D&D 5E (2014) Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)

[Micah Sweet]

I didn't say that it was...

Exactly. Which is why there's no particular need for good cultures.

 

[Maxperson]

These literary tropes already did determine how we play the game.

We made a game about their racism.

No. If I don't make the game a racist game, it's not racist. I'm not limited by any designer bias.

 

[Maxperson]

Or perhaps we should just get rid of simplistic idea of good guys vs bad guys? Perhaps we could have nuanced civilisations that have some good features and some bad features?

Clear good guys vs. clear bad guys is what a lot of us want to play. I get enough of nuanced civilizations that have some good features and some bad features every day in real life. A lot of times I don't want to go through more of that in my RPG play.

 

[Maxperson]

I sympathize, and honestly, I myself want a break from Forgotten Realms.

Heh, but I dont see how the business investments in Forgotten Realms Intellectual Property, can make it possible for WotC to leave Forgotten Realms behind, so that you can play it without updates, or so that I dont have to deal to with it or its gods.

The Forgotten Realms will always be a big part of the game, but they will also always have other settings. I don't see why you can't just pick up Theros, Eberron or one of the other settings and just leave the Forgotten Realms behind.

 

[Yaarel]

The Forgotten Realms will always be a big part of the game, but they will also always have other settings. I don't see why you can't just pick up Theros, Eberron or one of the other settings and just leave the Forgotten Realms behind.

It is difficult to immerse in the assumptions of an other setting, when players keep on immersing in the Players Handbook and its Forgotten Realms assumptions.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I can think of two reasons:

1) Not everything is about fighting.
2) Synergy happens - the value of a monster alone is not the only measure of its value.

I agree not everything is about fighting, but Winter has nothing to make them good at not fighting. Again, spring has illusion magic, Autumn has healing magic, and both can still fight. Winter has damaging AOEs.

I have also never seen them design a creauture to be completely unable to fill its stated CR because they expect it to be paired with something else, and them not make that explicit. And Winter Eladrin are not called out to be synergized with anything.

 

[Yaarel]

Clear good guys vs. clear bad guys is what a lot of us want to play. I get enough of nuanced civilizations that have some good features and some bad features every day in real life. A lot of times I don't want to go through more of that in my RPG play.

To have "clear" good guys and "clear" bad guys, almost implies that there is no free will, ... in which case, neither can they be "good" or "bad".

Somewhat seriously, can you describe a setting premise in where such a clear division between good and evil is plausible?

I am thinking of Star Wars, which is basically Good freedom versus Evil imperialism. But even then, the imperialists werent all monolithically Evil. There were a few clear villains, but then entire planets caught up in the misguided ideology, a planet with many innocents.

 

[Maxperson]

It is difficult to immerse in the assumptions of an other setting, when players keep on immersing in the Players Handbook and its Forgotten Realms assumptions.

The Forgotten Realms is generic. Forgotten Realms assumptions, that aren't location specific, are just basic D&D assumptions. The PHB in particular goes out of its way NOT to be Forgotten Realms specific. It brings up multiple settings at every turn, Forgotten Realms just being one of them.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I told you that I'm not explaining it to you again. Go back and re-read my final explanation. You have come here to tell me that I said the literal opposite of what I actually said.

And here you again attribute to me the opposite of what I said. Until you can demonstrate to me that you understand at least these two things that I have said, I see no point in wasting my time reading your response any further.

I reread both three more times. I still stand by what I said.

You have consistently said that elves without a +2 dex to their racial write-up are incomplete. You even explicitly talked about an example where someone said their elf started with an 8 in their dex score, and you said that would be impossible because they would have a 10, because they are elves.

By your own arguments then, an elf whose racial write up was a +2 Cha and +1 Int, having no bonus to Dexterity, is wither incomplete or not an elf. You would require them to have a +2 Dexterirty, because for you that is a vital component of "elfness" and not having it would be like cutting out the face of the Mona Lisa.



This is all because you see the racial write up as being meant for the purpose of showing the average across the population. It doesn't matter if there is an elf who has a Dex of 10 while the dwarf has a 16, because an average elf gets a +2 dex, so an average elf is more dexterous than an average dwarf. This is the point you have made repeatedly.

You don't like floating scores because then you believe that the average no longer exists. The Average Elf can't be said to be anything, because the scores are floating and they could be anything. This is the reason you have stated for not liking the floating scores, because it makes your race meaningless on a population level.


However, you are wrong. As I have pointed out, in our own real world, there are patterns. We are all human, yet the Dutch people tend to be the tallest and the various Japanese and Vietnamese people tend to be the shortest. So, there is no issue or would even cause an eyeblink to say that elves still tend to be the most dexterous. Even with floating scores.

Now, you can keep telling me that I simply don't understand your points, but maybe it would be more productive for you to try and understand my solutions.

 

[Maxperson]

To have "clear" good guys and "clear" bad guys, almost implies that there is no free will, ... in which case, neither can they be "good" or "bad".

Not really. To have clear good guys and bad guys means that the game is setting up these encounters and situations as being with good guys and bad guys. Hobgoblins might be of all alignments, but the ones the PCs run into are the evil kind. Bad guys. Elves might have all alignments, but the ones the PCs deal with are CG. Good guys.

If you want to extend what the PCs encounter to every instance of a race, then sure, but then you're the one removing free will.

Somewhat seriously, can you describe a setting premise in where such a clear division between good and evil is plausible?

See above.