D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[JiffyPopTart]

My poll was made with the assumption that ASI rules would be applied blanketly to any stat generation method, same as in 5e PHB.

For transparency purposes....my desire is for every player to be able to build whatever character they want. I want to accommodate a 3DEX elf with 2 peg legs and 2 peg arms and a 20STR pixie (perhaps chosen by the gods to perform crazy feats of derring do) if the player and GM are happy with the choice.

I chose No ASI because my preference is to just have a system that lets you one-stop shop all your stat creation.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I like 13th Age's method, which is closest to "some fixed, some floating."

Every race gets to choose one of two stats to increase (except Human, which can choose any stat). Dragonborn have Str or Cha, for example. You get +2 to the chosen stat.

Then, every class* also gets a choice between two stats, but it cannot be the same as the bonus from your race. E.g. Paladin is also Str/Cha, so every Dragonborn Paladin had +2 Str and +2 Cha, but a Human Paladin can have +2 Str and +2 Con, while a Dragonborn Rogue could be +2 Cha, +2 Dex.

This is, IMO, the perfect balance of thematics and playability. Every Wizard can be smart, every Fighter can be strong, etc. But an Orc Wizard is still going to be different from an Elf Wizard, and in a certain sense, races that "match" their class are actually a bit pigeonholed, where those that don't are flexible.

*Except Monk, but that's because Monks are super MAD, so they get a bonus to mitigate that problem. They get to pick two stats from a list of three (Str, Dex, Wis), same restriction of no doubling up with your racial bonus. A Dragonborn Monk could thus have +2 Cha and any two of the above stats or +2 Str/Dex/Wis, a total of four distinct combinations.

 

[Charlaquin]

So completely distinct from Fixed or Float.

Nah, it’s basically the same as floating, the difference is purely aesthetic.

 

[JThursby]

I view ASIs as a storytelling tool to create hooks to play into or against character types. Having all elves in a setting get a bonus to DEX, for example, creates expectations about how PC and NPC elves conduct themselves, like the kind of armor and weapons they use, since the players are aware of the mechanical benefits of a high DEX score. Ideally when playing a storytelling game we want the game to complement the story and the story to complement the game, so having one inform the other is a natural synergy. If your setting's elves favor light/medium armor, finesse and ranged weapons, and ambush tactics, a universal DEX bonus would work to communicate this.

The most contemporary D&D race that exemplifies this mindset is the Wayfinder's version of the Warforged, which was built from the ground up with ways to spark the player's imagination. All envoys come with a tool installed into their bodies; why do they have it and how does it shape this character are questions that it organically invites the player to answer with their specific character.

I'm ok if the focus in a future version of D&D has character storytelling moved away from ability scores, but I want it replaced with a comprehensive and working system, not the slapdash mess of the Tasha's alternate rules. Heterogeneous options allow for greater creative expression than unstructured homogeneity.

 

[Scribe]

Nah, it’s basically the same as floating, the difference is purely aesthetic.

Its really not, unless you operate under the assumption that the Standard Array isnt a thing.

 

[Maxperson]

Its really not, unless you operate under the assumption that the Standard Array isnt a thing.

And that you MUST buy +2, +1 over the standard point buy amount.

 

[JEB]

Other: Floating ASI by default, and each race having a sidebar that suggests options that are "classic" or "archetypal" or the like, for folks (to include veteran players) who want a pre-set option that isn't "optimize for your class". This would also be a neat opportunity to suggest new archetypes through ASIs, if they wanted, get folks thinking about new approaches to elves, dwarves, orcs, etc.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Other: Floating ASI by default, and each race having a sidebar that suggests options that are "classic" or "archetypal" or the like, for folks (to include veteran players) who want a pre-set option that isn't "optimize for your class". This would also be a neat opportunity to suggest new archetypes through ASIs, if they wanted, get folks thinking about new approaches to elves, dwarves, orcs, etc.

That is the noncommittal path of the unsure! Your attempt to tread two paths has been noted by the powers that be.

In the grim darkness of the far future there can be only ONE way.

(Because hard choices are more fun to discuss than "Multiple of the above", which is probably the actual best solution)

 

[Azzy]

Meh, no racial/character creation ASIs. D&D spent its first four years without them and the "basic" D&D line didn't have them for its entire run of almost two decades. Up the standard array/point-buy methods, and we'd be good.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I wanted to vote for "Only negative ASIs, and lots of 'em" but that doesn't seem to be an option.