Search results

Most people, myself included, are between those two. We want to play interesting characters with unique concepts that are well integrated into their setting and have their own goals and motivations. We also want a character who performs on par with others of their class from level 1, and like it...

I have a hard time believing that you're engaging with this in good faith. Your definition of encouragement is so far off the beaten path that it could be applied to all sorts of absurd things. When you say the game encourages half-orc wizards, you mean it doesn't discourage them that much. When...

The game does a good job of convincing a majority of its playerbase that sub 16 in a main stat isn't an option for them. I could, theoretically, with point buy and racial ASIs, start with 13 in every stat. Is that, really, an option though? The game doesn't present it as worthy of choice, it...

If I were to put my point more formally, I might say that the game doesn't want me to play a non-optimal combination either.

In case you're wondering I did in fact google the dictionary definition of suppression before using it to make sure it correlated, concluded that the definition given there wasn't actually indicative of its modern usage, and that's why I gave an example of its modern usage. To make sure people...

The closer the choices are to each other in quality, the more interesting the choice. People are willing to take lots of small hits to play the combo of their choice. They have shown over and over that they won’t take not getting a 16. The data shows it. I personally know someone you would...

But there isn’t a creativity being employed to get around those limitations or mitigating them. DnD’s chargen process didn’t give you a mechanical limitation to overcome, it gave you 11 levels of work to become still slightly worse than a high elf. The only thing you do there is sink an extra 4...

Look, your argument can be that you don’t see it as a big hit. But you can’t argue orc wizards don’t take a hit compared to races with even a +1 to Int. The game is discouraging orc wizards less than previous editions, but don’t just lie and pretend its encouraging them.

No, I did not make it. :LOL:I feel the goal of this project is to improve on DnD. And not mandating a Gygaxian world via statline is something I would consider a big step forward. Some other DnD-alikes have already done it. And I consider it a marked improvement.

It was just the only recent use of the word suppression I could think of. Think nothing of it. Now to get to your actual point: If we call these things limitations isn’t that even stronger as a term than suppression? Lets not pretend 5e is doing a great job with providing constraints that...

But like... yes it is. Suppression is the reduction of something based on a factor. The main example I can think of where the word is used would be that closing polling stations suppresses voter turnout. It does this by making it less convenient to vote. Not being able to reach 16 in your...

The math on how often certain race/class combos are picked disagrees with you there. And the distribution says the largest factor in deciding on a race is that tempting +2 mod. So by removing it, we open up new possibilities to players who are unwilling to be worse at everything they want to do...

Can we not express that in a way that doesn’t suppress build diversity?

Or they would, if WOTC had actually done that when writing supplemental material. Which they didn’t, at least not for halfling luck, which has been given to none of the 3 generic halfling enemies. This indicates there are exceptions to the idea that all members of a race get all of the racials.

I mean, I’m even cool with something a little more mechanical to represent those things, like giving dwarves the ability to shrug off the occasional hit, or halflings a mini shield-type effect to represent them being more dodgy. And I’m definitely fine with a little lore block describing what “a...

The only real thing we’re going off of for racial ASIs though is the PC creation rules as is. They aren’t even necessarily assumed for NPCs. They exist solely to create PCs. So there is no general rule that orcs have +2 to strength. That rule only applies to players. So it seems weird to argue...

A number of popular OSR games are literally B/X or AD&D with better writing. As in, 100% of the same rules. So that’s a good model for what OSR gamers tend to see as good design.

It just feels like saying “they have to adhere to a strict set of racial statistics that are the same across all games in all settings is a lot of extra effort to prevent orc wizards. And you have to admit the line between exceptional and special is getting pretty thin, especially when rolling...

I feel like the fairness angle is mostly just kinda misguided traditionalism, so I’m not gonna respond to that except to say I disagree because those +2s are an “in general” thing and shouldn’t be immutable. Especially not for PCs. As far as this idea, it seems like it kind of epitomizes the...

I guess I mean specifically in combat. Like, I don't make my NPCs make persuasion rolls or anything like that. But in a fight, unless they have legendary actions or some intentional method of breaking parity, they still swing at AC and make saving throws normally.