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

[Maxperson]

I guess I just don't see why that would be a disconnect for somebody who doesn't already have predetermined opinions about racial ASIs.

You don't need to have any concept of ASIs at all. Someone new coming into the game and reading dragonborn which average 6'5" tall and weigh in at an average of 238 pounds, and halflings which average 3'0" tall and and weigh in at 40 pounds, is going to end up scratching his head at them being equally strong.

 

[Scribe]

I guess I just don't see why that would be a disconnect for somebody who doesn't already have predetermined opinions about racial ASIs.

Is it a disconnect (with racial ASIs) if Bob puts a 13 in Dex and Joe puts a 15 in Dex, and they both end up with the same score? I suppose I can guess your answer, but I personally don't see why it's different (again, assuming it's a player who doesn't already have strong opinions about this).

Because if there even is world building being done (and the PHB does a bare minimum) then Elves are graceful, and Dwarves are sturdy and stout.

If pre ASI the elf puts in 13 dex and he and the dwarf match? That's the system reflecting variation within the species.

That's an elf that has ignored it's specialized potential dexterity, but by virtue of being an elf, is still as graceful as the most agile dwarf.

 

[Bill Zebub]

That's an elf that has ignored it's specialized potential dexterity, but by virtue of being an elf, is still as graceful as the most agile dwarf.

Yeah, that's fair. It reinforces the archetype.

 

[Scribe]

That's why I'm raising the cap to 20+racial bonus. That mountain dwarf will have a strength and constitution cap of 22, while the halfling will top out at 20.

I came to the same conclusion during one of the other discussions on this. Truly I believe min/max values need to come back for some of the more extreme PC options.

 

[Lyxen]

And if you have the more subtle sort of powergamer...let's call them an "optimizer"...they are still going to pick an optimal character, within whatever boundaries you establish as DM. Which, in the case of racial ASIs, is simply going to be one of the traditional archetypes. They're probably not going to go "against type".

They won't indeed.

And the thing about floating ASIs is that it doesn't actually open up new power-gamey options.

And this is where we disagree. There is a reason for which most of the class guides have been updated post-Tasha, you know, including some with differences on races choice whether you have access to customised origins or not. Powergamers now seek the best combination of racial features, Floating ASIs and class instead of just Racial Features and ASIs and class. And in a lot of cases, of course the solution with Floating ASIs is considered "superior".

The sad thing is that there is still only 10% of the combinations that is deemed acceptable by the powergaming community. It's not the same 10% as before, but it's still only 10%, which is another reason for me trying to explain why unmitigated powergaming is sad for the game, as it encourages people to deride 90% of the possibilities of characters in the game...

 

[Maxperson]

The sad thing is that there is still only 10% of the combinations that is deemed acceptable by the powergaming community. It's not the same 10% as before, but it's still only 10%, which is another reason for me trying to explain why unmitigated powergaming is sad for the game, as it encourages people to deride 90% of the possibilities of characters in the game...

And THIS is another example of why optimizing is not powergaming. Someone who wants to optimize a bit, but not powergame would just use the floating ASI and put it in his main stat while picking any old race that seems fun.

Again, just because a lit match(optimizing) is a fire, doesn't make it the exact same as a forest fire(power gaming) which is also a fire.

 

[Bill Zebub]

And this is where we disagree. There is a reason for which most of the class guides have been updated post-Tasha, you know, including some with differences on races choice whether you have access to customised origins or not. Powergamers now seek the best combination of racial features, Floating ASIs and class instead of just Racial Features and ASIs and class. And in a lot of cases, of course the solution with Floating ASIs is considered "superior".

The sad thing is that there is still only 10% of the combinations that is deemed acceptable by the powergaming community. It's not the same 10% as before, but it's still only 10%, which is another reason for me trying to explain why unmitigated powergaming is sad for the game, as it encourages people to deride 90% of the possibilities of characters in the game...

And this is where I think the various gradations of "powergaming" become important, and why I think the black & white portrayal of optimization leads us astray.

Yes, there are extreme optimizers out there who will switch from Wood Elf monk to Tortle monk (or whatever the theorycrafters say) because the racials are slightly better. But you don't want to play with those people anyway, do you?

And in between the two extremes are LOTS of players...like me...who have a hard time saying no to +2 in my primary attribute, but who otherwise don't need to be 100% optimized. I don't want floating ASIs in order to powergame more, I want it to so I can powergame less.

I'd love to play a Tiefling shadow monk and say "BAMF!" (at the table, not in-character) every time I teleport. But...Charisma? Monks are too MAD for me to go that route.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

And in between the two extremes are LOTS of players...like me...who have a hard time saying no to +2 in my primary attribute, but who otherwise don't need to be 100% optimized.

I'd still like to know how you can say no to +3 to primary attribute offered by Tasha's custom lineage. Because that's 18 and +4 modifier (under array/point buy.)

 

[Lyxen]

And THIS is another example of why optimizing is not powergaming. Someone who wants to optimize a bit, but not powergame would just use the floating ASI and put it in his main stat while picking any old race that seems fun.

No he would not. He would just pick the most powerful combination as indicated by the guides, just as he would have picked the previous combination pre-Tasha for exactly the same reason. It would just not be the same one, but the new one would be more "powerful" as indicated by the guides, and therefore increase the discrepancy with non-optimised combinations.

Again, that does not prevent him from roleplaying that combination. But the choices of a powergamer are not done for roleplaying.

You know what, it's easy, just show us characters that you really play, and we'll see whether you really used these floating ASIs for roleplaying...

Again, just because a lit match(optimizing) is a fire, doesn't make it the exact same as a forest fire(power gaming) which is also a fire.

It is the same principle, just to a lesser degree, and it has the same consequences, although to a lesser degree. As someone put it in this forum, someone's optimising will be somebody else's powergaming.

Again, I'm not saying it's bad, and you can do it to your heart's content at the tables where the DM lets you do whatever you want. But at our tables, we limit it for the sake of the people at the table who make choices mostly for roleplaying reasons, that's all. And that's why we don't want Floating ASIs, because it's one more tool that WILL be used by powergamers to increase the discrepancies.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I'd still like to know how you can say no to +3 to primary attribute offered by Tasha's custom lineage. Because that's 18 and +4 modifier (under array/point buy.)

Oh, wait...what? Did I not read Tasha's carefully? How do you get an 18?