D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[Lyxen]

That would be a great point if it were in the same multiverse as a fact.

And once more, this simply demonstrates the total absence of counterarguments.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Not at all, but the Floating ASIs are a very simple option, which obviously eliminates a lot of potential motivations. Moreover, this has been confirmed by the fact that absolutely none of the people in favour of it have been able to explain it more than "I want a 16 in my stat (because some can)". From my perspective, the rule does not allow any combination or character concept that did not exist before. It's just like, with any such things, it makes them slightly more powerful, and - as is the case in an unbalanced game - some slightly more than others.

You have set up a court case in which you are both judge and prosecutor. There is a reason that this isn't how it would work in a fair system.

Your argument essentially says "People only want floating ASI for character optimization and I know this because all the other reasons people have given me have been judged not good enough and excluded from consideration by myself".

But, for sake of moving this conversation forward, let's assume you ARE correct and indeed the only reason to use ASI is to simply let any combination of race/class have a +3. How does this enter into the discussion of what method of ASI someone prefers?

 

[Helldritch]

You have set up a court case in which you are both judge and prosecutor. There is a reason that this isn't how it would work in a fair system.

Your argument essentially says "People only want floating ASI for character optimization and I know this because all the other reasons people have given me have been judged not good enough and excluded from consideration by myself".

But, for sake of moving this conversation forward, let's assume you ARE correct and indeed the only reason to use ASI is to simply let any combination of race/class have a +3. How does this enter into the discussion of what method of ASI someone prefers?

Because the floating ASI open up a whole new ball game of power creep that many seem to either ignore, or just can't see ( or choose not to see).
With fixed ASI, there is a trade off for not doing certain races. Dwarves will not have that sweet sixteen, but will get better hp and armor. A half orc will gain better hp and a chance to get back up from a killing blow and so on.

With floating ASI, you get all the bonuses including that sweet sixteen optimizers so desperately want. In French we have an expression which goes like this. It is wanting the butter, the money for the butter along with the spare change from buying the butter.

Also, it breaks versimilitude, if all races can do everything perfectly, where is the humans' strong point that is versatility? All races are now versatile, and some races becomes power houses and a dream come true for optimizers.

I personnaly have no trouble with floating ASI in a specific setting, but for the base game? No way.

If I were in charge, there would even be a return for negative modifiers on stats. Loxodons, would get an additional +2 to strength and a -2 on dexterity. All logical and fine, but maybe not for all tables. Stat cap would also make a return. Would it block some character building choices? Both yes and no. I have seen halfling fighters in 1ed and they were good. I saw them in 2ed and they did not have the chance to Ha e high strength scores. Yet, they made for very interesting characters that did struggle a bit, but that is what magic items are for.

 

[Vaalingrade]

And once more, this simply demonstrates the total absence of counterarguments.

You're right; there's no counterargument for 'nuh-uh, I'm not going to listen to anything that goes against my campaign of attacking people for playing a way I don't approve of and won't accept when people explain they don't even play that way'.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think I'm done defending floating ASIs. There's no need: going forward it's the new normal in D&D (until they get moved to the attribute generation process itself in 6e).

If the people who pine for the past want to keep arguing for why D&D should go backwards, I might click on the threads. We'll see.

If anybody wants to start threads on how D&D could be different (probably not even D&D) so that this debate were moot...e.g., so that all attributes contributed more evenly...I would find that interesting.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

If anybody wants to start threads on how D&D could be different (probably not even D&D) so that this debate were moot...e.g., so that all attributes contributed more evenly...I would find that interesting.

Yeah, that would probably be a more fruitful topic of conversation...

 

[Scribe]

I think I'm done defending floating ASIs. There's no need: going forward it's the new normal in D&D (until they get moved to the attribute generation process itself in 6e).

If the people who pine for the past want to keep arguing for why D&D should go backwards, I might click on the threads. We'll see.

If anybody wants to start threads on how D&D could be different (probably not even D&D) so that this debate were moot...e.g., so that all attributes contributed more evenly...I would find that interesting.

I don't think it's pining. You are correct they have set the template for this going forward.

It's a discussion due to both sides seemingly being unable to understand or articulate WHY each feels the way they do.

Forums exist for discussion, and so, we discuss.

 

[billd91]

Yeah, that would probably be a more fruitful topic of conversation...

It is also a big challenge due to some of the same issues that drive the fixed ASI vs floating ASI debate - designed trade-offs in the game vs character concepts in the big umbrella of fantasy role playing.

 

[Older Beholder]

Not at all, but the Floating ASIs are a very simple option, which obviously eliminates a lot of potential motivations. Moreover, this has been confirmed by the fact that absolutely none of the people in favour of it have been able to explain it more than "I want a 16 in my stat (because some can)". From my perspective, the rule does not allow any combination or character concept that did not exist before. It's just like, with any such things, it makes them slightly more powerful, and - as is the case in an unbalanced game - some slightly more than others.

So, you’ve never started with a 16 in any stat before?

 

[Lyxen]

You have set up a court case in which you are both judge and prosecutor.

And executioner, don't forget about this one, it's my favourite one !

Your argument essentially says "People only want floating ASI for character optimization and I know this because all the other reasons people have given me have been judged not good enough and excluded from consideration by myself".

And again, if there were other undisputable reasons, I'm pretty sure that I would have been served them multiple times in a clear fashion over 30 pages.

But, for sake of moving this conversation forward, let's assume you ARE correct and indeed the only reason to use ASI is to simply let any combination of race/class have a +3. How does this enter into the discussion of what method of ASI someone prefers?

It's really easy, people just say that they like having characters slightly more powerful or not even slightly technically disadvantaged over the combinations that are a result of the racial ASIs. If it's what they prefer, then it's their taste and that's all there is too it, no one is judging preferences here. But at least they are frank and honest about it and stop hiding it behind reasons of "races equality" or "I want the freedom to be creative and have any race/class combination that I want" (because that has always been the case before, all these combinations WERE already available).