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

[Bill Zebub]

I hope you're not referring to my post. I have no problem with anyone wanting to play 5e. I just dont understand why someone with the history of issues with D&D that @Yaarel seems to have would want to do so. I'm sure they have reasons.

They can answer for themselves, but I would guess a major one (that I hear all the time) is that 5e dominates so completely that it has become really hard to find people willing to play other games.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well, there's a lot of conjecture here as to how other people will behave. All I can say for certain is what I would personally do, which is that while I currently always pick a race (or vhuman) that lets me get a 16 in my primary attribute, with floating ASIs I would pick races for flavor reasons. I can't, of course, extrapolate that to draw any certain conclusions about other people, so if you have a pretty firm idea of what you think they would do, I probably can't change that.

Happy gaming!

You aren’t following. I’m saying people are all different and will react differently. Some will be as you. Some will just move on to only playing races with other strongly advantageous abilities for their class choice.

Personally I think it’s a temporary solution and that most optimizers that would play classes without additional advantages initially would eventually fall into the habit of seeing those additional advantages as essential to a character they would choose to play. Though for a while at least I think they would try out less optimized options.

 

[Lyxen]

I think this new line of "If you don't like 5e then go play another game" is a fraught road.

It depends on the topic. For the floating ASIs, honestly, it's a detail, it's already an option, it will most probably not change during 5e so honestly the only reason I'm continuing to discuss is that some people can realise how unimportant that is overall.

However, there are people who do some much harder complaining about 5e, its lack of crunchiness, the imprecision of the rules, and who - despite the fact that they apparently play the game - would actually like D&D to be completely different game, usually much more like 3e/PF.

To these, my answer is why don't you play 3e or PF, the second edition is supposed to be quite good for people liking crunchiness.

But that is the wrong option for floating ASIs, however...

 

[Bill Zebub]

You aren’t following. I’m saying people are all different and will react differently. Some will be as you. Some will just move on to only playing races with other strongly advantageous abilities for their class choice.

Great. So some people, not all, will exercise their choice for story reasons, not optimization. That's a win in my book.

Personally I think it’s a temporary solution and that most optimizers that would play classes without additional advantages initially would eventually fall into the habit of seeing those additional advantages as essential to a character they would choose to play. Though for a while at least I think they would try out less optimized options.

Yeah, we clearly have very different expectations. I'm basing my expectations on my own experience, plus all the posters I see saying the same thing I do. I don't see a single person saying, "Yeah, once I get floating ASIs I'm gonna optimize for race." All I see is people on your side of the debate predicting that other people are going to do that. You may be right, of course, but I just don't see any evidence for it.

 

[Malmuria]

I think this new line of "If you don't like 5e then go play another game" is a fraught road.

I think it's pretty darn likely that the next iteration of D&D will be floating ASIs, and no racial ASIs. (Maybe there will be a suggested default location for ASIs, or "quick builds" that include it, but that will be it.). When that happens I hope all of you will continue to come here and discuss this, because I'd love to hear how it pans out for you in practice. And you may very well say that you hate it even more than you expected.

What I will not do is then say, "Well if you don't like it go find a game that suits your taste."

I can see how the sentiment has a gate-keeper-y vibe, but at the same time I would not mind if wotc had less of a hold on the rpg industry as a whole. A lot of people who don't like the direction of 5e might be well served returning to earlier editions (even wotc editions), or switching to pathfinder, or an OSR game (retroclone or not). Others might be more happy with a different style of ttrpg. It can be more of "here's a recommendation" than "you're not allowed in my game."

Premising my happiness with what wotc decides to do or not will only lead to disappointment. It's why I'm still mystified a little by the whole canon debate, like why does something not being official lead, in practice, to it being meaningless for oneself and one's gaming table?

 

[Scribe]

I think it's pretty darn likely that the next iteration of D&D will be floating ASIs, and no racial ASIs. (Maybe there will be a suggested default location for ASIs, or "quick builds" that include it, but that will be it.). When that happens I hope all of you will continue to come here and discuss this, because I'd love to hear how it pans out for you in practice. And you may very well say that you hate it even more than you expected.

What I will not do is then say, "Well if you don't like it go find a game that suits your taste."

You won't have to. Any move further away from what I like, in an eventual 6e, I just go do my own thing, like in 4e.

 

[FrogReaver]

Great. So some people, not all, will exercise their choice for story reasons, not optimization. That's a win in my book.

Sorry, but not choosing something to optimize it isn't the same as choosing it for 'story reasons'.

Yeah, we clearly have very different expectations. I'm basing my expectations on my own experience, plus all the posters I see saying the same thing I do. I don't see a single person saying, "Yeah, once I get floating ASIs I'm gonna optimize for race."

