D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[Bill Zebub]

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.

Again (and again and again and again) you make the narrative choice at the cost of the mechanical choice. That's the problem, because it's simply not necessary, except to preserve tradition at all costs.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

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.

They can go play Dungeon World. But the issue with that is critical mass of a player base. Because of CR, Stranger Things, and any number of other drivers, 5e now eats up so much of the TTRPG universe it is tough to find players for another game.

Further, watch CR for 10 minutes. It is entirely possible for not a single person to make a roll. Their performance (a show that has grossed 20 million, with paid actors) is ALL about narrative stuff, and any person who comes to D&D via CR believes that is how the game is played.

 

[Scribe]

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.

See, I dont play human ever in 5e, even if it is one of my 'favorite' races. There is no pressure, because that +1 to me is not remotely needed to make my character effective.

The narrative is more interesting to play one of the various planetouched (to me).

Again (and again and again and again) you make the narrative choice at the cost of the mechanical choice. That's the problem, because it's simply not necessary, except to preserve tradition at all costs.

And again, you value a +1 over tradition, which quite clearly I do not, because that +1 itself is not necessary, as evidenced by the basic math, in the basic system, of 5e.

So clearly we are just on opposite ends here, because you think +1 matters to the point of making races all the same, when I know that a 5% bump (maybe I'll ask my cleric to cast bless) wont make or break anything and I would rather that be attributed to the race choice.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They can go play Dungeon World. But the issue with that is critical mass of a player base. Because of CR, Stranger Things, and any number of other drivers, 5e now eats up so much of the TTRPG universe it is tough to find players for another game.

Further, watch CR for 10 minutes. It is entirely possible for not a single person to make a roll. Their performance (a show that has grossed 20 million, with paid actors) is ALL about narrative stuff, and any person who comes to D&D via CR believes that is how the game is played.

Excellent if unfortunate point. D&D has always had the market share, but if we've reached the point where every game is D&D, that's not healthy for the industry as a whole.

 

[Maxperson]

And again, you value a +1 over tradition, which quite clearly I do not, because that +1 itself is not necessary, as evidenced by the basic math, in the basic system, of 5e.

It's not necessary, but nor is it unbalancing at all. That's why I propose the +2 fixed and +2 floating as a compromise. Let those who want to power game, power game. Let those who want the +2 floating for RP reasons, use it for RP reasons. It doesn't matter in the end. The fixed +2 racial still provides dexterous elves, stronger goliaths, etc.

 

[Scribe]

It's not necessary, but nor is it unbalancing at all. That's why I propose the +2 fixed and +2 floating as a compromise. Let those who want to power game, power game. Let those who want the +2 floating for RP reasons, use it for RP reasons. It doesn't matter in the end. The fixed +2 racial still provides dexterous elves, stronger goliaths, etc.

No, its not unbalancing, because the math which it impacts is not balanced anyway. The system allows for rolled stats, we cannot say that stat generation is balanced at all in that scenario.

 

[Bill Zebub]

See, I dont play human ever in 5e, even if it is one of my 'favorite' races. There is no pressure, because that +1 to me is not remotely needed to make my character effective.

It's going to be hard to have a conversation when people keep intentionally choosing words that distort the arguments.
The proponents of floating ASIs are not saying a character can't be "effective" with a 14; they are saying the 16 is better, and they greatly prefer to have it, to the point where they are not choosing the races they would like to choose.

The narrative is more interesting to play one of the various planetouched (to me).

That's great. If more people had your preferences this wouldn't be a debate.

And again, you value a +1 over tradition, which quite clearly I do not, because that +1 itself is not necessary, as evidenced by the basic math, in the basic system, of 5e.

So clearly we are just on opposite ends here, because you think +1 matters to the point of making races all the same, when I know that a 5% bump (maybe I'll ask my cleric to cast bless) wont make or break anything and I would rather that be attributed to the race choice.

It's not a 5% bump. For example, a Fighter with 16 Strength does 20-25% more damage than one with 15 Strength (largely depending on AC).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Again (and again and again and again) you make the narrative choice at the cost of the mechanical choice. That's the problem, because it's simply not necessary, except to preserve tradition at all costs.

The mechanic represents the narrative. Narrative is that halflings are not as strong as half-orcs. They're no unconnected and I want that representation.

And ultimately I think balance is over appreciated. Like sure, I have done my fair share of complain about balance issues and I've houseruled my own campaign to fix some of them. But I still don't want to sacrifice verisimilitude to gain balance. Like sure, if we can have both, that's great, but former is more important to me.

I remember playing many games where characters were wildly unbalances. WOD games where some characters were powerful vampires and master level mages whilst others were normal humans with no super powers at all. And not even action movie level competent normal humans. Same with Ars Magica, where my favourite character was a companion (a non-magical person) whilst some others played vastly more powerful mages. In Critical Role they had some sessions where a ninth level character adventured with 18th level ones (or something like that) and it worked just fine. Buffy is far more powerful than Xander or Giles, Aragorn and Legolas are far more powerful than Frodo or Sam, Thor is mindbogglingly more Powerful than Captain America, let alone Hawkeye. Obsessing about balance down to level to some 5% difference just seems bizarre to me. It is not needed to have a fun game.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Further, watch CR for 10 minutes. It is entirely possible for not a single person to make a roll. Their performance (a show that has grossed 20 million, with paid actors) is ALL about narrative stuff, and any person who comes to D&D via CR believes that is how the game is played.

That's how I've played it for decades.

 

[Scribe]

It's not a 5% bump. For example, a Fighter with 16 Strength does 20-25% more damage than one with 15 Strength (largely depending on AC).

Its a 5% chance to hit, and then a +1 on the damage, right? Now at level 1, that +1 damage is meaningful sure, but that's what it is. +1

The proponents of floating ASIs are not saying a character can't be "effective" with a 14; they are saying the 16 is better, and they greatly prefer to have it, to the point where they are not choosing the races they would like to choose.

Its more than 'greatly prefer'.

Its the primary motivator for race, because to not get that +1, seemingly, invalidates whole swathes of race/class combinations.

Not mechanically, not mathematically, but in their eyes, yes?