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

[le Redoutable]

No it did not make it hard to play a character. It made lit hard to play an optimized character. But there is no problem in any edition in playing a character with a 14 in its prime stat.

I thought 0-levels were limited to 14,
While normal humans couldn't exceed 18
Then there are the tiers.
Epic (Olympic ) should climb to a max of 25
Gods could reach 30
Legends 36
Cosmic entities. Up to 42

 

[Maxperson]

No. See, because the game is encouraging the archetypes. They expect you to do that. Therefore they expect you will have the ASI applied, and your character isn't complete at first level until after they do that. I'm not talking the 16 is the baseline before racial ASIs, I'm talking about 16 being the baseline for a completed 1st level character, which is after racial ASIs. Those +modifiers aren't "amplifying" the character, they are the baseline.

You still haven't even tried to prove the bold part. Quote me the passage from one of the books, or hell even quote me one of the designers saying that.

 

[Scribe]

No. See, because the game is encouraging the archetypes. They expect you to do that. Therefore they expect you will have the ASI applied, and your character isn't complete at first level until after they do that. I'm not talking the 16 is the baseline before racial ASIs, I'm talking about 16 being the baseline for a completed 1st level character, which is after racial ASIs. Those +modifiers aren't "amplifying" the character, they are the baseline.

I can agree with this, from the perspective that the game encourages these archetypes by saying 'take your 15, then add one of your ASI to it'. This is the reward of specialization which non-humans have.

And why not.

Because the non-human options are specialized, they are directed into that path as a foil to humanity.

That is the fundamental question that led to Tashas and the boogieman of the change for 6e. Why is it that these archetypes should be more powerful and be the expected baseline? An Orc Druid as an orcish shaman is also a really solid fantasy trope, but it isn't an archetype the game was initially designed to enforce, and.. now it can be. How is there anything bad to that?

Because that is how FR/D&D 'core' if there is such a thing, are set up to be. Eberron has another subverted take on these archetypes as you pointed out, so...go nuts and leave FR alone.

Allowing for other 'against type' options, dilutes the setting, muddies the water, removes definition.

I play my Orc as CN, Barbarian with Path of the Storm Herald. (Close to my WoW Character lol)

The old archetypes still exist, but now newer archetypes can also get a chance to shine. Orc Druids. Gnomish Clerics. Dragonborn Monks. Lizardfolk Warlocks.

People can play those things. Right now. Pre or Post Tashas.

Go ahead and fire them up in a game at your table, whats stopping you? Nothing needs to change, literally nothing, with how the game was designed, or especially post Tasha's, so...what do you mean?

What is a Dragonborn Monk that they are keyed in as an archetype? Orc Druid as a Shaman, sure, WoW is a big deal. Gnome cleric?? Lizardman anything?

If these are archetypes to you, whats been stopping you from playing them?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Show me the hard proof that not only did they not expect dwarven wizards, which they went out of their way to allow by allowing casting in metal armor, but actively discouraged dwarven wizards.

You aren't getting the argument. They didn't actively discourage it. They never stepped in and made a declaration to make it illegal. But they encouraged dwarven fighters and clerics and barbarians more than any other class option. Like Scribe said, those were the types of options that made the best use of the dwarves stats, so they expected people to do that, discouraging them from making a dwarven wizard

Also, they didn't allow casting in armor (doesn't matter if it is metal) because of dwarven wizards, they did it because of Eldritch knights. You know, the fighters casting wizard spells while in platemail

lol No. You don't get to just arbitrarily assume 65% is the baseline and 60% isn't.

15 is the highest score in the array and they could not assume that a player would choose a race with a bonus, so 15 is by far the most likely baseline stat.

Firstly, it isn't arbitrary, I just can't find the frakkin articles. But I know people have referenced this math all over this forum, so I'm sure you've seen it.

And secondly, of course they could assume that. They have to assume you take a race, and if you take human, your highest is a 16. If you are planning on playing a rogue you are going to take a dex race, how can we assume that, because the players are capable of basic logic. The game says that if you are a rogue, you should max your dex, and therefore you would pick a dex race.

Additionally, what is the most iconic rogue? Halfling Rogue. What do they get? +2 Dex for a total of 17 or 16 if you shoot for a 16/16 build. What was the pre-gen rogue? Halfling Rogue, with a 16 or higher dex.

