (thematically) elves were supposed to be great wizards and dwarves were supposed to distrust arcane magic, but (mechanically) Con was one of the most important stats for wizards, so dwarven wizards ended up outnumbering elven wizards by a significant margin. The game mechanics didn't go nearly far enough to support the narrative that they were trying to promote.

 

[Sunseeker]

OK, but will that fly with the crowd who want everything about their character to have some reflection in the game mechanics? I rather doubt it...

Who says they wouldn't? Dwarves could still have their Iron Stomach traits, Half-Orcs would have their "I'm not dead yet!" traits. There's plenty of interesting features you can use to represent each race. But utilizing "racial features" forces the designers to get creative. To figure out "how is this short stumpy human different from that tall skinny human?" Being creative is hard. Maybe all Gnomes are proficient in "Use Device" or all elves have some innate druidic magic. (like that cantrip that makes flowers bloom).

Thematic racial elements also force players to think creatively about their characters and make power-building a more creative endeavor. Fighters should always be strong. Sorcerers should always be charismatic. There's no reason that Dwarves should always be strong or Tieflings should always be charismatic.

Personally, I don't mind a character's race having an impact on its stats; though I prefer if the impact skews the bell curve rather than being a flat + or -. For example, instead of saying a Dwarf gets a flat +2 on strength just have the Dwarf's strength range be from 7-19 instead of 3-18, and adjust accordingly. Dwarves might also have a charisma range of 3-16 instead of 3-18, and so on. To do this for each stat for each race can be a bit tedious, but the good news is you only have to do it once. And humans, as the standard-setters, are always 3-18 on everything - with no adjustment for gender, to keep it simple.

Lan-"we've already done this long ago; I can point you to our adjustment tables (they're online) on request"-efan

Personally I think racial stat modifiers and ranges promote concepts our society is rapidly outgrowing, is the verbose way of saying what I'm thinking.

 

[dave2008]

Personally I think racial stat modifiers and ranges promote concepts our society is rapidly outgrowing, is the verbose way of saying what I'm thinking.

But we are all humans, i.e. we are the same race. Ideally I think fantasy races that are actually quite different, should have that reflected in the mechanics to a greater degree.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

Empirically, after the fact. Publish a ruleset where dwarves and halflings make for significantly better paladins than elves and gnomes do, and then let people play with it. You should end up seeing a lot more dwarf paladins and halfling paladins than elf paladins or gnome paladins.

...And this empirical information comes from?

And the accuracy of it is checked by?

I mean, this ain't an online game. It's not every DM compiles a report and sends it to a database for later analysis by somebody with a degree.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

...And this empirical information comes from?

And the accuracy of it is checked by?

It doesn't matter. If your table is full of elven paladins and dwarven wizards, even though they're designed to be less powerful, then that doesn't affect anyone else who is playing the game in the expected manner. As long as the world is presented honestly, and the game mechanics reflect that presentation, then it doesn't matter whether someone chooses to play something weird. I mean, as long as it's fine with everyone else at the table.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

It doesn't matter. If your table is full of elven paladins and dwarven wizards, even though they're designed to be less powerful, then that doesn't affect anyone else who is playing the game in the expected manner. As long as the world is presented honestly, and the game mechanics reflect that presentation, then it doesn't matter whether someone chooses to play something weird. I mean, as long as it's fine with everyone else at the table.

Given that there are optimisers around who object to other player's characters using the wrong sword, having deliberately suboptimal race/class combinations sounds like a recipe for strife.

You might want to adjust the wording though. As it is written, it sounds like a player would actually need permission from other players to play some races/classes.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

It doesn't matter.

I see. So it doesn't matter if you can't provide any details on how anyone working for a game design company or playing a game might gather information in a unbiased manner about successful gaming strategies.

Why is that?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I see. So it doesn't matter if you can't provide any details on how anyone working for a game design company or playing a game might gather information in a unbiased manner about successful gaming strategies.

Why is that?

How did we get to the topic of someone working at a game design company analyzing successful gaming strategies? It's an RPG. It's successful if everyone has fun!

Games are art. The designers make the game they want to make, and if people like it, then they'll play it. If they don't, then they'll play something else.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Given that there are optimisers around who object to other player's characters using the wrong sword, having deliberately suboptimal race/class combinations sounds like a recipe for strife.

It's not a trap if it's clearly labelled, which is my point. If everything in the world is saying that dwarves shouldn't be wizards, then only the player can be blamed for deliberately choosing that. Although you could go one step further, and simply declare that dwarves can't be wizards at all. It makes little difference, in practice.

You might want to adjust the wording though. As it is written, it sounds like a player would actually need permission from other players to play some races/classes.

The only permission you ever need is from the DM, but if they're trying to promote a certain tone, then they'll probably encourage some character types over others. As a matter of courtesy, players should collaborate with each other and the DM on making characters that are appropriate for the game at hand.

 

[NotActuallyTim]

How did we get to the topic of someone working at a game design company analyzing successful gaming strategies? It's an RPG. It's successful if everyone has fun!

Games are art. The designers make the game they want to make, and if people like it, then they'll play it. If they don't, then they'll play something else.

...so you aren't an optimiser?