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

[Chaosmancer]

I dont care at all if you have access to Tasha's.

While we understand that you enjoy watching others lose something they enjoy, I dont share that same spite.

Funnily enough, I'm celebrating all the things we gained. No spite, I'm just happy to finally be free of these shackles that have been dragging us down.

 

[Scribe]

Funnily enough, I'm celebrating all the things we gained. No spite, I'm just happy to finally be free of these shackles that have been dragging us down.

Nothing was dragging you down, and nothing is gained going forward, only replaced. The DM is and was, and has been, always free to modify the rules.

I dont begrudge you having your option in print at all, so its nice to see some maturity.

 

[Chaosmancer]

In a case of a new game, new setting, or what have you? I'd agree. Absolutely less work, less content to provide, if Wizards would just say 'nope 2/1, do whatever.'

Which goes back to what I've said many times, what am I paying for?

In the case of these other race/subrace options that we have had for years, or in previous additions? The work is done.

I fully anticipate 6e will just be floating, do whatever, and thats 100% fine.

I don't know what you are paying for, what have you bought recently?

Me, I just bought Fizban's Dragons hoping for some cool spells and feats, maybe a few magic items and if 'm lucky some lore I can actually use.

Didn't really buy it for them to tell me kobolds get a +2 Dex +1 Int, I couldn't care less about that.

 

[Scribe]

Didn't really buy it for them to tell me kobolds get a +2 Dex +1 Int, I couldn't care less about that.

Trust me, I'm aware you dont care. You dont have to.

I didnt buy the Ravenloft guide, because it doesnt have things in it which I want. I may get Fizban's, because they seem to have at least put Alignment in, but we will see.

I almost certainly wont buy Strixhaven, as again, it wont have ASI on the PC options, and its not a path of game design I will support with $.

 

[Maxperson]

I do, too.

But I would never design a combat bonus into the race (even though there's precedent for that) because doing so would make elves the "best" choice for an archer build. Which is precisely what floating ASIs are trying to avoid.

Free proficiency helps convey that theme, but in an especially boring way (imo). I'd love to think of a ribbon feature that let's the character do something that conveys "at one with a bow" but without making it straight up better at combat.

I'm not sure that there is a way to do that. If you give them the ability to ignore cover or shoot farther without disadvantage or something similar, they will still be the optimal choice. Giving them an ability that is useless in combat, like twirling their bow on their finger(old west style) doesn't make them "one with the bow."

 

[Faolyn]

For the PC options where the options are defined and provided in the books I pay for?

Correct, I can do so.

So you're saying you are incapable of just making up an ASI on your own, but you're expecting the floating ASI people to do exactly that. Hmm.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Right, so those stats don't actually mean all that much in the first place, since there's so much that uses different stats to do the same thing.

If you think that, why even have different stats then?

So what, exactly, does it mean for a half-orc to be stronger than an elf?

To have a better strength score.

They're not going to do more damage than an elf because Strength and Dexterity give the same bonuses.

Again, so what? Casters can do same damage with spells. And the mostly weapons are not the same. Thematically dex weapons are different.

They can lift more than a creature who has a lower Strength, sure, but a lower-Strength creature with Powerful Build can lift even more.

And that is bit weird, and is due how awkwardly the should-really-be-large-but-isn't species work. But at least it is usually given to species whose niche it is to be strong, so it is not that jarring.

Do you get upset if some people decide to play Strength 10 half orcs in the same party as a Strength 16 elf?

No. Because I have never claimed that every half-orc should be able to be stronger than every elf, merely that if the half-orc decides to focus on the niche of their species they will be better at this than the elf. And vice versa with the elf and dex.

And why do you not realize that these floating ASIs affect PCs only, and PCs are already supposed to be unusual? Which means that NPC half-orcs are going to be as strong as you want them to be and the NPC elves are going to be as weak as you want them to be? This shouldn't be hard to follow either.

PCs can be usual in their competence and ambition, but I don't wan them to be (or at leas start as) some sort of superheroes that do not resemble the rest of their species. And why does this 'but PCs are unusual' just apply to things that are represented via ASIs? Why can an elf have the half-orc's niche of being strong but halfling cannot just have wings like aarakockra?

 

[Maxperson]

I keep asking this question (in this thread and in others) and nobody has answered me yet.

Probably because nobody is arguing that. Racial bonuses are just one part of what makes a race feel like that race. An integral part, but only one part none the less.

 

[Malmuria]

Which edition was the best in doing design for races, in everyone's opinion?

 

[Maxperson]

What kind of character concepts have you built?

Were they strictly a class concept?

Did you think about how this character would grow up and participate in and relate to a race cultures community?

I could easily still build an elf concept if I used floating bonuses. This is not an all or nothing thing that is utterly dependent on stat bonuses like you guys keep wanting to paint it. Stat bonuses are just one important part among several that make up a race's feel. That elf concept built with floating bonuses would feel off, though. That would bug me to no end and I would ditch the concept.