Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="LadyElect" data-source="post: 8378288" data-attributes="member: 7031965"><p>Just to “save my own skin” so to speak, since I assume this references my own post, I was merely co-opting a sort of min-max lingo there for effect and don’t actually believe there is any race-class combo that tangibly suffers enough to demand alteration to play. But to actually answer to this request, it would merely be any race-class combination whose ASI bonuses and ASI usages don’t align (ie: Elf Barbarian and Dwarf Wizard referenced upthread). And it’s because I actually agree with your opening from a game design perspective. I should have a 17 too.</p><p></p><p>But the 17 to me just represents an ideal starting balance. Any race-class combination should be able to approach level 1 with even footing potential (you can likely tell I tend to run standard array and point buy). So of course you <em>can</em> play any combination now and a game will run perfectly fine. Sometimes I even find it fun to roll random all around. But there’s no reason provided by the opposing arguments so far that I agree with enough to want the uneven footing of certain combinations to remain the default.</p><p></p><p>But that’s also just one piece of a much larger balancing act that will exist as long as the game does, regardless of edition.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I also made some allusion to this upthread, but for me these things aren’t indeed part of my own argument. Or, at least, part of the argument against the ASIs. Flavorful racial abilities like Fey Ancestry and Trance are the sorts of things I think should instead be <em>expanded</em> upon in place of the ASIs. Because they don’t favor any particular class combination through direct synergy, they exist outside the argument of opposing built-in optimizability. Instead, I find they give reason for players to explore a wider variety of race-class combinations since they provide unique benefits to their PCs rather than innately complementary benefits.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="LadyElect, post: 8378288, member: 7031965"] Just to “save my own skin” so to speak, since I assume this references my own post, I was merely co-opting a sort of min-max lingo there for effect and don’t actually believe there is any race-class combo that tangibly suffers enough to demand alteration to play. But to actually answer to this request, it would merely be any race-class combination whose ASI bonuses and ASI usages don’t align (ie: Elf Barbarian and Dwarf Wizard referenced upthread). And it’s because I actually agree with your opening from a game design perspective. I should have a 17 too. But the 17 to me just represents an ideal starting balance. Any race-class combination should be able to approach level 1 with even footing potential (you can likely tell I tend to run standard array and point buy). So of course you [I]can[/I] play any combination now and a game will run perfectly fine. Sometimes I even find it fun to roll random all around. But there’s no reason provided by the opposing arguments so far that I agree with enough to want the uneven footing of certain combinations to remain the default. But that’s also just one piece of a much larger balancing act that will exist as long as the game does, regardless of edition. I also made some allusion to this upthread, but for me these things aren’t indeed part of my own argument. Or, at least, part of the argument against the ASIs. Flavorful racial abilities like Fey Ancestry and Trance are the sorts of things I think should instead be [I]expanded[/I] upon in place of the ASIs. Because they don’t favor any particular class combination through direct synergy, they exist outside the argument of opposing built-in optimizability. Instead, I find they give reason for players to explore a wider variety of race-class combinations since they provide unique benefits to their PCs rather than innately complementary benefits. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)
Top