D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[Lyxen]

You're right; there's no counterargument for 'nuh-uh, I'm not going to listen to anything that goes against my campaign of attacking people for playing a way I don't approve of and won't accept when people explain they don't even play that way'.

Indeed there is no counterargument, since you have presented none whatsoever. And please start reading what I'm writing, please telle me who I am attacking and what I approve of, I would be interested by this, if you can actually, for once, present any argument.

 

[Lyxen]

So, you’ve never started with a 16 in any stat before?

You know what, I think I have, once or twice, when my desire for a race/class combination matched it, or when it was supposed to be a "hard" campaign and some optimisation was required (But honestly, that one in particular was certainly not my favourite campaign, with the DM being very competitive and piling encounters on us for very spurious reasons). But then, both the DM and the players were very open about it, not hiding it in any way.

And what I've certainly not not done is insisting like a madman for a DM to validate an option so that I can have a more powerful character.

 

[Vaalingrade]

This entire thread, you have been accusing people of being powergamers and wanting floating ASIs for power with absolute negative connotations despite any later backpedaling.

 

[Older Beholder]

Indeed there is no counterargument, since you have presented none whatsoever. And please start reading what I'm writing, please telle me who I am attacking and what I approve of, I would be interested by this, if you can actually, for once, present any argument.

I prefer the +1,+2 to represent background and backstory, I find that more interesting than using race. Floating allows for that.

 

[Lyxen]

This entire thread, you have been accusing people of being powergamers and wanting floating ASIs for power with absolute negative connotations despite any later backpedaling.

You are the one putting negative connotations there, my friend. Again, I've been a powergamer in the past, there is no special shame attached to that, to each his own and his own preferences.

 

[Lyxen]

I prefer the +1,+2 to represent background and backstory, I find that more interesting than using race. Floating allows for that.

Then you should be allocating specific stats increase to specific backgrounds. It's just that, until you show me a character where these bonuses don't align with the class main stats, I will have a tendency to consider that it's still been done for power purpose and justified with "backstory", because, honestly, that is the easiest thing to do...

 

[Older Beholder]

You know what, I think I have, once or twice, when my desire for a race/class combination matched it, or when it was supposed to be a "hard" campaign and some optimisation was required (But honestly, that one in particular was certainly not my favourite campaign, with the DM being very competitive and piling encounters on us for very spurious reasons). But then, both the DM and the players were very open about it, not hiding it in any way.

And what I've certainly not not done is insisting like a madman for a DM to validate an option so that I can have a more powerful character.

That‘s the thing, every campaign is different. Maybe I just want to run a high stat Dark Sun game. Maybe there’s only 3 players and I need to make a character that fills more than one roll. if you can, why can’t others?

 

[Older Beholder]

.., honestly, that is the easiest thing to do...

not only is it easy, it’s fun and lets me use creativity too.

 

[Lyxen]

That‘s the thing, every campaign is different. Maybe I just want to run a high stat Dark Sun game. Maybe there’s only 3 players and I need to make a character that fills more than one roll. if you can, why can’t others?

And, once more, I'm not forbidding anyone to do anything, if you want high stats, all power to you, god knows that some people are not ashamed to post really high stats characters (where it gets a bit silly, because they are taking people for fools, is when they are saying "honestly, I rolled them ).

I'm just asking people to be honest about their motivations, that's all.

Just another example, one of our few powergamers is starting a campaign, he has asked use to use a feature of DDB where you can roll 10 sets of abilities and choose. Obviously, these characters will end up having powerful stats. I don't need it, and honestly, I don't like it much, because that DM also has a tendency to want to make us feel high powered by giving us really powerful items really early, but I still like his campaigns and the stories, and it's a good chance to play. And I therefore still have to go through the process, because it's expected by the DM and some of the people at the table, although I think that it unbalances the game and makes it even more swingy. But doing otherwise would not be playing by the table rules, and it would create a character which would be a drag for the others, not something that I want to do either. The only thing that I'm not going to do is come brag about my stats and my optimised character (since it's not optimised, not really at least I think), or my "skill" in creating it...

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

And executioner, don't forget about this one, it's my favourite one !



And again, if there were other undisputable reasons, I'm pretty sure that I would have been served them multiple times in a clear fashion over 30 pages.



It's really easy, people just say that they like having characters slightly more powerful or not even slightly technically disadvantaged over the combinations that are a result of the racial ASIs. If it's what they prefer, then it's their taste and that's all there is too it, no one is judging preferences here. But at least they are frank and honest about it and stop hiding it behind reasons of "races equality" or "I want the freedom to be creative and have any race/class combination that I want" (because that has always been the case before, all these combinations WERE already available).

You know this is a no-win discussion. The ones on the side of pro-floating ASI's simply shrug, say "You don't like them, it is optional". And then when WOTC inevitably comes out and says "Nope, it is now RAW", those same people will state "There is no discussion to be had. You guys lost. Either quit the game or adjust."

If you have hard copies (soft copies will be erased from history) of the three books being re-written and released in less than 10 weeks, it will be very telling to see the changes.