D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[JiffyPopTart]

I definitely think that halflings that are as strong as half-orcs are ridiculous.

In base 5e (with fixed ASI) halflings already can be as strong as half-orcs.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I mean ok you can just say it, its fine.

"I want the highest number possible on my rolls."

No. Not "the highest possible". But:
1) Higher > Lower
2) "What do I get if I go with lower rolls?"

Currently, within the rules, you are choosing between a largely narrative difference (race) and that higher roll. Which results in a huge number of people choosing the higher rolls, and the same old race:class combinations over and over again.

A design that unnecessarily encourages people to make mechanical choices at the cost of roleplaying choices is bad design, in my book.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

And Floating ASIs help make it more of a narrative choice, which is why some folks like the rule!

But lets be logically consistent with it. Abolish races as a game concept. Have a bunch of 'origin traits' (Breathweapon, Darkvision, Powerful Build, Flight Speed etc.) and let players choose a certain amount of them, and then come up with whatever narrative they want to justify them.
I am not sure I'd like it, but it would at least be a coherent approach instead of the current clunky hodge-podge.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Race is not inherently a narrative choice. If it were, it wouldn't provide a y mechanical benefit at all.

I would argue that without ASIs the other mechanical benefits largely cancel out. Or, at least, the delta is so much less than with ASIs that it would solve most of the problem. (With the possible exception of Yuan-ti.)

 

[Scribe]

Is there a single argument that will convince you that people don't want floating ASIs just for Powergaming reasons?

Perhaps, but I've yet to see much of anything beyond.

'I want to make X race dramatically weak in the Stat it normally is strong in.'
'I want the highest number possible.'

People dont want to just outright say they want their primary stat as high as they can get it at level 1, even to the point now where not having it is seen as a penalty, a debuff, which it quite literally is not.

So yeah.

People want that sweet +1, which I've been saying for over a year.

No. Not "the highest possible". But:
1) Higher > Lower
2) "What do I get if I go with lower rolls?"

Currently, within the rules, you are choosing between a largely narrative difference (race) and that higher roll. Which results in a huge number of people choosing the higher rolls, and the same old race:class combinations over and over again.

A design that unnecessarily encourages people to make mechanical choices at the cost of roleplaying choices is bad design, in my book.

Fair, not highest, otherwise you would be a Variant Human (oddly enough the most played, and favoured race...hmmm odd that.)

If you dont like race design, thats fine too, most are terrible, but the reality is this.

You are choosing raw numerical power, over any other consideration. Which is again 100% valid and fine, but it is what it is.

People want the +1, because thats what they value most, the power of a +1 on a dice roll.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And Floating ASIs help make it more of a narrative choice, which is why some folks like the rule!

I know this opinion is unpopular, but why dont people who like narrative games just play more narrative games? Why this insistence on persuading the devs to change the game to more suit their tastes and less suit the tastes of others? I really don't get it.

 

[Scribe]

And Floating ASIs help make it more of a narrative choice, which is why some folks like the rule!

You can make a narrative choice as a halfling with 15 str, or a halfling with 16/17 str.

The +1 doesnt change the narrative.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That 55.5% is not you and "the rest of us." like you claimed. That's barely more than half.

Some people like one thing, some like another. The fact that it's so close (assuming this forum is actually representative, which it isn't) leads me to believe the ability to do either should be preserved.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I don't know what to say. I would have walked away from a table where some player because of a lucky roll gets such a massive boon. Because if stats did not matter so much, this thread, and all the ones like it, would not be so long nor the battle lines so entrenched.

You're of course free to leave any table, but leaving because someone got lucky during chargen (4d6 drop lowest being one of the official methods) would be poor form imho.

Do you leave also when a PC gets a belt of stone gianr strength? It would be better and achievable at the level @Maxperson is speaking of.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Fair, not highest, otherwise you would be a Variant Human (oddly enough the most played, and favoured race...hmmm odd that.)

Not at all odd, and explained by the same principal: you can get a 16 in your primary stat and a feat, versus pointy ears and darkvision (and a couple other things that are nice, but not nearly as nice as a feat). I'll take the feat any day: it's powerful AND flavorful. Way better than a +1. Oh, wait, you get the +1 also. Amazing.

Honestly, I wish the vHuman option didn't exist so I wouldn't feel so much pressure to take it every time.