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

[Maxperson]

Wizard's intended for some PC options to be better/worse/different, when choosing different classes, and to have that difference reflected at level 1 with a difference of +1 on a primary attribute.

There is no expectation of a 16, because there is no limiting of Class and Race options. You may choose whatever you like. Furthermore, there are rules straight out of the PHB which allow for different mechanism of Attribute generation.

The 'fundamental math' of the game cannot possible have an expectation of 16, there is too much room to change one's attributes for that to be the case.

(EDIT: Oh and if they DID intend for a min of 16, then they really DID intend for races to be fundamentally tied to specific classes and archetypes.)

Wizards almost surely intended for Mountain Dwarf Wizards and Tabaxi Clerics to be a thing. With a max of 15 in their respective prime stats, the baseline starting stat would be 14-15(+2). The baseline assumed racial bonus to a prime stat would be 0.

 

[Lyxen]

You're new here so I'm just trying to be friendly. That's really close to edition warring which isn't allowed on this site.

Thanks, I was not aware of this, my comment was actually not leaning on one side of the fence or the other, just to say that there were things done right in that edition compared to the problem that we are discussing.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Where do you put that 15? Well if I'm a Fighter, I have the option of going for a Dex build, and ending up at 17 (+3) or Str, and getting 15 (+2). Wait...we arent quibbling over a +1 still are we?

I was never quibbling over that +1. If I'm building a strength-based fighter I (and apparently millions of other people) want the 16. You can quibble with me, but I'm not quibbling back.

I mean, what is there to quibble about? Whether or not it is factually true that I want that 16, and it will affect my choice of race?

I think what we were quibbling about is what the costs and benefits would be in allowing people like to me to choose any race I want and still get the 16.

(I guess some people were trying to quibble about whether my desire is driven by analysis and mathematical understanding, or some kind of Freudian character flaw.)

 

[Scribe]

I think what we were quibbling about is what the costs and benefits would be in allowing people like to me to have both the 16 and choose any race I want.

No, I was never taking issue with that. By all means, use the tools that have been present since 2014 to take the race you want and get your 16.

 

[Bill Zebub]

No, I was never taking issue with that. By all means, use the tools that have been present since 2014 to take the race you want and get your 16.

I guess I should have said "...and also what the costs and benefits are to keeping racial ASIs in some form."

Also, what's the tool present since 2014? That is, pre-Tasha's?

 

[abirdcall]

The context of the discussion is racial asi vs floating asi. If you argue that racial asi is a helpful way of differentiating races and accentuating their features, then you have to concede that floating asi can be used to accentuate other aspects of the character such as background.

No, I don't.

Deciding where to place your stats isn't representative of any particular thing beyond what you decide for yourself.

That's like saying the standard array is representative of your background.

 

[Scribe]

I guess I should have said "...and also what the costs and benefits are to keeping racial ASIs."

Also, what's the tool present since 2014? That is, pre-Tasha's?

DM's can allow for anything they wish to change. Any DM could have implemented floating ASI at any point at their table.

There is no cost to keeping racial ASI 'presets' or quick builds. Both systems can easily coexist. Crack open the PHB and look at the amount of space taken by Standard Array vs Point Buy. Having the ASI as designed for 6 years can easily coexist with Tasha's when its literally:

"Alternatively, you may have ASI apply in a +2/+1 to any Attributes you wish."

Again, I have to continue to remind myself, it doesnt matter what I say on this. I'm already losing what I want. Its done and determined. Tasha's is the only option going forward for new PC options in any future books.

 

[Maxperson]

I guess I should have said "...and also what the costs and benefits are to keeping racial ASIs in some form."

Since you can always enact Tasha's, there is no cost to keeping racial ASIs. There are benefits, though, in the form of archetypes and the ability to play against type, as well as allowing races to actually be better at what they are supposed to be better at.

Also, what's the tool present since 2014? That is, pre-Tasha's?

He's probably talking about picking a race that gets you the bonus.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Question to those who feel compelled to start with a +3 modifier in the class' main stat. The custom lineage in Tasha's gives you +2 to any stat and a feat. This can get you to 18 (with point buy/standard array) so a +4 modifier. Do you feel similarly compelled now to use the custom lineage exclusively and if not, why not?

 

[Bill Zebub]

DM's can allow for anything they wish to change. Any DM could have implemented floating ASI at any point at their table.

"The thing you want is already in the game because the DMG says that DMs can do whatever they want" is not really a valid argument. If it were you wouldn't be persistently arguing to keep racial ASIs in the game because you would just houserule them in, right?