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

[Scribe]

They say they've redone how CR is determined and how to balance encounters. Also, monsters seem to have a lot of new actions and bonus actions, so at the least fights will be more interesting.

Honestly even with all the things I dont like, this may sell me.

 

[Maxperson]

They say they've redone how CR is determined and how to balance encounters. Also, monsters seem to have a lot of new actions and bonus actions, so at the least fights will be more interesting.

I'm not sure about that. What I've see is that they moved certain spells to actions in order to help DMs pick the best action for the creature. That doesn't make it more interesting from before, since they're the same actions as before, just in a different place. Are there truly new actions?

 

[Bolares]

Honestly even with all the things I dont like, this may sell me.

Yeah, I backed it because a buddy of mine is on the design team (support your buddies people!) but the Monster Manual itself would have sold me on it

 

[Faolyn]

I'm not sure about that. What I've see is that they moved certain spells to actions in order to help DMs pick the best action for the creature. That doesn't make it more interesting from before, since they're the same actions as before, just in a different place. Are there truly new actions?

Have you been paying attention to all the LU threads and looked at all the monsters? Because yes, they have new actions. Here's the green dragon they teased us back in March.

 

[Minigiant]

Yep. 5% difference in connection isn't going to change the underlying assumption, reinforced with the math and design of abilities that the PCs are intended to stride among their enemies like gods.

All this math actually proves.

1. Balance never existed in the base game.
2. Nobody needs, in the strictest mathematical sense, a 16 at level 1.
3. Wizards set some really poor expectations.
4. Racial ASI restrictions don't make you powerless.

Ii think it's less 1-4 and more the cons of the Post 2e unified ability modifier system.

It's simple but until you hit 20, it bare affects a 1d20. You you have to delude yourself into thinking a 12 or a 14 or a 16 matters.

And once you do that... that mindset trickles down to everything.

 

[Bolares]

Ii think it's less 1-4 and more the cons of the Post 2e unified ability modifier system.

It's simple but until you hit 20, it bare affects a 1d20. You you have to delude yourself into thinking a 12 or a 14 or a 16 matters.

And once you do that... that mindset trickles down to everything.

I got nothing of this...

 

[Scribe]

Ii think it's less 1-4 and more the cons of the Post 2e unified ability modifier system.

It's simple but until you hit 20, it bare affects a 1d20. You you have to delude yourself into thinking a 12 or a 14 or a 16 matters.

And once you do that... that mindset trickles down to everything.

However you want to slice it.

I am simply more convinced, to the point of being unshakable unless someone drops some knowledge in this thread that I have not seen, that 16 is only needed as an arbitrarily derived, player driven want, not a need at all.

 

[Minigiant]

I got nothing of this...

D&D has me fretting about a 5% penalty to rolls my character will avoid like the plague.

It's that isn't self delusion...

 

[Bolares]

However you want to slice it.

I am simply more convinced, to the point of being unshakable unless someone drops some knowledge in this thread that I have not seen, that 16 is only needed as an arbitrarily derived, player driven want, not a need at all.

The only place I'd say it could be a need is in casters. It's only a +1 still, but missing a spell, or having a monster pass a ST is a bigger deal with the limited resources of a caster, mainly in low levels.

Even if the chance is still 50% or more, the cost of failling is higher, so I can see that cost driving character creation decisions more.

 

[Scribe]

The only place I'd say it could be a need is in casters. It's only a +1 still, but missing a spell, or having a monster pass a ST is a bigger deal with the limited resources of a caster, mainly in low levels.

Its a bigger deal, sure.

I'm not saying people cant care, or want the best stats, or want the best stats with whatever special hat they want, or whatever combination of 2 or 3 special rules they want with a bonus.

All I'm saying, is that mechanically, there is no way 16 is needed based on the information presented. Just no way.

I'm over the loss of racial ASI, it is what it is. Just as people dont care about why I want it, I'm dont care why they wanted it removed. Great, done, dusted. The only question remaining for me was 'well is there something mechanically that drives this behavior.'

As far as I'm concerned thats answered too.

5e as released, as designed, doesnt require a 16 in your characters primary stat.