Have you looked at any character guides with Tasha's floating ASI's sections. People are already optimizing for that when it's just a variant rule.

All I see is people on your side of the debate predicting that other people are going to do that. You may be right, of course, but I just don't see any evidence for it.

What would you accept as evidence?

 

[Yaarel]

I am honestly curious about sonething: you have explained the things you dislike about D&D many times and at great length over the years. Several of those things, by your own admission, are pretty core to the D&D experience and have been for many years. Are you playing 5e now and, if so, what keeps you coming back if you seem to dislike it so much? You have every right to play whatever you like, but I have to believe there's a game out there that fits with your preferences better than D&D.

Again, this isn't an attack. I truly want to understand your desire to engage with a game you have so many fundamental problems with.

I love D&D. It is a fun game that I enjoy immensely. I also consider it an important game in the context of intellectual history.

The problematic parts that I find concerning or annoying, are few, specific, and containable.

For example, swapping race ability score improvements and proficiencies solves just about every problem I have ever had with the D&D elf. I can now officially play a Norse version of an elf. It is Charisma and Intelligence/Wisdom - any of which is +2 depending on which fullcaster class I want to explore (typically Bard, Paladin, Druid, or hopefully Psion). I swap out the weapons for Arcana and Persuasion.

I dont mind Trance, and would love to swap darkvision for an other cantrip. But the 5e rules for building an elf are satisfying.

I also hate the D&D gods, but that is a setting choice. Put the Xanathars cosmic force Cleric in core rules of the Players Handbook, and I am satisfied.

For my identity personally, that is pretty much it. No big deal. I love D&D.

I support the identies of other players too. I care about depictions of women in terms of heroism, goodlooks, and skin exposure mirroring that of men in frequency. I care about depictions of samesex couples and transgender showing up often enough.

When I see African diaspora cultures or Asian cultures, or Romani culture, voicing concerns about thoughtless repetition of memes, I agree that this kind of cultural misrepresentation is inappropriate.

The 5e Players Handbook can benefit from a cleanup. 5e has been evolving for almost a decade now. It is due for a revisit for clarifications and options anyway.

D&D is an awesome game. I want any player from any part of the world, from any culture to be able to enjoy it wholeheartedly.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Sorry, but not choosing something to optimize it isn't the same as choosing it for 'story reasons'.

Sure, that’s true. AND some people who would have chosen a race purely for the ASI will now choose their race for role playing/story/just-because-they like it reasons, as I said. Our two statements are not mutually exclusive.

And why “sorry”? I don’t understand what you are apologizing for. Or was it meant ironically?

Have you looked at any character guides with Tasha's floating ASI's sections. People are already optimizing for that when it's just a variant rule.

Sure. When 5e came out all the people who wrote 4e (and 3e?) guides wrote new ones, even though there is so much less to optimize. I doubt that will ever stop.

The question is how many, of the millions of people playing 5e, actually use those guides? But since both of us will be conjecturing, it’s not really worth discussing the answer.

What would you accept as evidence?

D&DBeyond data that controls for Tasha’s.

 

[Scott Christian]

I think this new line of "If you don't like 5e then go play another game" is a fraught road.

I think it's pretty darn likely that the next iteration of D&D will be floating ASIs, and no racial ASIs. (Maybe there will be a suggested default location for ASIs, or "quick builds" that include it, but that will be it.). When that happens I hope all of you will continue to come here and discuss this, because I'd love to hear how it pans out for you in practice. And you may very well say that you hate it even more than you expected.

What I will not do is then say, "Well if you don't like it go find a game that suits your taste."

Thanks for that.

Two campaigns, one homemade and the other being Tomb of Annihilation, use the optional floating ASI rules. Different players for each. No crossover. Here is what I have noticed:

• (Tomb campaign) We have characters that outperform every other character in just about everything when it comes to combat: damage, being hit, being able to heal, etc. is all in their wheelhouse. At times, at 5th or 6th level, they pull off 60+ damage in two rounds. Others do 12 in two rounds. I did not see this disparity when we just used the PHB races and classes.
• (Homemade Campaign) A PC's race is not integral to the story whatsoever. We have a triton, a genasi, a drow, a dwarf, a human, and at one time, a loxodon. No one blinked when we went anywhere because the difficulty of roleplaying is not worth the trouble and too disruptive to the other storylines. It definitely breaks the suspension of disbelief for me whenever I thought about it. This might not be completely about ASI, but it's interesting to note nonetheless.

I should add that both campaigns has phenomenal DMs and excellent players. I had fun during both campaigns. And there were some positives to this:

• Players describing themselves during roleplay and combat was always interesting and creative.
• Our powergamers could go to town and dive into something that they originally could not. Thus, creating a better (or at least new) experience for them.