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

[Chaosmancer]

No it's not a connection. If I write up a murder in the game and it says, "A woman murdered a 16 year old girl who was placed in her care," it has no connection to the Gertrude Baniszewski murder despite it's similarity. Especially since I didn't even know about that murder until I just googled it. You don't get to forge a connection that isn't present, just because you find some random similarity with something in real life.

Yes, it does have a connection. Quite literally the connection of the exact same end result. How is that not a connection?

I'm not talking about legality. I'm not talking about someone being able to prove you made a product with intentional connections to real life. I'm talking about the fact that if you present a child murder... child murder is a real thing that happens. That's it. that isn't some "random similarity" it is literally "this event is something that happens in the real life"

I honestly don't understand how this is a debate. Do you have trees in your game? It may shock you to learn trees are real. Do you directly describe the specific tree that was in Jefferson's back yard? I don't care. That's not the point. I can draw a connection between "tree" and "tree". I can draw a connection between trees in fantasy, and trees in reality, because they are both trees. You can't talk about trees in fantasy without in some way referencing real trees, because the language doesn't allow for that. Language doesn't differentiate between real trees and fantasy trees. They are still trees.

It's not a connection. Any last stand I've done has nothing at all to do with Custer.

But it was a last stand, right? The concept of a last stand exists in fantasy because it is a real thing that people really did. Therefore, there is a connection between last stands in fantasy and last stands in reality. Whether or not you are specifically talking about Custer's Last Stand or the Last Stand at Thermopoly. It doesn't matter. This isn't about specific direct references.

A connection connects to things together. Two telephone poles are unconnected without the wire, despite their similarities. If I don't actually connect my fantasy creation with a real world instance of something, there is no connection.

I'm not talking connection like a physical connection. I'm talking about ideas, langauge, two telephone poles aren't connected? They are literally the same thing. There are dozens of connections I can draw. Like for instance a tall wooden pole being connected to the idea of telephones, and therefore connected to the idea of mass communication. No physical wires needed.

Sure I have. You just don't agree with it.

Nope, you just keep restating that they are.

No. Not to my point anyway.

So, races having the exact same ability scores isn't important to the point of what would happen if all the races have the exact same ability scores? I can't even begin to ask why you could think this.

I haven't presented any theories.

Yes, you have. Maybe you would prefer me to be more scientific and say hypothesis. or Prediction. Or whatever word you prefer, but the point is you put forth the idea that if all races had the same ability scores, then no matter their appearance or abilities they would be seen as a single race.

I've proven that wrong.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It's literally, "This race is more dexterous when it's not actually a race that is more dexterous." That's what dex feats with no dex bonus produce. That's nonsense. The reason I don't like it is that it's nonsense. If it made sense, I wouldn't care.

Oh, I must have missed the part of the text that literally says "elves are more dextrous than other races". My bad.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, it does have a connection. Quite literally the connection of the exact same end result. How is that not a connection?

Because my description has nothing whatsovever to do with that murder. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Nein!

I'm not talking about legality. I'm not talking about someone being able to prove you made a product with intentional connections to real life. I'm talking about the fact that if you present a child murder... child murder is a real thing that happens. That's it. that isn't some "random similarity" it is literally "this event is something that happens in the real life"

Okay. It happens in real life. So what.

Yes, you have. Maybe you would prefer me to be more scientific and say hypothesis. or Prediction. Or whatever word you prefer, but the point is you put forth the idea that if all races had the same ability scores, then no matter their appearance or abilities they would be seen as a single race.

I've proven that wrong.

At best you've only proven your own strawmen wrong. I've presented no theory. If you're tilting at theories, they are of your own devising.

 

[Yaarel]

What stat is lucky?

Typically, luck is Charisma, relating to fate and destiny, and personal impact.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh, I must have missed the part of the text that literally says "elves are more dextrous than other races". My bad.

What do you think grace is? When someone is graceful, they are very dexterous. A graceful race is a highly dexterous one. Hence the +2 racial bonus to dex. Or did you think that +2 dex was random and unconnected to anything?

 

[Maxperson]

Typically, luck is Charisma, relating to fate and destiny, and personal impact.

Luck is not charisma.

In 5e charisma is...

"Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality."

That's all charisma is.

 

[Argyle King]

I think there are already ways to do this without adding granularity. For example, skill expertise is a thing that exists, so a dexterous race could get proficiency and expertise in acrobatics. That would be a +4 to your acrobatics roll at 1st level, equivalent to a +8 ASI, but only for acrobatics checks (which would feel quite meaningful because of the way bounded accuracy works).

Related: at 1st level being proficient in a skill is twice as meaningful as a racial asi.

I'd personally prefer less things be flat bonuses. (I'm not convinced that the goal of "bounded accuracy" was met.)

Though, I think what you've said fits within how 5E currently works.

 

[Yaarel]

Luck is not charisma.

In 5e charisma is...

"Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality."

That's all charisma is.

D&D has a tradition that often merits consideration.

Flavorwise.

Paladins and Sorcerers might do magic relating to a "commanding personality", but the magic of a commanding personality runs deep.

Charisma encompasses destiny and fateful impact. Charisma correlates with innate magic.



It relates to how "fate" becomes faie and "faerie", speaking fate in the sense of prediction, whence commanding fate, the term meaning "magic".

 

[Bill Zebub]

What do you think grace is? When someone is graceful, they are very dexterous. A graceful race is a highly dexterous one. Hence the +2 racial bonus to dex. Or did you think that +2 dex was random and unconnected to anything?

Well, grace can be lots of things. Including charisma. But I looked up the definition of the Dexterity attribute (PHB 173) and it says only "agility". No mention of grace.

Meanwhile, Dwarves get a whole sub-heading that says "Long Memory", and Intelligence is defined as "reasoning and memory", yet they don't get an Intelligence ASI. Do you find that non-sensical? (If so, then I will give you points for consistency.)

You and I both know we could play this game all day long, and find examples where the fluff does not have corresponding ASIs.

Now, I will grant that it does "make sense" that of all the descriptions we have of elves, the designers chose to implement the part about "grace" mechanically, and that the specific mechanic they chose was +2 Dexterity. But that doesn't mean that the opposite is true, that it's "non-sensical" to implement some descriptors in ways other than ASIs, or to leave them unimplemented (as they did with "long memory").

 

[Scott Christian]

Of course both can exist. But that's the point. BOTH EXIST.

That was not my question. My question for you was - can they both exist in the same campaign? If the answer is yes, then there is absolutely no need to debate Max. He can have escapism that does not reflect reality.

Yeah, I can sit back and watch Riggs cowboy it up and shoot the bad guys, and it can be great entertainment. But that doesn't mean that there is no possible connection that can be drawn between that and a trigger happy cop in the real world.

And you can choose to draw that connection if you want. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, it is often encouraged for deep storytelling. But, can you accept, for many, the suspension of disbelief is strong enough to never draw a connection? And even when shown, choose to ignore it? Or must they see things your way?