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

[Chaosmancer]

Actually, my perspective is the inverse, which is that if you're the person that want to optimise, you will be unable to resist the lure of a higher primary attribute. And that this is one of the reason for not allowing Floating ASIs at our tables.

But that isn't bad. It isn't bad to play an elf with a 16 dex, so why is it bad to play a tiefling with a 16 dex? You've never explained except to say that all powergamers are the same.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If anyone is obsessed with that +1 you keep talking about, it is an obsession with keeping that +1 from certain race/class combos.

We've got people accusing us of all sorts of things, all because we want to play a concept that isn't pre-approved to have their blessing of a 16. A halfling warlock with a 16 charisma? Obvious powergamer, obsessed with making the strongest character they can. Half-Elf warlock with a 16 charisma? Perfectly normal roleplayer, no problem whatsoever with this person.

Yeah, this. The intensity of emotion I feel directed at me for generally preferring higher attributes to funky race/class combinations vastly outweighs the intensity of emotion I feel about having to make the trade-off.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, they do. And passive discouragement can be as simple as encouraging the opposite. And oh look, that's exactly what they did. Encouraged the opposite, which passively discourages the other path. No need for them to state it anywhere, it is just a natural consequence.

As Umbran pointed out, there's room for there to be no encouragement AND no discouragement.

Uh huh, but they didn't do it to actively encourage dwarven wizards. It was at best an afterthought.

Not really relevant. They did in fact encourage going against type. Whether it was specifically the dwarven type or not doesn't matter. It clearly shows that they were not against breaking type like you claimed.

And lo and behold, what number does every race including humans get in their prime stat by level 1? A 16 or a 17.

They all get a 15 or better.

Of course they are assuming you will take either a dex race or a human. And secondly, you immediately went against the guideline by putting your 15 in Charisma, the 15 is your highest, your highest score should be your dexterity.

I did not go against the guideline. It says that the prime stat should be the highest and it was. Both charisma and dexterity were 15's. It did not say put the 15 in dex. Only that it should be the highest stat.

Dude... of course you are most likely to increase your dex, it is your primary stat. Yes, you are free to choose, but it doesn't take much to realize that a +1 to all your most important abilities is more valuable than a +1 to your least important abilities.

Not me. Increasing my prime stat is a waste in a game so easy. With bounded accuracy it's much more important to raise wisdom or constitution for the save, and charisma for the social interactions. With con you also get more hit points.

The game isn't easy with a 16, so you are wrong.

Maybe I'm just a better player, because with a 16 it's very easy. With a 14 it's only easy.

So.. you immediately had to specify you were building a mountain dwarf, because if I went with a hill dwarf cleric, I could get the ASI...

Clerics are in type for mountain dwarves. I had to specify to forestall you from trying to limit it to just hill dwarves.

So, dwarven clerics can get the 16 wisdom I said. So I'm still right. You are just trying to quibble that a subrace doesn't follow the typing exactly. And why would you play a Mountain Dwarf Cleric instead of a hill dwarf, you aren't gaining any benefits that are worth it.

I guess you're going to incorrectly go there anyway. No, dwarven clerics cannot get a 16 wisdom. Only hill dwarven clerics can. Mountain dwarven in type clerics cannot.

Animal biology covers multiple different species.

Yep. All the many DIFFERENT animal biologies.

And you do realize that there is no announcement of 6e right? That there is nothing more than fear mongering of what might happen in a version of the game that might never exist?

It's discussion about the possible future. Nothing wrong with doing that. In any case, nobody is saying you are having big bad wrong fun by using floating bonuses.

 

[Yaarel]

In a world where.

Array
Buy
Roll
Racial ASI
Tasha's
Custom Lineage

Are all options, in that world, how can we even pretend 'balance' was or is, a concern?

I care alot about balance. I dont really see a probem.

Rolling random abilities creates unbalanced characters, so I never do it.

An array is most fair. Pointbuy is ok.

Moving a score improvement to an other ability is balanced. Just like assigning an array score to an other ability is balanced.

Custom lineage is a bit less powerful than a Players Handbook race. Balanced.

It is all balanced. (Except for rolling which is unbalanced)

 

[Scribe]

I care alot about balance. I dont really see a probem.

Rolling random abilities creates unbalanced characters, so I ne er do it.

An array is most fair. Pointbuy is ok.

Moving a score improvement to an other ability is balanced. Just like assigning an array score to an other ability is balanced.

Custom lineage is a bit less powerful than a Players Handbook race. Balanced.

It is all balanced.

I disagree completely that both these are all balanced against each other, and that the Devs care.

Standard Array + Racial ASI? I could buy that.

Anything outside of that cannot be considered balanced. Too different from the basic standard.

This isn't about what we consider balanced. It's like saying 1 = 2, because they are close enough.

 

[Maxperson]

I care alot about balance. I dont really see a probem.

Rolling random abilities creates unbalanced characters, so I never do it.

An array is most fair. Pointbuy is ok.

Moving a score improvement to an other ability is balanced. Just like assigning an array score to an other ability is balanced.

Custom lineage is a bit less powerful than a Players Handbook race. Balanced.

It is all balanced. (Except for rolling which is unbalanced)

You can't discount rolling just because you never do it. The claim was that all of the stat generation methods are not balanced against each other and you just agreed with him with the bold portion.

 

[Yaarel]

I disagree completely that both these are all balanced against each other, and that the Devs care.

Standard Array + Racial ASI? I could buy that.

Anything outside of that cannot be considered balanced. Too different from the basic standard.

This isn't about what we consider balanced. It's like saying 1 = 2, because they are close enough.

When it comes to balancing a gaming system, I have a good eye, and I know what I am talking about.

Moving ability scores around is nonsignificant.

Rolling abilities is horribly unbalanced.

 

[Maxperson]

Rolling abilities is horribly unbalanced.

It can be at either extreme, but most of the time it's relatively balanced.

 

[Yaarel]

It can be at either extreme, but most of the time it's relatively balanced.

If a player wants to roll randomly, I would rather have them roll to determine which array value gets assigned to which ability.

 

[Maxperson]

If a player wants to roll randomly, I would rather have them roll to determine which array value gets assigned to which ability.

I wouldn't play in that game. I despise arrays and point buy. Total deal breaker for me.