D&D 5E Do you miss attribute minimums/maximums?

[MechaPilot]

@MechaPilot
I will disagree. If you have had any min/maxer in your games. You'll see that they, invariably, follow the same path. Starting stats: 15, 8, 14, 10 or 13, 12, 13 or 10. If variant humans are allowed 1 point in strenght, and one in the 13 where ever it is. (int for the eldritch knight variant, cha for the blade lock variant). Already two different choice? Wow... Again a counscious choice. If you keep the fighter a champion or a battle master it won't matter. Progression will stay the same from one character to another. Yes with the right background, the right player differences will abound, the logic behind the progression won't.

The feat taken will be obviously GWM. Then level 4. ASI into Strength. Level 6, ASI into Strength again. Level 12. ASI into Constitution. Level 14 ASI into Constitution, Level 16 ASI into Constitution again if the campaign goes that far. May be the Tough feat could be sneaked in somewhere.

But take the example of a player who rolled. 14, 15, 14, 10, 6, 14. Ho man... my life is broken, I wanted to do a great weapon master and now I am stuck with a bad array... I'll do one anyway. Stat placement Maybe St and Dex? Feat? Great weapon master. The player starts as a great weapon weilder. Maybe along the way he'll chose medium armor master? Raise is St and Dex at level 6. Dip into the warlock class to get a bit of an extra whomp for a few levels. Now I can imagine a player making a pact to get power and going to every extent possible to find those gauntlets of ogre's power. Some items becomes quite important when you know that the high strength is not that reachable. A 16 might become satisfactory.

A set up like this can bring great role play. Even a totaly perfect beginner will have to role play it through. Especialy if the DM demands a Role Play reason to dip into an other class. Here the player would be more or less nudge into the warlock or sorcerer style. But what if he chose paladin hood instead? He could get an other fighting style (probably defense). Would get the lay on hand. Who knows?

Yes you can do that with the point buy. But you probably won't do it unless you are an experienced player. Most novice will stick to what they have. Race and Class min/max attribute can give the little nudge they need to get into it.

I have two min-maxers at my table, and neither of them play variant human (one is a half-elf, the other is a goliath).

The player of the goliath character picked polearm mastery as his first feat.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

"The setting" implies or assumes that there is only one setting. D&D has a diversity of settings, all the more so when you consider that "homebrew" is the second most popular setting among the fans.

There are a lot of different settings, but most of them have quite a bit in common, since they're all based on the same core material. Dragonborn aren't a generic fantasy thing, at all, even a little bit. They show up in some (but not all) D&D settings, and there are analogues in several other settings, but they're still just a setting detail that nevertheless managed to weasel its way into the base game. Exactly like alignment restrictions.

True Neutral druids and Lawful Good paladins are setting details that managed to find their way into a base game, and when AD&D was the current edition, that meant those details were copied to most (but not all) D&D settings. And now that it is no longer the current edition, those details are no longer preserved, but other details from the current base game are copied instead. And given that the base game is loaded down with setting-specific details either way, whether those details come in the form of weird races or class restrictions is just a matter of preference.

 

[MechaPilot]

There are a lot of different settings, but most of them have quite a bit in common, since they're all based on the same core material. Dragonborn aren't a generic fantasy thing, at all, even a little bit. They show up in some (but not all) D&D settings, and there are analogues in several other settings, but they're still just a setting detail that nevertheless managed to weasel its way into the base game. Exactly like alignment restrictions.

True Neutral druids and Lawful Good paladins are setting details that managed to find their way into a base game, and when AD&D was the current edition, that meant those details were copied to most (but not all) D&D settings. And now that it is no longer the current edition, those details are no longer preserved, but other details from the current base game are copied instead. And given that the base game is loaded down with setting-specific details either way, whether those details come in the form of weird races or class restrictions is just a matter of preference.

A race has far less impact on the game than one's class does.

A race being included in the PHB in no way means that it's going to be a part of all settings; it is simply an option to be selected.

Weaving setting-specific details into classes impairs a part of the game that determines a very large part of a player's D&D experience.

 

[Helldritch]

I have two min-maxers at my table, and neither of them play variant human (one is a half-elf, the other is a goliath).

The player of the goliath character picked polearm mastery as his first feat.

Then, for the moment, he's not a GWM, yet...
Again a conscious choice, planned in advanced. He's just doing what any min/maxer would do. 4th GWM. 6th ASI in Strength. From then on all bets are on but if he keeps to the fighter class, the logical choice will constitution up to 20 (or maybe the Tough feat at some point). If he intends to switch class for a bit, then it would be nice to see what "he chose" as his stat for the second class.

