Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Not a Decepticon" data-source="post: 9360024" data-attributes="member: 7020527">For someone who pretends to not see other people's style of play you sure write whole paragraphs trying to prove your preference is obiective fact and sure tend to be dismissive of people finding your behavior disrespectful, especially in comparison to how you reacted to being disrespected yourself.Powerful Build doesn't actually incentivise anything because carrying capacity is such a small thing no one builds around maximalizing it, except as a joke. Even in 3.5 this was a non-issue. And in 5e you really don't need much to reach strength required...in fact, most armors' restriction is not on carrying capacity, but on strength. So again, +2 STR pidgeonholes you to wear heavier armor. However, a character with powerful build being able to lift or carry twice as human of the same strength shows very well how that character is from a species built for dealing with hard labor or harsh conditions.Anegdotical evidence is not indicative of what people play game like. I have put +2 into dump stat too. Doesnt' change the fact we're a minority. Also, I found in such situations that it made me blander and less interesting as a character, because it nuliffied my weak points. Orc wizard can be weak...just not enough for it to affect them negatively, weakest Orc is still as strong as an average joe commonner. Rudest, meanest, most anti-social Tiefling will still be as charming as an average joe. It's as if ASI are inherently bad design or something.And no, just because you dislike floating ASI, it doesn't make set in stone ones good. Neither is the opposite true. For me the best option is what Kobold Press did in Tales of the Valiant, where they deleted ASI altogether and just gave people more points for point buy.Goliath being able to lift more point they grew in an enviroment where they did need to gain lifting strength. You are stuck on idiotic definition of strength, one that requires a strong character be strong equally in all areas at once. For all the talk about realism, this is msot unrealistic take, shows real lack of understanding how people define strength. Fistfighter is strong in a different way than a weightlifter, who is storng in a different way than a miner, who is storng in a different way than a farmer. +2 Strength is jsut lazy way to erase that entierly, kill nuance and any diversity in favor of one, narrow "strong is strong".Also, rolling is only good for powergames, point buy is how you can actually make interesting characters and have meaningul choices at character creation. It allows you to make character who is good at their thing but you feel they paid it by lacking in different area, instead of jsut being good at everything or bad at their whole thing because dice said so.</blockquote>

Verification