Again, they had to assume you would take a race. They can't assume the racial bonus is +0 because no race gets that. And they encourage you multiple locations to take an archytpical race/class combo this is going to lead to a 16. That was the baseline.

16 doesn't matter. They would have balanced around +2 and +3 would be a bit better is all.

No, they wouldn't have. It makes no sense to assume that every character would be weaker than the iconic character you are encouraging people to play. Again, they aren't expecting you to play against type, that doesn't make logical sense.

Don't assume that they are encouraging certain class/race combos. The design of 5e goes directly against that. It's by far the most permissive version of D&D that I've played in that regard, and that was before the floating bonus. Which by the way is very strong evidence that you are wrong. If they really do want to discourage certain race/class combos, then a floating bonus is not the way to go about it.

Just because it is permissive doesn't mean that they weren't encouraging these combos. Why else would every pre-gen character, and even the very example of building a character, be an archetypical class/race combo?

That doesn't make sense at all. You could also be wrong if they wanted some people to play against type. There's no need for a majority(or anywhere near it) to play against type in order for you to be wrong.

But they didn't want that. They knew people would, because that's the direction the game has been going, so they couldn't punish it. People hated that in 3.5 and they paid attention to that, but they still made certain combos superior, to encourage people to select them.

And if you are encouraging that, then you are assuming people will take the bait and build those characters.

I didn't say their feelings were incorrect. I said they were incorrect. You can feel like the entire world is out to get you. That won't make it true. The math proves that you don't need a +3 to do very well in your class. +2 still makes the game easy. If someone feels like they have to have a 16, they are wrong. They don't. That doesn't mean their feelings are wrong. Feelings are feelings.

And who cares? The point may stand that a +2 is viable. We've never claimed otherwise. Have your highest stat as a 14 and you won't be useless. But that doesn't mean that's what you want. That doesn't mean that is the expectation, and those feelings pressure us into certain patterns. And people are sick of the patterns, we want to move past this already.

And a few people who vehemently agreed with you before, came back and said "actually I was wrong. I like this. It feels better"

You can tell them that their feelings old and new are factually and statistically wrong, but you aren't going to get anywhere, especially since it is so trivially easy to show how expected the 16 is.

Just play a human.

No. There's no need for the baseline to be against type.

There is if you expect the baseline to 14 or 15, becuase the only characters even capable of that with the standard array are the ones that are against type.

No one else had trouble with it.

Dude, you were responding to me and we've even had a mod tell us how borderline our conversation is. I expect most of the thread is ignoring us, don't go telling me that because no one else bothered to read your post that they understood it.

Yes it is still just a skill.

Rooted in biology

I'm not a fantasy creature with fantasy rules.

Then what was your point in asking me if I've ever grown a callous. It doesn't apply to a fantasy creature with fantasy rules anyways.

I said it's not limited to one race, making it NOT a racial ability.

Of course it is limited to one race, because we say it is. If we say that non-elves can't learn these feats, then they can't. Fantasy races with fantasy rules.

PC's don't make the stat decision. Players do.

Player's also make the decision to take the lucky feat. If lucky feat is them learning a skill because it was chosen, then the +2 dex is also a learned skill because it was chosen. It is even being chosen by the same decision point, the level 4,8,12,16,19 ASI choice.

 

[Chaosmancer]

DMs get to choose the method that you use to generate them.

Some DMs act like they do, but they do not. Players always have that choice. From the PHB

You generate your character’s six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

They are speaking directly to the Player, in the Player's handbook. Standard Array is a player's right to choose, per the rules. The DM has no say in that choice.

 

[Chaosmancer]

As array is buyable with the point buy, then if point buy is allowed the array by definition is too. The inverse however of course is not true. And rolling is completely different thing. But ultimately it is a GM level decision what ability generation methods is used. Some allow using any method, I wouldn't; everyone uses the same method.

To reiterate my post from earlier. No. the DM has no right in the rules to tell you that you cannot use the Standard Array. The rules are very clear.

You generate your character’s six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

This is 100% the player's decision. There is no "if your DM allows" for the standard array.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Because the non-human options are specialized, they are directed into that path as a foil to humanity.