You bring nothing new. It is not by showing an other character concept that my point of view will crumble under the weight of logic. Variant stats will bring variant choices. I was comparing human variant with a human variant. Do the same, please, and you'll see that I am right (or at least not too far off the trail ). The progression of the goliath character will follow the same line as other characters of the same build/choice. Simply because there is no way to prevent the build to be done.

Again I see nothing wrong with with your point of view but the point buy/set stat variant does nothing to encourage new players into RP. What if the Goliath wants to be a warlock too? He'll put a good stat into charisma. With the standard array it is quite easy to do. 13 CN, 14 Cha. And voilà! Ask any players with the default array to reproduce your Goliath charater and he will do the same, even without seeing the original character. With the rolled up array and min/max requirement, one player might not be able to "qualify" for the warlock and would go instead to the ranger? Or the wizard? Or even the cleric? Now this is something you won't see often in 5th edition. With the class/race min/max requirement some doors can be locked, others will be wide open that no one would've chosen otherwise...

 

[MechaPilot]

Then, for the moment, he's not a GWM, yet...
Again a conscious choice, planned in advanced. He's just doing what any min/maxer would do. 4th GWM. 6th ASI in Strength. From then on all bets are on but if he keeps to the fighter class, the logical choice will constitution up to 20 (or maybe the Tough feat at some point). If he intends to switch class for a bit, then it would be nice to see what "he chose" as his stat for the second class.

He didn't pick the obviously op variant human. He's past 4th lvl and has not taken GWM. Haven't you already had your fill of making incorrect prognostications?

You bring nothing new. It is not by showing an other character concept that my point of view will crumble under the weight of logic. Variant stats will bring variant choices. I was comparing human variant with a human variant. Do the same, please, and you'll see that I am right (or at least not too far off the trail ). The progression of the goliath character will follow the same line as other characters of the same build/choice. Simply because there is no way to prevent the build to be done.

You can't prevent it so it's inevitable, despite different people being . . . different? Sorry, but that's ridiculous on its face.

Again I see nothing wrong with with your point of view but the point buy/set stat variant does nothing to encourage new players into RP. What if the Goliath wants to be a warlock too? He'll put a good stat into charisma. With the standard array it is quite easy to do. 13 CN, 14 Cha. And voilà! Ask any players with the default array to reproduce your Goliath charater and he will do the same, even without seeing the original character. With the rolled up array and min/max requirement, one player might not be able to "qualify" for the warlock and would go instead to the ranger? Or the wizard? Or even the cleric? Now this is something you won't see often in 5th edition. With the class/race min/max requirement some doors can be locked, others will be wide open that no one would've chosen otherwise...

Class minimums don't encourage new players to RP either. It just encourages them to make characters that will be as successful as possible given what was rolled. With or without minimums, players want their characters to be competent at what they do.

Also, where is this mechanical focus coming from when considering quality RP? Characters, apparently, are nothing but their stats, feats, etc. I can make two characters of exactly the same stats, race, class, and build and make them both into very different and well-rounded people.

 

[Maxperson]

Bolded for emphasis

"The setting" implies or assumes that there is only one setting. D&D has a diversity of settings, all the more so when you consider that "homebrew" is the second most popular setting among the fans.

When the base game binds classes to settings as part of the default, then you have to unravel those bonds when you play any other setting. It's far more logical for the base game to be as flexible as possible and to have the material that details the different settings provide the ties that bind classes to those settings.

I agree. The base game has to be more generic in order to fit with multiple settings.

2) Mordenkainen, presumably, was a powerful enough wizard to engage in planar travel, and for his name and magical legacy to spread among many of the published D&D worlds.

No need to presume. He has met with Elminster and Dalamar to trade spells and magic items on multiple occasions.

 

[Helldritch]

He didn't pick the obviously op variant human. He's past 4th lvl and has not taken GWM. Haven't you already had your fill of making incorrect prognostications?

What??? He didn't take the feat at fourth level? Wait for level 6 or 8. It does not matter when, he will take the feat. IF he is the min/maxer you claim him to be. What you call prognostications, I call experience. As I have said, I introduced over a hundred players into the RPG specificaly D&D. I am still in contact with about 3 dozens DM in D&D and the trend is there. Maybe your personal experience shows you otherwise, but in the long run, it boils down to what I have said.

