D&D 5E Wow! No more subraces. The Players Handbook races reformat to the new race format going forward.

[Scribe]

That's not a compromise. That's you getting what you want and my side getting screwed over.

Its already over dude. Unless someone puts out a 3rd Party book, Wizards wont back away from this and racial ASI are just a thing of the past.

 

[Maxperson]

Its already over dude. Unless someone puts out a 3rd Party book, Wizards wont back away from this and racial ASI are just a thing of the past.

So was alignment until they backed down and reintroduced it with a compromise.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

So was alignment until they backed down and reintroduced it with a compromise.

Alignment being dropped was very, very minor. This actually has mechanics attached to it. Racial ASIs are not coming back. That's clear.

 

[Scribe]

So was alignment until they backed down and reintroduced it with a compromise.

I can appreciate your desires here, but I'm not holding my breath. If Tasha's wasnt enough to satisfy people then, it certainly wont be now that they have gotten what they wanted.

That wont stop me from making an issue of it in every Survey from now till 5.5 comes out, but, it is what it is as far as discussion here goes.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I can appreciate your desires here, but I'm not holding my breath. If Tasha's wasnt enough to satisfy people then, it certainly wont be now that they have gotten what they wanted.

That wont stop me from making an issue of it in every Survey from now till 5.5 comes out, but, it is what it is as far as discussion here goes.

Good Idea.
Also a +2 bonus is so minor, if they keep them in the stat block, it does not matter.
They could also put a "usually goliaths are especially trained" before +2 Str.

The only argument for me is that it does nothing to actually transfer the Idea of an especially strong race. And a +2 bonus is not enough to work with.
A loxodon who is an elephant person does not get any bonus to strength at all. But they are tough. If big means strong and tough, both ability increases go to str and con. Since now at least +1 to three stats is on the table, you can at least get a bit of vatiety. But then, compared to standard human, it is no bonus at all.

So if they keep it, by all means, the standard human has to officially go and be replaced by a different one (or the variant human if feats become core, but I prefer a different solution).

 

[Chaosmancer]

If you add in feats, you have to also add them in to the other side to get a true gauge. So +8 vs. +13. Still slower.

Why would I add feats that don't increase Dexterity? The entire point is to show that dexterity and initiative are being decoupled. Demanding that I must include it is like trying to show you can have a car that doesn't run on gasoline, then insisting that you must include a gasoline engine to run the car.

I mean, if I wanted to prove that dexterity doesn't increase movement speed compared to someone with the mobile feat, I wouldn't give the dexterous person Mobile, that ruins the entire concept by having no control group.

Already answered that twice.

By claiming that they are popular, as though that alone was a good enough reason. But you could have had snow elves and desert elves and mountain elves and space elves all without changning their ASIs. After all, if elves were popular because of their ASIs, then changing it would be a bad thing.

Your answer doesn't dispute the claim.

What part of they didn't make enough of them to have stat bonuses for each stat are you not getting? Or are you just twisting my arguments again?

Are you sure they didn't? How many would they have had to make to cover "all" of six numbers when every race got two increases? Not even looking and just going from what I saw in previous discussions there were AT LEAST 4 different types of halflings, one of whom got a +str and were famous barbarians. What was the point of making strong halflings famous for being barbarians if it wasn't to open halflings into playing strong melee archetypes like barbarians?

 

[Umbran]

So was alignment until they backed down and reintroduced it with a compromise.

If that is your hope, note that berating people on EN World isn't going to be what accomplishes the task.

I think there is already a compromise in place - you can, if you wish, say that the +2 and +1 go in the traditional places in your game for the bulk of the population for each race. You may also either enforce that for PCs, or you may say that the PCs can, if they wish, be anomalous members of their populations.

Your game does not produce a statistically relevant number of PCs of any given race for this to present a difficulty for the fiction. The average can remain, even with PCs choosing to defy it.

 

[Maxperson]

Why would I add feats that don't increase Dexterity? The entire point is to show that dexterity and initiative are being decoupled. Demanding that I must include it is like trying to show you can have a car that doesn't run on gasoline, then insisting that you must include a gasoline engine to run the car.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're trying to claim that those non-dex feats increase speed, then the dex guy can have those non-dex feats as well. All else being equal(both having same feats) the guy with the highest dex is faster than the SLOWER guy.

By claiming that they are popular, as though that alone was a good enough reason. But you could have had snow elves and desert elves and mountain elves and space elves all without changning their ASIs. After all, if elves were popular because of their ASIs, then changing it would be a bad thing.

Two more arguments that I never made. That said, I will note that for the first argument popularity is in fact a good enough reason in a game where popularity = $$$. WotC is in the business to make $$$.

Are you sure they didn't? How many would they have had to make to cover "all" of six numbers when every race got two increases? Not even looking and just going from what I saw in previous discussions there were AT LEAST 4 different types of halflings, one of whom got a +str and were famous barbarians. What was the point of making strong halflings famous for being barbarians if it wasn't to open halflings into playing strong melee archetypes like barbarians?

Show me one race other than elves that got bonuses in all 6 stats with 6 subraces in a single edition.

 

[Faolyn]

Individuals of that race, yes. For them to get separate stat bonuses, they would need to be a separate race. Otherwise they would get what the race gets.

Why? Why insist that all members of a race are the same? And if they have to all be the same, why allow people to roll or assign stats at all?

Because consistency and what makes sense matters. If you like nonsense, have at it. A lot of people are okay with nonsensical things. I'm not.

Why is it nonsensical? Are you saying that you if you saw a race with Powerful Build and no forced Strength bonus, it would be too crazy for you to play? Does this mean you'd never play a loxodon? Or a hobgoblin, since they have no traits that support their +2 Con?

I've said it before and again in this thread not to long ago that I'm okay with a floating +2. Give elves +2 dex and a floating +2. Gives dwarves their +2 con bonus and a floating +2. It's not hard to make it so that both sides get what they want. No need to screw over one side or the other.

But you already get what you want when you have totally floating ASIs: you can put the +2/+1 wherever you want. You literally get what you want, which is dwarfs with a +2 Con and elves with a +2 Dex, if that's where you want to put the stats. Are you saying that you wouldn't know what bonus to put in which stat if the book wouldn't tell you? Are you saying that you wouldn't know how to play a goliath if it didn't come with a pre-placed Strength +2? I fail to see how you get screwed over by having a choice. Explain.

 

[HammerMan]

No, that's not true. They over balanced and over bounded the game. Imbalance is what makes the game fun. They could have made it more fun by relaxing their balance quest just a bit. After 3e they seem to have gone too far in the other direction.

um...what makes unbalanced things fun?