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

[Bolares]

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.

I know you are over that, I'm not trying to go back to the racial ASI discussion, we got as close to an agreement as we could on that.

I'm just trying to understand where you draw the line on "needed". To me if the cost is so high that missing a roll results in 50% of your resources being lost, you need to get your primary stat as high as possible.

 

[Scribe]

I know you are over that, I'm not trying to go back to the racial ASI discussion, we got as close to an agreement as we could on that.

I'm just trying to understand where you draw the line on "needed". To me if the cost is so high that missing a roll results in 50% of your resources being lost, you need to get your primary stat as high as possible.

Well, even casters have none casting options and cantrips right?

The loss of a spell is a bigger deal, but they (wizards, sorcerer, especially warlock) are still not completely without options right?

So I would say it matters more, but still not approaching required?

Does the basic math look the same? I'd have to check after work.

I really wish I had done this many threads ago, it would have put my mind at ease a long time ago.

 

[Bolares]

The loss of a spell is a bigger deal, but they (wizards, sorcerer, especially warlock) are still not completely without options right?

I think the three you mention are the ones that suffer less. Wizards have arcane recovery, Sorcerers have sorcery points to convert (after level 2) and warlocks have short rests (and a reeeally good cantrip).

 

[Azzy]

Can someone link or list all the places WoTC used pregens, if any have a 14 prime stat that gives @Scribe a chance to be right. if NONE do I think that sinks his arguement.

More than you can shake a fist at.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

No I haven't seen them all, which is why I used, "I'm not sure" and asked the question, "Are there truly new abilities?"

Thank you for that link. If that example is typical of the changes, I will be happy. I hope, though, that it's not like a movie preview where they show you most of the few good moments and are then disappointed by the feature itself.

 

[Azzy]

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.

To be fair, BECMI also had a unified modifier system.

 

[Bolares]

No I haven't seen them all, which is why I used, "I'm not sure" and asked the question, "Are there truly new abilities?"

Thank you for that link. If that example is typical of the changes, I will be happy. I hope, though, that it's not like a movie preview where they show you most of the few good moments and are then disappointed by the feature itself.

The tarrasque preview also has a lot of actions.

 

[Maxperson]

The tarrasque preview also has a lot of actions.

My group doesn't want to go advanced, but now I'm thinking of buying the monster book and just using those. Monsters are my prerogative.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sorry, not even fully optimized.

I'm just talking at the most basic. Like Orc Fighter/Barb, Level 1, Standard Array.

17 may as well be 16 in terms of the calculation being discussed.

Going into various power builds just makes the 'balanced' discussion even more laughable.

See, this is where I end up losing the conversation. A lot of discussion about Racial ASIs is that they "encourage" archettypes. Like playing an Orc Barbarian. And then we seem to have two different view points that constantly shift.

Either playing an Orc Barbarian is more powerful than the average, and playing an Orc Warlock is average or Playing an Orc Warlock is weaker to represent a higher challenge and playing an Orc Barbarian is normal. No one ever seems to disagree on their relative position, but I've seen a lot of people put forth the idea that 16 is somehow more powerful than average when I find that position to not follow from the evidence we have.

 

[Bolares]

My group doesn't want to go advanced, but now I'm thinking of buying the monster book and just using those. Monsters are my prerogative.

I've been using 4e monster slightly modified and it's been great!