MGibster
Legend
I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. If I wanted to use those other fantastical tropes I'd probably select a different game to play. I play D&D because it's D&D.
D&D 5E What To Do With Racial ASIs?
I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. If I wanted to use those other fantastical tropes I'd probably select a different game to play. I play D&D because it's D&D.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
I said why I don't like it, that's all. It is subsection of convoluted methods of assigning ability scores which ultimately result everyone having the same score in their main stat. If that is the desired result then there are easier methods to achieve it.
FrogReaver
As long as i get to be the frog
So looks like leave them as is seems to be ahead. Poll methodology and early change in it makes it impossible to get a good comparison for precisely how much though.
I think part of the problem is the reasoning for proposed changes. I personally am more amenable to some changes in racial bonuses - but not in an environment where the changes are proposed for the reasons they are being proposed for.
I think part of the problem is the reasoning for proposed changes. I personally am more amenable to some changes in racial bonuses - but not in an environment where the changes are proposed for the reasons they are being proposed for.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
No, that's not it. But a race whose 'thing' is being strong should be able to be stronger than race whose 'thing' most definitely is not being strong.
Furthermore, it is absolutely fine if halflings favour dexterity based fighter builds and orks favour strength based ones. They can both still be decent fighters, but they do things differently.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
For myself, that would just be too many bonuses. I am already tired that people feel a +2 is needed to feel competitive at all. I know I am in a minority on that, but that's just how I feel about that issue.
Honestly, I would rather see racial modifiers adjust the caps. Something like 18 for humans across the board, but that dwarf can have a CON 20 and the elf a DEX 20. Their maximum abilities are simply beyond what humans can do. Now, to me, that makes them "alien" in a way so they aren't just humans in make-up, etc. We've been doing this for a while and I like it. We added a feat, Raising the Bar which allows you to increase the max for one ability score from 18 to 20, so a human could be a strong as a dragonborn (for example), both with STR 20, but the human has to invest in it.
It could probably be reworked to be more popular, but as I said I like it and think it has merit. I'm tired of seeing 18's at level 1 (which is why I stopped rolling for scores, too.) because that little edge makes the PCs too good for me. shrug
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I was playing a half ogre in AD&D, a centaur later reincarnated into a bullywug in AD&D 2nd, fought alongside a minotaur and later a wemic in 3.x and a pixie in 4e. D&D has always had monsterous races; there is no ground to stand on to try to exclude them as "not D&D". There is no foundation to your assertion at all.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
OH! I forgot about my 2E wemic! I love wemics and miss him...
We need wemics back in 5E!!!
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
That's fine for a personal preference, but since we're already looking at +3 to +4 for every existing race I wouldn't take that as a game-wide problem.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
Add minimum scores too and this would be absolutely fine.
Remathilis
Legend
32 points, 16 max cap. No bumps until 4th level.
Similar Threads
