D&D 5E Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)

[Chaosmancer]

This sounds a little bit like you're referring to a post I made. If so, let's clear this up- I have never argued that "because bears (goliaths) are stronger than humans that horses (elves) must be weaker", or anything even close to it. If it's my post you're referring to, you are mischaracterizing it. My point is that different species are different and ASIs tied to race/species are therefore a coherent, logical idea that helps to reflect the game world.

Sure, races are species. Therefore it is perfectly coherent to say that Horses (elves) are faster and more perceptive but that they can never be stronger than a bear (goliaths) who are stronger and tougher.

I mean, it isn't like Arabian horses and Clydesdales are the same genetic species from a biological perspective. They can't even inter-breed right? And an Irish wolfhound isn't even close to the same genetic species as a golden retriever right?

 

[Yaarel]

I fully support a variant rule, included in the Player's Handbook, that allows you to reassign the +2 as you see fit!

But I also want 5e to officially support the eladrin sun elf with Int +2 or Cha +2, as examples of an elf build.

And similarly grugach elf with Str +2.

And so on.

I dont want to fight against the official mechanics. These are aspects of the elf that 5e mentions by name and needs to treat accurately.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's almost like there would be several radically different species of felinidae...

Sure, we can even go further. Because the Bengal Tiger is stronger than the Sumatran Tiger, and neither of them are the Siberian Tiger or the Javan Tiger. So not even all tigers are equally strong.

So is "elf" closer to Felinidae or "Tiger" or "Siberian Tiger" in how specific we want to make this?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Taking the idea more seriously, why not:

• floating ASIs by default
• providing one example ASI as a "traditional elf" (i.e. "Dexterity elf")
• providing another example ASI as an "alternate elf" (i.e. "Strength elf")
• explicitly encouraging folks to innovate beyond that

I was just thinking that each race could have not just ASIs as a choice, but maybe some other choices as well (which Tieflings and Half-elves are moving toward). As in, "Pick 3 of the following 5 class features".

Then each entry could include a "Quick Build" (just like there is for each class) that could have the ASI in the traditional place.

 

[Bill Zebub]

So is "elf" closer to Felinidae or "Tiger" or "Siberian Tiger" in how specific we want to make this?

How about "not a Dwarf"?

 

[Yaarel]

I was just thinking that each race could have not just ASIs as a choice, but maybe some other choices as well (which Tieflings and Half-elves are moving toward). As in, "Pick 3 of the following 5 class features".

Then each entry could include a "Quick Build" (just like there is for each class) that could have the ASI in the traditional place.

Yeah, and I think this assemblage approach helps avoid essentialism because each individual can be very different, while at the same time allowing the race to have salient and even unique themes being part of this assemblage.

Moreover, the DM can easily modify a race, by simply adding to the choices.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I mean if we want to go down the rabbit hole, but I really dont.

In this comparison, Its Tiger (Goliath) and Halfling (Caracal) as its Cat (Fantasy Huminoids).

Besides, I find it beyond my ability to suspend disbelief that you do not understand my position, and its simply arguing in bad faith with you at this point.

No, I understand your position.

I'm just sick and tired of people taking this argument that "well, it is different species and gorillas are stronger than humans, so this is perfectly coherent" and then ignoring the fact that, there are multiple different species of gorilla, so even within the umbrella of "gorilla" there is a massive range of size and strength. So, if we can have a floating and variable range for "gorilla" why can't we for "elf"?

 

[mrpopstar]

@mrpopstar

For me, the essence of the elf is it personifies magic.

If the 5e elf has Dex score +2 rather than a mental ability score +2, it feels less magical to me. As if it is only mediocre at magical classes. It feels wrong.

I love the D&D magical elf archetypes: gray elf, sun elf, 4e eladrin elf. These with Int +2 and Cha +2 are the elf that I want. 5e already has their names and flavor, but want their mechanics too.

I understand. Elves (to me) are sylvan creatures more than anything. They have fey ancestry, but they belong to the material plane now, which makes them slightly less innately magical (to me).

When I think "elf" I think "bow and arrow." That's just how they occur to me in my fantasy, and that's how they've been represented in D&D's brand of fantasy (at least its core).

But I also want 5e to officially support the eladrin sun elf with Int +2 or Cha +2, as examples of an elf build.

And similarly grugach elf with Str +2.

And so on.

I dont want to fight against the official mechanics. These are aspects of the elf that 5e mentions by name and needs to treat accurately.

Rules variants are official!

 

[Faolyn]

The PHB tells us what each ability score represents.

I asked what they represent to you.

 

[Scribe]

No, I understand your position.

I'm just sick and tired of people taking this argument that "well, it is different species and gorillas are stronger than humans, so this is perfectly coherent" and then ignoring the fact that, there are multiple different species of gorilla, so even within the umbrella of "gorilla" there is a massive range of size and strength. So, if we can have a floating and variable range for "gorilla" why can't we for "elf"?

Maybe we shouldnt, and 'Gorilla' would have a number of subspecies which would not be floating? Exactly how we have (checking) 8 plus configurations of ASI for "Elf" which are defined as of the current edition.