You know, I think I'll agree with the argument that the current racial ASIs reinforce the purported advantage for humans, that is, that they are versatile: they and half-elves are the only races that can start with a +3 in the primary attribute of any class, or even a +3 in any two attributes (looking at you, monks and paladins).

(Which raises the question of why half-orcs don't get something similar, if it's the human heritage that does the trick.)

Not that I think this is a worthy goal or a desirable implementation; I'm just saying it's internally consistent in this sense.

 

[Chaosmancer]

There was no requirement to follow that as a player. It just said to consider it, because the DM would probably be using it with NPCs and such. In any case, pretend fantasy racism is not real racism.

Just because there was no requirment to follow it didn't mean that the rules didn't encourage it as the "correct" way to play

 

[Maxperson]

You aren't getting the argument. They didn't actively discourage it. They never stepped in and made a declaration to make it illegal. But they encouraged dwarven fighters and clerics and barbarians more than any other class option. Like Scribe said, those were the types of options that made the best use of the dwarves stats, so they expected people to do that, discouraging them from making a dwarven wizard

You're conflating a lack of encouragement with discouragement. It doesn't work that way. To discourage there needs to be a penalty, not a lack of encouragement.

Also, they didn't allow casting in armor (doesn't matter if it is metal) because of dwarven wizards, they did it because of Eldritch knights. You know, the fighters casting wizard spells while in platemail

Nope. If it was just because of eldritch knights then it would simply have been an eldritch knight ability and wizards would not be able to do it.

Firstly, it isn't arbitrary, I just can't find the frakkin articles. But I know people have referenced this math all over this forum, so I'm sure you've seen it.

The math of 65% doesn't prove diddly. You need to show the designers straight out saying that +3 is the baseline for it to be anything other than assumption.

And secondly, of course they could assume that. They have to assume you take a race, and if you take human, your highest is a 16. If you are planning on playing a rogue you are going to take a dex race, how can we assume that, because the players are capable of basic logic. The game says that if you are a rogue, you should max your dex, and therefore you would pick a dex race.

The game isn't balanced around humans.

I've also never read the bold part. Can you quote it for me? Players misperceiving the "need" to max out dex is not proof of designer intent.

Again, they had to assume you would take a race. They can't assume the racial bonus is +0 because no race gets that. And they encourage you multiple locations to take an archytpical race/class combo this is going to lead to a 16. That was the baseline.

They didn't assume that you would take a race. You HAVE to take a race or you don't get to play.

What they also didn't assume was that your race would have a racial bonus in the class's prime stat.

No, they wouldn't have. It makes no sense to assume that every character would be weaker than the iconic character you are encouraging people to play. Again, they aren't expecting you to play against type, that doesn't make logical sense.

Or maybe the player of the halfling rogue puts his 13 in dex and then has 3 +2s, instead of a +3, +2 and +1. A third +2 is pretty good. Especially when it created two 15's to make 16's at 4th level.

And who cares? The point may stand that a +2 is viable. We've never claimed otherwise. Have your highest stat as a 14 and you won't be useless. But that doesn't mean that's what you want. That doesn't mean that is the expectation, and those feelings pressure us into certain patterns. And people are sick of the patterns, we want to move past this already.

14 isn't viable. It's good. Viable implies that it just gets by.

There is if you expect the baseline to 14 or 15, becuase the only characters even capable of that with the standard array are the ones that are against type.

Are you seriously arguing that if the baseline is +2 that the only characters capable of achieving that are against type? Because that's objectively wrong.

Rooted in biology

Not racial biology.

Then what was your point in asking me if I've ever grown a callous. It doesn't apply to a fantasy creature with fantasy rules anyways.

It shows a way to develop thicker scales later in life. Or maybe they can molt in a certain way if they learn how. Or.... Plenty of way that they could learn how to get thicker scales.

 

[Bill Zebub]

To reiterate my post from earlier. No. the DM has no right in the rules to tell you that you cannot use the Standard Array. The rules are very clear.

This is 100% the player's decision. There is no "if your DM allows" for the standard array.

Well, look at that. You are right. I actually never realized that.

I mean, beyond the meta-rule that the DM can arbitrarily decide anything, the rules do say:

If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

Point Buy, on the other hand, is explicitly left to the DM to approve.