Level Up (A5E) Do Player Characters Have Average Population Stat Distributions?

[Micah Sweet]

Sure there is, you give them featlike things that fit with the race so that and elf gnome & human wizard all feel viscerally different at the table. Instead of subraces that give a different set of stats & maybe very minor feature differences you have subraces that are quite different & don't need a bunch of racially restricted feats trying to mechanically represent fluff that didn't fit in the race itself

I've said this before, but I'd really like to see examples of these racial features that make up for losing the ASIs while making races strongly distinct from each other. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't know how to do it.

 

[TwoSix]

I gotta say, the arguments in defense of racial ASIs are so slippery and abstract that it feels to me like it's more of a knee-jerk reaction to change (in some cases motivated by a suspicion that it's a change driven by political correctness) than anything well-reasoned. The only argument I find really solid is that the game should encourage certain race/class combinations. I mean, I don't agree with that design goal, but it's a valid design goal, and racial ASIs support it.

I'll be honest, all that really matters to me is if I can create my genius character with 5 Int.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Playing a dwarf ranger should feel different, not just weaker.

Agreed on feeling different, not agreed on how it would be "just weaker." How do you think it would be just weaker?

 

[Guest 6801328]

I'll be honest, all that really matters to me is if I can create my genius character with 5 Int.

You can do that now!

But you knew that.

 

[TwoSix]

I've said this before, but I'd really like to see examples of these racial features that make up for losing the ASIs while making races strongly distinct from each other. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't know how to do it.

If you don't have racial bonuses, I think features like Halfling Luck, Mountain Dwarf armor proficiency, High Elven cantrips, and Eladrin fey step would be valued more highly. I'd also look at Xanathar's racial feats for examples of features that could be attached to races.

(Full disclosure, I wouldn't get rid of all racial ASIs, I'd just trim them, and give every race a 1st level feat and create some race-specific feats as well.)

 

[Guest 6801328]

I've said this before, but I'd really like to see examples of these racial features that make up for losing the ASIs while making races strongly distinct from each other. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't know how to do it.

I'll agree it's tricky to design them to minimize class bias.

But the thing I genuinely don't understand is the opinion...shared by several posters, apparently...that racial ASIs are "strongly" flavored. The 5% bonus to all your primary activities is significant, but I don't find it "flavorful", especially since there are other ways to get high scores. Maybe it's flavorful during character generation (as Max seems to think) but...really? That's the goal?

I find all those named racial abilities that you consciously invoke during the game to be much, much more flavorful. Even in cases where they have similarities to other abilities (e.g. Halforc Relentless Endurance is similar to but not identical to barbarian Relentless Rage, etc.) they still "pop" out during play much more than a passive bonus that could have come from any number of sources, and that never really gets mentioned.

How many times have you experienced a player rolling the exact number needed to hit, and having them narrate something about their ancestry? "Good thing I'm an elf or I would have missed." (I've never once heard that. YMMV. And of course it's the internet so we can all pretend that it happens in whatever way most supports our side of the argument.)

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

To be honest, if we're getting rid of ASI on the basis that "PCs are outstanding, they break the norm, so a halfling warrior can be as stout and brawny as an orc warrior", then the same reasoning applies to luck. Why would an extraordinarily lucky orc couldn't exist if an extraordinarily strong halfling can? I understand your point is to maintain differences between races, but I don't think the "racial feats" would work unless open to all races.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You actually don’t need to change any rules to prevent characters from hacking down stone walls with swords. The DM adjudicates actions and can rule that an action fails without a check if it has no chance of success. Trying to hack down a stone wall with a sword has no chance of success. Maybe if you try with a trebuchet 17 AC and whatever HP and damage threshold will be appropriate.


In other words, abstract representations of the characters’ ability to do the things the abilities’ mechanics do. There’s no reason a halfling can’t have more bodily power, athletic training, and the extent to which you can exert raw physical force than a Goliath, even though the Goliath undeniably has more muscle mass.

You're not changing the rules of the game, what you're changing is what those rules represent. And that's fine, but it's not RAI for a stone wall to be described as something else because it doesn't sense to you.

Actually, I think 4th ed encouraged that sort of thinking, or at least that was my impression.

 

[Charlaquin]

You're not changing the rules of the game, what you're changing is what those rules represent. And that's fine, but it's not RAI for a stone wall to be described as something else because it doesn't sense to you.

Well, I’m ruling that an attempt to destroy a stone wall with a sword fails without a roll on the basis of not having a chance of success.

Actually, I think 4th ed encouraged that sort of thinking, or at least that was my impression.

It did, whereas 5e seems to be a bit less explicit on the matter.

 

[Guest 6801328]

To be honest, if we're getting rid of ASI on the basis that "PCs are outstanding, they break the norm, so a halfling warrior can be as stout and brawny as an orc warrior", then the same reasoning applies to luck. Why would an extraordinarily lucky orc couldn't exist if an extraordinarily strong halfling can? I understand your point is to maintain differences between races, but I don't think the "racial feats" would work unless open to all races.

Then you're misunderstanding the argument.

The premise isn't that all races are identical.

The premise is that on particular method for differentiating races, racial ASIs, tends to strongly favor some classes over others, with the (undesirable) result of dissuading players from choosing non-optimal race/class combinations.

It might be (and has been) argued that halfling luck favors rogues over healers (for example) because rogues roll a lot more d20s than healers do, and thus the are more likely to roll 1's. While the logic is true, probably fewer players would let it bias their choice. (I might be wrong.)