Class minimums don't encourage new players to RP either. It just encourages them to make characters that will be as successful as possible given what was rolled. With or without minimums, players want their characters to be competent at what they do.

At least you gave me that point. From that point on, going the RP route for a novice is just a small step to make and not the giant leap that the set array involves.

Also, where is this mechanical focus coming from when considering quality RP? Characters, apparently, are nothing but their stats, feats, etc. I can make two characters of exactly the same stats, race, class, and build and make them both into very different and well-rounded people.

Of course you can. I have absolutely no doubts about that. But what of the young inexperienced player? He needs a little nudge in the RP direction. When you have everything you want from the start, there is nothing to strive for. When the odds are not so favourable, you find ways to achieve your goals that are not from the normal receipe. With a bit of enticement, the young player will quickly mature into a well rounded RPGamer. The stats can explain the character's choices when they are different from one character to an other. With all the same stats, and no racial/classes min/max, all you have is the same chocolate cake that the neighbourg has. The decoration might be different, but the essence is the same. Whereas with the random stats, min/max racial/class requirement, you get to see strange choices. A pure 20th level champion with an 18 intelligence? You will not see that with the standard array. Never. But I have seen a 31st level Paladin with a score of 16 in intelligence. I have seen a wizard with 17 in strength that never took a single level in fighter class.

My first character ever made was a a lawfull good fighter with a 16 strength (about a 12 with today's way of calculating stats bonuses) and an 18 in intelligence. Arcana rolled at that. I switch to dual class as a wizard around level 7 and the RP involved, with the help of the master and the other players is still remember among us. I was almost 11 years old at the time. My fighter was lame, and yet, I assured a place in the imagination of my team mate as I switch to wizard and became their most powerful ally. I rose up to level 20 in three years. How could it have been done if I had had my way? I would've had the standard 16 in strength, maybe 14 in intelligence (I would've gone eldritch knight with the current rules...). I have seen this happening in first edition dozens upon dozens of times. Even in the 2e it was possible and to a certain extent in 3e. 4th and 5th edition removed the racial/class min/max requirement altogether and it saddens me a bit.

The one thing I am proud to see however is the removal of race ban on certain class. Now we can see dwarven wizards, elven bards and elven cleric going into high levels, gnome paladins (got one in one my groups, he's a blast to see) and many other things that were unimaginable back then.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

A race has far less impact on the game than one's class does.

A race being included in the PHB in no way means that it's going to be a part of all settings; it is simply an option to be selected.

Weaving setting-specific details into classes impairs a part of the game that determines a very large part of a player's D&D experience.

That's an interesting perspective. To me, it looks like races and classes are at least equally important in terms of defining a setting. But when you get into all of the sub-races, and how they also fit into the world, races probably go even further than classes in defining how the world works. Logically, declaring a world as being devoid of monks would have less of an impact than saying there are no Dragonborn at all.

I mean, there's no reason to assume that a setting-designer is going to intentionally edit down the race list while leaving the class list perfectly intact, unless you view the race stuff is inherently flavorful and the class stuff as basically just mechanical, such that the latter should be able to fit anywhere even if the former cannot. I don't know if it's in the PHB, but the DMG flat out tells us that the DM (when acting as setting-designer) has free reign to allow or disallow any race or class as they see fit.

 

[Igwilly]

I don't know if it's in the PHB, but the DMG flat out tells us that the DM (when acting as setting-designer) has free reign to allow or disallow any race or class as they see fit.

Well, we discussed about that. I think it's, in the end, a false promisse.
Long story short: in many occasions, if the DM has to impose restrictions, s/he is the bad guy, spoiling the player's fun. If s/he takes out restrictions, s/he is the cool guy; the one that "breaks" the rules so you can "have fun".
Doing such changes (imposing restrictions) between long time friends is easy - you can do almost anything in this case. But with some people you met not long ago, and have the "everything goes" mode activated, this can have serious impacts. You may even lose players.
I even admit it took a while for me to appreciate limits like this. I wish I don't have to convince all new players of that before they begin playing at my games; that's a lot of energy hahaha.

 

[MechaPilot]

But what of the young inexperienced player? He needs a little nudge in the RP direction.

Isn't that what mentors and role models are for? Are the elder gamers who brought the little one into the D&D fold not teaching her RP by way of being good examples for the tyke? Is the DM not encouraging her to engage in meaningful non-combat actions in game? Does the DM not make connections with the RP elements of the elder gamers' characters that result in them getting more subplot or spotlight time than if they were bland piles of stats?