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

[Phoebasss]

Incorrect. You are welcome to play a sorcerer with the lakeside dweller culture, you just don't get to do it with that +2 charisma. Why is +2 charisma a requirement to play a sorcerer?

Maybe I as a gm made that choice deliberately for plot or other reasons such as having plans involving a charismatic korth dweller. Maybe I as a GM am tired of nakedly transparent minmaxing taking advantage of plot or setting related hooks that are ignored because the minmaxing combinations don't fit in any logical manner

Your charismatic Korthe dweller still exists, with or without the +2 Cha from Korthe. I'm primarily a GM myself, so I understand that our settings are cool and we like to see the PCs interact with them, I just don't see how being 5% more likely to hit if you pick one of 3 classes and are from area x is interesting. It's not transparent minmaxing to not want to play with a disadvantage for 11 levels because you put some thought into your character. I guarantee people will care more about the place they are from if it confers roleplaying benefits or non-stat bonuses. If it confers stats building a character just becomes a rote process.

Here are the 2 ways I see building a character going for your theoretical minmaxer under both systems. However, just to note, these people usually just don't want to gimp themselves in combat for a roleplaying benefit, but are interested in roleplaying in my experience.

Under "culture confers ASIs"
1. I want to play a sorcerer.
2. I look for cultures which give a +2 Cha bonus and pick one of them, probably based on the secondary stat it gives or if it has some skills I want.
3. I never think about where I'm from again because +2 cha conveys no flavor.

Under "free-floating ASIs"
1. I want to play a sorcerer.
2. I look through all the locations for ones with good skills or a useful/interesting roleplaying ability.
3. They look for times to use that ability, which connects them more closely with the world you've created.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I would put it as a knee-jerk reaction to your arguments. I don't even care about racial ASIs, but when reading your arguments, I want to defend them just out of spite.

You come off as the equivalent of a philosophy major who is dancing around trying to convince everyone that the world is all an illusion in their own minds, and nothing is real. And because philosophy being what it is, it's entirely possible to make such arguments. However it's pointless sophistry to someone who just wants to sit down and deal with reality.

If the argument was just, "I think we should drop racial ASIs and replace them with more useful, differentiating traits", I'd be like, sure, fine, sounds great. What ideas do you have? But if all you're doing is promoting arguments about the philosophy of the existence of racial ASIs, it just sounds like you're full of ****.

Achievement Unlocked

 

[Micah Sweet]

Would you say the same about just using the stats of a Goliath and telling everyone you’re Halfling?

No, but if it was important to me to be a sorcerer from Fishertown, I would accept my lack of a +2 charisma bonus. I can sorcer just fine with a 16 rather than 18 (I roll stats).

 

[Phoebasss]

If you want to be a sorcerer from Fishertown, and the Charisma bonus is important to your concept, then just use a different culture and tell everyone you're from Fishertown. I see this as a corner case, and therefore something you house rule with your DM. Of course, others may feel differently. That's just where I stand.

Wanting your class's main stat to benefit from your race/culture is basically the opposite of a corner case. It's the reason for the massive difference in numbers between some stat/race combos and others. It affects everything your character class does for 11 levels (the earliest you can max a stat if you don't have at least a +1 in that stat).

 

[tetrasodium]

If you want to be a sorcerer from Fishertown, and the Charisma bonus is important to your concept, then just use a different culture and tell everyone you're from Fishertown. I see this as a corner case, and therefore something you house rule with your DM. Of course, others may feel differently. That's just where I stand.

I think that the "problem" is not "hey gm, can we houserule something so that..." so much as "how dare there be something I need to work out with my GM for max ultimate minmaxing after the gm said here's the cultures & backgrounds local to my campaign""

 

[Guest 6801328]

I do wish there was some way of proving what kinds of characters people actually play. I would find it super interesting to see how often the proponents of racial ASIs actually play sub-optimal characters.

 

[Phoebasss]

I think that the "problem" is not "hy gm, can we houserule something so that..." so much as "how dare there be something I need to work out with my GM for max ultimate minmaxing after the gm said here's the cultures & backgrounds local to my campaign""

Mate. Wanting your main stat to start at +3 rather than +2 isn't ultimate minmaxing. It's the expected value for a level one character. It makes you 5% worse at everything you do for your class for most of the game. Just because you wanted to have a more interesting character and not be a caricature of your cultural heritage. There's just no reason to tie ASIs down.

 

[Charlaquin]

I would put it as a knee-jerk reaction to your arguments. I don't even care about racial ASIs, but when reading your arguments, I want to defend them just out of spite.

You come off as the equivalent of a philosophy major who is dancing around trying to convince everyone that the world is all an illusion in their own minds, and nothing is real. And because philosophy being what it is, it's entirely possible to make such arguments. However it's pointless sophistry to someone who just wants to sit down and deal with reality.

If the argument was just, "I think we should drop racial ASIs and replace them with more useful, differentiating traits", I'd be like, sure, fine, sounds great. What ideas do you have? But if all you're doing is promoting arguments about the philosophy of the existence of racial ASIs, it just sounds like you're full of ****.

“I don’t disagree with your position, but I’ll argue against it anyway because you make it sound too philosophical”? That’s... pretty anti-intellectual...

 

[Guest 6801328]

Mate. Wanting your main stat to start at +3 rather than +2 isn't ultimate minmaxing. It's the expected value for a level one character. It makes you 5% worse at everything you do for your class for most of the game. Just because you wanted to have a more interesting character and not be a caricature of your cultural heritage. There's just no reason to do it.

The only way that position can really be attacked is through hyperbole. Labeling it "ultimate minmaxing" and "rollplaying instead of roleplaying" is a weak attempt to discredit it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Wanting your class's main stat to benefit from your race/culture is basically the opposite of a corner case. It's the reason for the massive difference in numbers between some stat/race combos and others. It affects everything your character class does for 11 levels (the earliest you can max a stat if you don't have at least a +1 in that stat).

Fair enough. I'm just saying if being a sorcerer and being from Fishertown were both important to me, I would accept a less than optimal main stat. I'm cool with sacrificing one part of my character if other parts are more important to me.