D&D 5E Ban Variant-Human! Impact?

[DND_Reborn]

The other races benefits don't balance out though.

True, which is why we balanced them out and as I quoted our current party composition, everyone likes playing lots of different races now. If you think variant is too good, balance it out.

No idea where you go the impression that anyone cared only about raw numbers.

Not intended for you (other people are participating here, you know) and just a general observation that the standard human option can be powerful, too.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Why are speaking again as if there is one true answer to this question and you possess it and everyone else who isn't seeing it like you just hasn't thought it through as well as you have?

And no, I am not putting words in your mouth. I can quote you in this thread for every summary of your position I just gave.

please do so

People say things like this all the time - but sometimes it's the truth and sometimes they just haven't analyzed their games enough to really understand what's occurring.

How's that? I'll leave your other positions to @Mistwell if he cares to.

 

[Mistwell]

please do so

Sure.

1.

No racial combination of abilities is better than a feat for a number of classes (which classes those are depends slightly on stat generation method).

2.

That's likely the best racial ability you could come up with and it's still inferior to the actual feats the variant human gets to select.

3.

People say things like this all the time - but sometimes it's the truth and sometimes they just haven't analyzed their games enough to really understand what's occurring.

#1 and #2 you're saying absolutist statements. You say NO races (without exception) are better than a feat for some classes, and the best racial ability is still inferior to feats without exception. #3 you say people just have not analyzed their games enough to understand as well as you have.

It's super annoying and incredibly unpersuasive when you make statements like that. It's why you get more people disagreeing with you sometimes that you otherwise would. You make a lot of perfectly reasonable statements (which I often agree with by the way, and I've tried to tell you that when it happens) that people would often agree with and expand on, but then add these kickers which imply "I am smarter than you" and "there is no reasonable way to disagree with my position because it's absolutist in nature" and it pisses a lot of people off into disagreeing with you anyway.

I am asking why you do that? Is it intentional or do you just not know you're doing it? If it's intentional, why?

 

[pkt77242]

It gets a feat that doesn't require forgoing an ASI. That's what is meant by free.



That's likely the best racial ability you could come up with and it's still inferior to the actual feats the variant human gets to select.

1. That isn’t what free means. There is a cost associated.
2. In your opinion it is inferior.

Having said that why not limit what feats can be chosen by variant humans instead of removing the variant human. No GWM, No sharpshooter, etc.

 

[DND_Reborn]

1. That isn’t what free means. There is a cost associated.
2. In your opinion it is inferior.

Having said that why not limit what feats can be chosen by variant humans instead of removing the variant human. No GWM, No sharpshooter, etc.

Yeah, I suggested a limited list of feats for human variant as well. It was ignored.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure.

1.

2.

3.

#1 and #2 you're saying absolutist statements. You say NO races (without exception) are better than a feat for some classes, and the best racial ability is still inferior to feats without exception. #3 you say people just have not analyzed their games enough to understand as well as you have.

It's super annoying and incredibly unpersuasive when you make statements like that. It's why you get more people disagreeing with you sometimes that you otherwise would. You make a lot of perfectly reasonable statements (which I often agree with by the way, and I've tried to tell you that when it happens) that people would often agree with and expand on, but then add these kickers which imply "I am smarter than you" and "there is no reasonable way to disagree with my position because it's absolutist in nature" and it pisses a lot of people off into disagreeing with you anyway.

I am asking why you do that? Is it intentional or do you just not know you're doing it? If it's intentional, why?

That's ridiculous. Anything I say is my opinion. Just because I don't put an IMO before or after it doesn't mean that's any less of the case.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yeah, I suggested a limited list of feats for human variant as well. It was ignored.

Then let me make it clear. I think it's a terrible idea.

 

[FrogReaver]

How's that? I'll leave your other positions to @Mistwell if he cares to.

You quoted me saying it could either be true or something else as evidence of me saying there is only one true answer...

Come on man. I know you disliked that response but if there was an issue with it - it isn't the issue you are claiming it was in this post.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm saying starting with a feat at level 1 is too much because:
1. It doesn't cost an ASI that could be boosting your main stat

Doesnt a Variant Human have fewer stat points than the standard, overall, as well as a lower stat bonus than every other race.

2. Feat effects at low levels are relatively stronger than they are at higher levels.

;You could delay the feat, or bring in it's effects over Apprentice Teir, instead.

 

[FrogReaver]

1. It doesn't cost an ASI that could be boosting your main stat

Doesnt a Variant Human have fewer stat points than the standard, overall, as well as a lower stat bonus than every other race.[/QUOTE]

1. many feats that are extradinarily good also give a +1 ASI bringing the variant human up to the same stats as most other races.

2. The impact of a +2 stat highly depends on stat generation method. In point by it's not super meaningful. In standard array it means a potential +1 in a seconday stat. In rolled stats it just depends on what you roll.

;You could delay the feat, or bring in it's effects over Apprentice Teir, instead.

Only resolves one of the two issues I mentioned. The issue about a free feat being to strong to fast is still in place.