last time I saw a single digit con (not counting when it was drained or damaged down) was 2e.I do! My players often place stats for roleplay and not optimization. I've seen 8 and even more rarely 7 cons. Not often, but it happens.
last time I saw a single digit con (not counting when it was drained or damaged down) was 2e.I do! My players often place stats for roleplay and not optimization. I've seen 8 and even more rarely 7 cons. Not often, but it happens.
No, because you still have the +2/+1. (They were never called "racial bonuses" in the first place, so they haven't even been renamed.)This is objectively false. I will have lost racial bonuses.
And it is a choice, because you can choose to put the floating ASI in the traditional stats, or you can choose to put them in different stats. You can choose for every elf you make to have +2 Dex and every tiefling have +2 Cha, even if it wouldn't benefit your class. Just like how it's always been. You haven't lost that ability, even if they're not calledThe floating +2, +1 is no longer being presented as optional, so it's not a matter of not taking those options.
First, declaring that something is a fallacy doesn't actually mean it's wrong.And the Oberoni Fallacy isn't an answer that works, since new races won't have racial bonuses for me to opt back into.
Tell that to the bard in one of the games I'm in. I know the PC has either +0 or -1 in Con, and we had to stare at the player over the tops of our collective glasses to get him to start rerolling the 1s and 2s for hp when we leveled up. I think when the PC was 4th or 5th level they had 17 hp. The player likes RPing low stats. Everyone at our table does, really, but I think this is the first time anyone had made Con their dump stat.I mean yeah rolling is a thing, but who knows a player crazy enough to put even the 8 in there con no modifier let alone a 3...
I don`t think so.10 is not unhealthy, and is entirely irrelevant to my point.
What's more, the gods of aRNGee have dictated that 4.62% of dwarves will roll a 6 and that 9.72% of elves will roll an 8. That means that there will be fewer than half the number of dwarves with an 8 con as there are elves with an 8 con. 9.39% of elves will have a 5-6 con, while only 1.84% of dwarves will have a 5-6 con. And only elves will have cons below 5.Variation within a population is not a problem.
If the God aRNGee decides that 2 beings will have con 8, but one ends up an Elf, and the other a Dwarf, then despite both being far from robust, the Dwarf is still a Dwarf, and gets a bump to 10 Con instead while the Elf gets 8.
No. This is a blatantly wrong misstatement of my position.I don`t think so.
By your argumentation, every dwarf must have a con of 16...
I've seen it in every edition but 4th, which I did not really play(A couple of con sessions don't count).last time I saw a single digit con (not counting when it was drained or damaged down) was 2e.
um...I see endurance, I see inner metal, I see sturdy... all that can have many ways to read it that doesn't involve a stat at all."Their courage and endurance are also easily a match for any of the larger folk."
"Dwarves are solid and enduring like the mountains they love, weathering the passage of centuries with stoic endurance and little change."
"The dwarf god Moradin forged the first dwarves in his great workshop, causing them to spring to life from inert metal when he cooled the heated castings with his breath."
"Moradin crafted the dwarves' sturdy bodies, giving them the strength to work for long periods of time."
"His gifts of durability and purpose gave the dwarves all they needed..."
I'm sure there is more, but this more makes my point that they should have a constitution bonus.
but why do you care what goes into the stats? That is the question I have asked and still don't get. I mean at the end of the day ESPECIALLY if you are rolling (and I don't understand that either) why does it matter how they got the stats?Because it's not about the final number(and I don't allow arrays or point buy). It's about the race as a whole, which includes the PC.
The flaw here is rolling.rolling has SUCH a huge swing (except not between cheaters, rerolling new characters until you are happy and suiciding low stat characters) that I can't believe
I like RPing low stats too, so do SOME of the players in my greater circle, but con is just SO deadly to have at a negative.Tell that to the bard in one of the games I'm in. I know the PC has either +0 or -1 in Con, and we had to stare at the player over the tops of our collective glasses to get him to start rerolling the 1s and 2s for hp when we leveled up. I think when the PC was 4th or 5th level they had 17 hp. The player likes RPing low stats. Everyone at our table does, really, but I think this is the first time anyone had made Con their dump stat.