Unpopular opinions go here

[Cadence]

Being real strong or having super strength is the least interesting way to make a character stand out.

Apparently it is important to lots of Halfling fans ;-)

 

[Cadence]

Sounds like an opinion.

Maybe even an "unpopular" one?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sounds like an opinion.

Hence the "I think".

 

[Lanefan]

On races - I dunno. Why not focus on the stuff that should actually matter? Society, history, culture. The stuff that actually makes a difference between an elf and a halfling?

That can be there too, and it's good stuff; but there's a seemingly rather high number of players (if these forums are anything to go by) whose stance boils down to "if there's no mechanics involved, it might as well not exist". Or, put more simply, "fluff doesn't count".

Not my stance, but it's out there.

All those mechanics? Meh. They don’t differentiate anything. Most of them - like seeing in the dark for example - are shared by various races.

IME the various mechanical differentiators between 1e species do make a difference, and though it's fairly subtle most of the time there's occasions when it's front and centre. The Elvish resistance to charm, sleep, and some forms of paralysis is huge if you're fighting ghouls or foes who rely on charming. Dwarven underground senses (determine depth, slope, etc.) can be a big deal if-when a party gets lost down there. And so on.

Also, using the night-sight example, you can differentiate a bit further by having different species have different types of night vision that work in different places. In 1e Dwarves had infravision, good underground but not great outdoors; while Elves had ultravision, great outdoors but nigh-useless underground.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't agree with you on the rules distinction. All hard mechanics are rules that in some way another deal with content. Whether it's to shape content, like the rules that you can only pick 1 race and 1 class at 1st level, or the ones that deal with only content like a medusa can turn you to stone with X gaze mechanic.

I think differentiating them is a distinction that doesn't matter.

Agreed.

There's no rule that the game can't do without.

Disagreed. There's many rules that 5e could do very well without.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm glad 6e is a non-starter for you. Me too. I don't play games that don't exist.

OTOH, when you bake in "meaningful" mechanics (and I'm putting scare quotes there deliberately since I find almost all the race mechanics to be pretty much meaningless) into a given race, and refusing to allow any variation from that, you are insisting that everyone else must play the way you play.

When we have floating ASI's, you can STILL play the way you want to, but, now, you don't get to force your preferences on everyone else. Everyone wins.

Note, none of the mechanics for races - Halfling luck, darkvision, etc. - has been changed. The only thing that's been changed is the inherent stat bonuses.

Like I said, if a +2 Dexterity is the only thing that makes your elf interesting... well...

A +2 bonus to Dex may or may not make my Elf any more interesting but it does serve to differentiate it from a species that doesn't get said bonus. Personally, though, I prefer a wider range of species-driven bonuses and penalties to stats than 5e now has; and I'm more than perfectly fine with this resulting in some classes flat-out being more suited to some species than others.

 

[Lanefan]

That's what I was meaning, but apparently didn't outright say.

Combat roles. Tank. DPS. Heals. Others?
Social roles. Face. Sage. Good cop. Bad cop. Blackmailer. Others?
Exploration roles. Scout. Sage. Quartermaster. Forager. Others?

Pick one from each.

Tank. Face. Sage.

Now I've got a character who can do everything, why do I need the rest of the party?

 

[overgeeked]

Tank. Face. Sage.

Now I've got a character who can do everything, why do I need the rest of the party?

Because you can’t do everything. That’s the point.

The tank can take hits but not dish them out so will eventually die without the DPS there to kill the monsters and the healer to keep the tank from dying.

In the current set up “face” is the sum total of the social pillar. In a game with specific social roles it would not be.

Your sage cannot scout, forage, etc so they wod hardly be described as being able to do it all.

 

[Lanefan]

Because you can’t do everything. That’s the point.

The tank can take hits but not dish them out so will eventually die without the DPS there to kill the monsters and the healer to keep the tank from dying.

Ah. To me when I think "tank" I think of the Sherman version: really good defense combined with a great big gun that hella hurts when it hits you.

More to the point, I've never liked the idea of "tank" vs "DPS" (which I assume means damage-dealer?) as being different roles. The tank should be the one capable of both taking and giving out the most damage in melee.

In the current set up “face” is the sum total of the social pillar. In a game with specific social roles it would not be.

Your sage cannot scout, forage, etc so they wod hardly be described as being able to do it all.

Lack of healing would be the biggest drawback.

 

[overgeeked]

Ah. To me when I think "tank" I think of the Sherman version: really good defense combined with a great big gun that hella hurts when it hits you.

More to the point, I've never liked the idea of "tank" vs "DPS" (which I assume means damage-dealer?) as being different roles. The tank should be the one capable of both taking and giving out the most damage in melee.

Lack of healing would be the biggest drawback.

Right. But that’s literally the point. Spread things around so that no one character or class can do it all. Tanks still deal damage, just nowhere near as much as the dedicated damage dealers. It makes it so that everyone has to rely on each other, like you should in a co-op game.