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

[Lyxen]

I feel like the powergamer argument isn't worth engaging with. If the mechanical effect of ASIs matters, then it matters equally whether floating or fixed.

Again, no it does not, it's clearly demonstrated by the guides - if nothing else - that floating ASIs have a stronger mechanical effect than fixed ones. Just look at the color of races for a given class in updated guides. Deny this if you can.

To pretend anything else is disingenuous and exhausting. As has been reiterated, if someone wants to play a low strength halfling fighter, they can in either case.

How about avoiding strawmaning as well ?

No one here is talking about creating purposefully bad characters. But it's clear, again from the guides (and the few examples given here show that people who defend themselves from powergaming but who have characters extremely close to the most powerful of the ones described in the guides - whether they have read the guides or reached the same conclusion on their own is another matter), that there are 3 different power levels at least:

• Casual characters
• Optimised characters with Racial ASIs
• Optimised characters with Floating ASIs

It's no use denying the difference between the last two (read the guides), and because one of my aims is to reduce the power gap between casual and optimised characters, it's obvious why I don't want to use the option of Floating ASIs. They bring nothing positive to our tables.

 

[Chaosmancer]

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.

Maybe, but so what? I don't think Tashas floating ASIs has created anything more optimized than the variant human, or a Half-Elf Sorclock or Pali-lock. This doesn't change the power level of the game pretty much at all just increases the size of the middle. And the optimizers will always optimize, with or without this.

 

[Scott Christian]

From what I see, it's a good game if you like technical games, but 3e really was too much for me, I couldn't stand fights that took more than one evening or having to spend 3 hours just to create an NPC. Now I can run 3 interesting fights in one evening and still spend the majority of the time roleplaying, and I define my NPCs in a few minutes at most, D&D is fun again.

100% with you. It is definitely "to each their own" type rule when it comes to crunchiness.

 

[Scott Christian]

A median could be a fine word for it.

I'm using baseline because I think that is what the developers assumed when they had to run a character against challenges to see if they were balanced.

And I guess we'll just have to disagree on that last part. My guess is they playtested the heck out of characters that didn't start with 16 or 17, but rather a 15. And my guess is the same is true for 4th level, and 8th, and etc. I would also venture to guess this was true for skill checks, saving throws, and attribute rolls, not just combat.

 

[Scott Christian]

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.

But, you know what, maybe they picked a half-elf because it IS more powerful. And maybe they might have played the fun halfling concept that they had first, but when they were given the choice, they didn't see a reason not to play the half-elf, which is far stronger, fits with the class better, and moved on from there.

But, we must be powergamers and optimizers and rollplayers because we want that 16 charisma on the wrong race. It is just a constant parade of how terrible we must be, how we must be liars, how we should just admit is it all about power and we don't care about story, instead of recognizing that I can tell a story with both of those characters. Maybe even mostly the same story, so... I have no incentive to choose the first option, and all the reasons to pick the second, but trying to make those two options more equal just shows my true nature as a person who is obsessed with being better than everyone else.

It's just exhausting. And especially so since this thread started out on such a positive note, and here we are again, back in the trenches, defending ourselves and our integrity.

I hear you Chaos. I am not accusing or throwing around the word powergamer. There are some that min/max, and that's cool. I have no problem with it. I apologize if my question came off as rude. It was not my intent. I just wanted clarification on the penalized portion of your statement. For example, you feel players are penalized for not playing the optimized (+1) race/class combo. So people might feel penalized for playing, let's just say, a halfling fighter. That was the part I wanted to hear more about.

Thanks for being patient with me. It is appreciated.

 

[LadyElect]

Again, no it does not, it's clearly demonstrated by the guides - if nothing else - that floating ASIs have a stronger mechanical effect than fixed ones. Just look at the color of races for a given class in updated guides. Deny this if you can.

I don’t ask this to be combative but rather because I have quite literally never seen or looked for these and “look at the color” suggests to me a specific set. Is there a specific source you are referring to here? Or is there a most popular option people go to for this sort of thing? I’m curious to see an illustration of this benefit.

 

[clearstream]

I don’t ask this to be combative but rather because I have quite literally never seen or looked for these and “look at the color” suggests to me a specific set. Is there a specific source you are referring to here? Or is there a most popular option people go to for this sort of thing? I’m curious to see an illustration of this benefit.

Could be referring to the option to move current racial ASIs onto different abilities. When I use the term 'floating' ASIs, I mean the option to put 2pts on one ability and 1pt on another, or 1pt on three abilities, not the option to optimise your mountain dwarf as a caster. I agree that the latter is wrong-headed. Gods know what they were thinking.

 

[Scott Christian]

I don’t ask this to be combative but rather because I have quite literally never seen or looked for these and “look at the color” suggests to me a specific set. Is there a specific source you are referring to here? Or is there a most popular option people go to for this sort of thing? I’m curious to see an illustration of this benefit.

He is referring to this source (and there are a few more like it).

RPGBOT - DnD 5e - Classes

They show optimized classes and tell you what to choose. I have perused them, but never used them, as I find it much more fun to try and figure it out on my own. But, I have seen many players use them - word for word.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's no use denying the difference between the last two (read the guides), and because one of my aims is to reduce the power gap between casual and optimised characters, it's obvious why I don't want to use the option of Floating ASIs. They bring nothing positive to our tables.

Agreed. I think this is a fairly strong point.

 

[FrogReaver]

Maybe, but so what? I don't think Tashas floating ASIs has created anything more optimized than the variant human, or a Half-Elf Sorclock or Pali-lock. This doesn't change the power level of the game pretty much at all just increases the size of the middle. And the optimizers will always optimize, with or without this.

Most classes can pick a stronger race to combo with using tashas than without