D&D General No More "Humans in Funny Hats": Racial Mechanics Should Determine Racial Cultures

[Scribe]

For a system that supposedly embraces diversity, 5e actually instead promotes uniformity by eliminating differences between gender, race, size and weight. While that might be equality, it’s not diversity

Reducing everything to a couple of special rules certainly is a choice.

Not one I find satisfying, but it is what Wizards is hanging their hat on.

 

[Faolyn]

You have written words, but you haven't actually answered it in coherent manner.

No, I just haven't answered it in a way that will let you go "aha! See, she's just a big dummy who's picking on ASI!"

As I have written multiple times, ASIs are assigned mostly either to support certain class builds or for reasons that are supposed to be biological but don't stand up when compared to other races or even to their own lore or physical descriptions. Therefore, ASIs are random enough that they might as well be assigned.

Secondly, while changing traits is enough to make a race into something else (halflings have never had breath weapons, there's nothing in their writeups that ever suggests that one might have a breath weapon or that they are in any way related to dragons or other fire-breathing monsters), changing an ASI won't affect the race in the same way. Halfings are Nimble and Lucky, and will continue to be so even if they have +2 Charisma. Those traits do a better job of showing what a halfling is like even if they had no ASI at all, because lots of races have +2 Dex, but none of them have Nimble and Lucky.

If you can't find that coherent, that's a problem with your comprehension, not my argument.

Why can't you handle variable ASI versions of races in the same way then? Why you need floating ASIs?

Already explained. Please learn to read.

Also, why should I create six versions of a race when I can have one version with a floating +2?

 

[Scribe]

So instead you get "do I take this race for the special rules, or this race because I think they're cool."

Same number of layers, same number of questions. Just different questions.

We are talking about mechanics. Crunch. ASI.

Taking a race because it's cool is always an option. Like my pre 4e Tiefling Paladin.

So then you admit it's a flawed premise to assume that people who want a floating ASI will always put it in their class' main stat, yes?

I'm not making that assumption. I told you days ago.

Admit you are not required to have a 16 (or more) in your Primary stat, you just desire it. You are free to do whatever you want, the game has shifted in the direction you desire.

But it's somehow not all the same when people play +2 Strength races as warriors, or +2 Dex races as rogues or monks, or when +2 Cha races as bards or warlocks

It isn't.

Because not every race gets that +2 Str, at least before Tasha's.

Was it perfect diversity? Not at all. Strictly speaking was there more ASI diversity? Yes.

 

[Geoff Thirlwell]

Just speaking from my personal experience, there are two main groups of players who benefit from putting the +2 wherever they want
1. Power gamers
2. Players who want to make silly characters for the sake of their own amusement

I preferred the old version. My group still had lots of players playing race/class combinations that weren’t completely optimised. I was pleasantly surprised that although I allow races from all the books, only one of the 24 characters in the adventure I’m running is taken outside of the PHB and there was a good roleplpaying reason why. All the weird and wonderful races in D&D lose there specialness when you live next door to them and invite them round for tea and scones.

 

[Scribe]

So instead you get "do I take this race for the special rules, or this race because I think they're cool."

Same number of layers, same number of questions. Just different questions.

Oh and this is wrong anyway.

"Do I pick my race based on ASI."
"Do I pick my race based on special rules."
"Do I pick my race based on what I think looks cool."

Add however many other considerations you want, culture, origin, heritage, destiny, its ALWAYS 1 less now, because ASI is no longer a consideration.

As we established before, 3 > 2, and as such, "All considerations" will always be less than "All considerations, and ASI."

 

[Faolyn]

We are talking about mechanics. Crunch. ASI.

Which you still have. Only now, you're not limited where you put the ASI.

I'm not making that assumption. I told you days ago.

Admit you are not required to have a 16 (or more) in your Primary stat, you just desire it. You are free to do whatever you want, the game has shifted in the direction you desire.

You are making that assumption, because otherwise you wouldn't be trying to bully me into "admitting" something anything. I've already said that the +2 can be put into any stat, but you refuse to accept that.

It isn't.

Because not every race gets that +2 Str, at least before Tasha's.

Far as I can tell, only tritons didn't get a +2.

Was it perfect diversity? Not at all. Strictly speaking was there more ASI diversity? Yes.

Each race being forced into a specific niche means there was more diversity? What?

 

[Faolyn]

Just speaking from my personal experience, there are two main groups of players who benefit from putting the +2 wherever they want
1. Power gamers
2. Players who want to make silly characters for the sake of their own amusement

And in my personal experience, people who use the term "power gamer" are often snobbish gatekeepers who want to feel superior to people who aren't "really" roleplaying because of reasons.

Also, in my persona experience, judging people you don't know based on one's own preconceived notions (by saying that they must be either powergamers or people who are silly) is neither nice nor useful, yes?

 

[Scribe]

Which you still have. Only now, you're not limited where you put the ASI.

I still have a layer of consideration due to ASI restrictions? No, thats false.

You are making that assumption, because otherwise you wouldn't be trying to bully me into "admitting" something anything. I've already said that the +2 can be put into any stat, but you refuse to accept that.

I'm not bullying you. The math of the game does not require a 16 at level 1. You simply desire to not be restricted, so you can put that +2 wherever you want.

Again, the game does not require a 16 in Charisma, to play a Warlock.

Far as I can tell, only tritons didn't get a +2.

Many races didnt get a +2 in Str...now all can. That is not diversity.

Each race being forced into a specific niche means there was more diversity? What?

I'll make it simple.

PHB - No sub types. Pre-Tashas.

1. Str +2: Dragonborn, Half Orc,
2. Dex +2: Elf, Halfling
3. Con +2: Dwarf
4. Int +2: Gnome
5. Wis +2:
6. Ch +2: Half Elf, Tiefling
7. Any: Human

PHB - No sub types. Post-Tashas.

1. Str +2:
2. Dex +2:
3. Con +2:
4. Int +2:
5. Wis +2:
6. Ch +2:
7. Any: Dwarf, Elf, Halfling, Gnome, Half Elf, Tiefling, Dragonborn, Half Orc, Human

Hmm.

And in my personal experience, people who use the term "power gamer" are often snobbish gatekeepers who want to feel superior to people who aren't "really" roleplaying because of reasons.

Also, in my persona experience, judging people you don't know based on one's own preconceived notions is neither nice nor useful, yes?

The irony here.

 

[Geoff Thirlwell]

And in my personal experience, people who use the term "power gamer" are often snobbish gatekeepers who want to feel superior to people who aren't "really" roleplaying because of reasons.

Also, in my persona experience, judging people you don't know based on one's own preconceived notions (by saying that they must be either powergamers or people who are silly) is neither nice nor useful, yes?

I did say from my personal experience, there may well be a third group of which you are a member but I’ve not gamed with such a person. Personally, I try and come up with a concept of a character and then try to match that with an option available in the game. Sometimes, I might alternatively read a new subclass and be inspired by it. I’m not judging anyone or saying I’m superior to anyone. I’ve played the game since B/X and 1e and I believe flexibility to be a positive thing but also the ruination of the game by encouraging the two types of players I highlighted

 

[ReshiIRE]

You're talking in circles.

In my opinion this naughty word would be solved if the game adapted a structure matching Level Up 5e and Pathfinder 2e to make it possible to use whatever class and whatever ancestory together, without having to worry to play for or against type. I'm fairly sure that'd solve everyone's issues.

Like, I know it's a smaller community, but I'll point out there's simply no discussion on this at all in the Pathfinder community, yet in the time I've spent here this subject has been beaten to death every week in at-least one thread.

It's getting old.