Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Malmuria" data-source="post: 8373189" data-attributes="member: 7030755">Right - everyone is basically on board for floating asi because it lets create the archetypes you want (and the dm can insist on 5e phb racial asi to automatically create all those archetypes).&nbsp; But some people also need to see their preferred archetype in the written rules.&nbsp; That's why I'm wondering if this is less about the actual play experience (which is customizable both with and without explicit rules) and more about the reading experience.&nbsp; They want to open up a dnd book and have it &quot;feel like dnd,&quot; with all the familiar tropes and archetypes.&nbsp; That's comforting to them.&nbsp;&nbsp; If other people want to use the game for different fantasy archetypes (Avatar tLA, Dark Souls, anime), they can flip to the optional rules and use those.&nbsp; Something like that?Case in point:So the default phb character creation needs, for you, to present halflings in this way.&nbsp; If others want to do something different, there should be a page of optional rules in the phb or the dmg for those groups to use.&nbsp; Correct?The idea that racial ASI in 5e have a whole lot in common with game design or even in-fiction worldbuilding from early editions is simply not accurate, or at the very least misses many of the reasons that races/classes were designed in a particular way in those earlier editions.&nbsp; There was no logic as to why non humans had level limits and class restrictions or could multiclass but not dualclass, for example, except to (try to) balance out all the benefits those races got at first level.&nbsp; Some of those benefits would be archetype-defining in a 1e game but barely register in a 5e game (dwaves' ability to discern sloping construction, for example).&nbsp; Small races like gnomes had no penalty to str.&nbsp; Elves were not allowed to be rangers.&nbsp; Further, unlike 5e, to-hit rolls were not affected by Str or Dex, but rather associated with class.&nbsp; Once you have a unified mechanic the logic behind ASI has to shift.&nbsp; If anything what you want is 3e-era game design--that was the more radical shift away from early basic and 1e/2e, and has more in common with 5e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Malmuria, post: 8373189, member: 7030755"] Right - everyone is basically on board for floating asi because it lets create the archetypes you want (and the dm can insist on 5e phb racial asi to automatically create all those archetypes). But some people also need to see their preferred archetype in the written rules. That's why I'm wondering if this is less about the actual play experience (which is customizable both with and without explicit rules) and more about the [I]reading[/I] experience. They want to open up a dnd book and have it "feel like dnd," with all the familiar tropes and archetypes. That's comforting to them. If other people want to use the game for different fantasy archetypes (Avatar tLA, Dark Souls, anime), they can flip to the optional rules and use those. Something like that? Case in point: So the default phb character creation needs, for you, to present halflings in this way. If others want to do something different, there should be a page of optional rules in the phb or the dmg for those groups to use. Correct? The idea that racial ASI in 5e have a whole lot in common with game design or even in-fiction worldbuilding from early editions is simply not accurate, or at the very least misses many of the reasons that races/classes were designed in a particular way in those earlier editions. There was no logic as to why non humans had level limits and class restrictions or could multiclass but not dualclass, for example, except to (try to) balance out all the benefits those races got at first level. Some of those benefits would be archetype-defining in a 1e game but barely register in a 5e game (dwaves' ability to discern sloping construction, for example). Small races like gnomes had no penalty to str. Elves were not allowed to be rangers. Further, unlike 5e, to-hit rolls were not affected by Str or Dex, but rather associated with class. Once you have a unified mechanic the logic behind ASI has to shift. If anything what you want is 3e-era game design--that was the more radical shift away from early basic and 1e/2e, and has more in common with 5e. [/QUOTE]

Verification