D&D 5E What To Do With Racial ASIs?

[FrogReaver]

LOL, you're welcome...

Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut!

It isn't 67%. The way this poll works, it is actually a hair over 40% when you look at total votes:
View attachment 124014

It is still in the lead against the individual options, but "keeping them" while doing "something else" (e.g. float, move to class/background, boost array) is ahead with it at a total of 83 votes (27 + 38 + 15 ) currently.

So, as of right now more over all votes are in favor of change. Hope that doesn't turn the feelings in your gut too much....

That’s not accurate. There’s no way to know how many people only made 1 vote.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That’s not accurate. There’s no way to know how many people only made 1 vote.

Actually, it is pretty simple math to figure that out.

As it stands now with 202 total votes with 121 people voting, you have 81 people who voted twice (for 162 votes) and 40 who voted once (40 votes), for a total of 202 total votes.

Kinda surprised you thought there was no way to know that...

 

[CubicsRube]

I suppose in a lot of ways I tie background to culture quite a bit... A culture that is more "warlike" is likely to have more soldiers, for example. A culture that is more academic might have more sages.

A while ago someone (I think it was @CubicsRube IIRC) who did a thread on cultural modifiers into something like 12 variants. I was thinking about that two for this thread, but I would want something super simple if possible.

Maybe (just spit balling...) something like:

Academic
Agricultural
Military
Nomadic
Religious
etc.

Any race could have any "primary" cultural type? Each cultural type could offer a choice of two ASI +1. Like Agricultural might offer CON or WIS?
Then, if you want to include class, have each class offer an ASI +1 in either of the ability scores in which it has proficiency for saving throws?
Note: your cultural and class choices MUST be different.
Finally, throw in a single floating ASI +1. This represents an area the PC decided to improve themselves in prior to adventuring. This point can go wherever you want.

Races could have traits, but maybe no ASI and instead (if you want) cap the ability scores at 18, but offer a single 20 cap if warranted to represent the race? Such as Dwarves might have max CON 20 instead of 18.

Thanks for the mention. Yes I gave them generic names, so for example growing up in an Eyrie would give you cultural elements normally associated with high elves, such as proficiency in bows and swords and perception and the like.

I've always liked unusual combinations, so I like the idea of a grizzled and menacing elf that grew up in a barbarian tribe for example.

I voted for bonuses to be moved to class myself (if they were to be moved) just because it opens up more possibilities for folks. I know that many do say that you are free to work with a less optimal race/class combination, but no one can deny that there is incentive to stick to certain race-to-class tropes because of the ability score boosts associated with choice of race.

 

[FrogReaver]

Actually, it is pretty simple math to figure that out.

As it stands now with 202 total votes with 121 people voting, you have 81 people who voted twice (for 162 votes) and 40 who voted once (40 votes), for a total of 202 total votes.

Kinda surprised you thought there was no way to know that...

I mean the 1 votes aren’t evenly distributed and you have no idea how they are. Could be every 1 vote was for no change. That skews the results.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That skews the results.

Only if you make assumptions about the number of people and how they voted. I didn't. I spoke about the number of total votes. If you can vote twice, and choose not to... well, that is your choice and you are only exercising half your power in the poll (so to say).

 

[Maxperson]

LEAVE THEM ALONE!!!!! (caps intended)
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut!

A floating +1 from culture would be a nice idea. Not everything should be related to race.

And strange that the "leave them alone" is so far, the most popular option. At a wee bit over 67% and the second is class and background...

Thank you Dnd4vr for this poll. So far it proves that my gut feelings were not off the mark.

I like this idea. Instead of +2 from race and +1 from racial subtype, make it +2 from race and +1 from background OR +1 from race, +1 from subtype and +1 from background.

 

[DND_Reborn]

So, do we want a poll for just the move options? One vote only?

Choices might be:
Float +2, +1
Move to class
Move to background
Some other options???

I don't know. Thoughts? Suggestions?

 

[FrogReaver]

Only if you make assumptions about the number of people and how they voted. I didn't. I spoke about the number of total votes. If you can vote twice, and choose not to... well, that is your choice and you are only exercising half your power in the poll (so to say).

That’s how it’s skewed.

 

[DammitVictor]

I see nothing wrong with having racial ASI's, personally I think characters start with too many point buy stats but that is easily ammended with a lesser point buy for a grittier game. I'd prefer, like some others suggested, an 18 cap with your racial bonuses allowing one to reacher higher.

It wasn't really an issue in TSR D&D where characters didn't improve their ability scores as they leveled, or in 3e and 4e where characters could improve their ability scores indefinitely-- limited only by character level-- but combining regular ability score increases with ability score caps that a lucky character could hit at 1st level is one of the most incomprehensibly bad design decisions in 5e.

I really don't like racial stat modifiers. Just replace them with a feat (humans get 2 feats). If you do want stat bumps, let the background give a +1 and the class give a +2.

Both of these have the advantage that if your PC changes race (e.g. Reincarnate, curses, whatnot), you don't have to recalculate stats.

This. So much this, all of this forever. If you can legally, legitimately play a D&D character whose prime requisite does not get a bonus from the PC's race-- which is at least theoretically true-- then you do not need the 1st level racial ability score increases at all. They're not necessary.

Prior to AD&D, when races were classes, they didn't have racial ASIs. They were added in AD&D to differentiate members of one race from another, since they might be members of the same class. (They weren't necessary then.) They were supposed to be balanced against each other, and humans didn't get them in AD&D or 3.X. Humans started getting the "floating" ASIs in 4e and PF because nonhuman ASIs were adjusted to be "net positive" instead of balancing out.

They're unnecessary. If we're going to remove them because they are causing a problem with gameplay or because they are socially uncomfortable... we do not need to replace them with anything, and if we're going with the latter argument, that's a very strong argument against replacing them with anything.

Because if we're talking about replacing "elves are quicker and smarter than dwarves" because it's essentialist and problematic, but we're talking about replacing it with "the nobility are wiser and more beautiful than academics"... seriously, how is changing race/species bioessentialism into socioeconomic essentialism not objectively worse?

 

[Guest 6801328]

I mean that yes. Mechanically they're almost identical.

That kind of blows my mind.

Character 1: Orc fighter. Proficiency in Intimidation, Relentless Endurance and Great Weapon fighting style (wields a Maul) Outlander background, speaks Orc and Giantese, and plays the War Drums.

Character 2: Elven fighter. Fey Ancestry and Trance abilities. Dueling fighting style (wields a Longsword). Noble background. Speaks Celestial and plays Dragonchess.

I mean, really, even if their 6 ability scores are the same, you think these two characters are almost identical?