I was thinking this over. It seemed to me that for many pages this thread was held hostage to accusations and anxieties about power creep. Yet no one has been able to say exactly how power is crept? If I want +2 on Dex, I can choose elf, or I can apply 2 points from my floating ASI. The only difference is that with fixed ASIs, choosing dragonborn is incompatible with starting with +2 on Dex: my character concept is prevented.
Once more, no, it's not, unless your character concept is having a +3 in your main stat, which is a pure power consideration. You are confusing the concept with the build, the character personality, history, background and roleplay with its technical efficiency.
Ironically, an important motive for moving to floating ASIs is because fixed ASIs degrade the perception of some races, especially in reflecting some real world stereotypes.
No, sorry, it's not. This is a false argument that I'm really tired with, it has absolutely zero basis in fact, it's only fanatics claiming this on behalf of others to stir trouble. And the best proof of this is that the Floating ASIs have gotten these annoying people out of WotC's back when in fact they have addressed nothing in terms of the orcs in particular, which proves that it's just (cleverly done) deflection tactics against political manoeuvering that has nothing to do with the game. For example, now that the wave has passed, WotC has completely dropped the word lineage from its latest publications, and is back to "race" as the official name for the PC options.
I have found in play that choice of race feels more significant when any concern about ASIs is entirely off the table. I've observed players thinking about what they truly want to play, without being sabotaged by other concerns.
As these concerns are purely about power, it just proves my point around here. And sorry, it's only sabotaging if a +1 somewhere is critical, which is demonstrably totally false in terms of enjoyment and survivability. It's just in terms of self-image and wanting to be more powerful.
As this thread is about voting on the official method (
@Sabathius42 perhaps you could confirm that?) badgering a DM about an option is not at issue. It is further not at issue because without badgering at all they could always have just chosen the race that gave them the ASI they wanted.
And then, they would have sacrificed a character concept in the name of power, there is a name for that, powergaming. If they really like the concept, they will play it, and increase their stat later if they think it's the right development path. Nothing mandates that at level 1.
Seeing as I can honestly say that isn't the case for myself and folk I play with, perforce you speak here only of yourself and perhaps players you play with. Or let's put it another way: suppose I concede that you have that belief (which I surely should). How can you possibly show me that it is a justified, true belief? As often happens with instances of JTB, we will founder on what counts as justified. Seeing as you don't have any rigorous way to prove how I feel, or how those who I play with that you have no contact with feel, you will be relying on a justification from your own experience without most likely anything in the way of clinical study to support it.
Look, you have provided zero proof of what you claim, and the only thing you are saying is that your friends and you want it, obviously because not having a +1 somehow prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a perfectly enjoyable, viable and efficient character. Hence, it's all about the power of the +1, for your friends and you.
I'm not judging here if it's your preference, just be aware that it's simply about the power. If you had all characters with 14s and 15s, I'm pretty sure the adventures would play exactly the same way. Why would they not, even a full character life is not sufficient for the law of great numbers to really kick in, and it has ZERO value for a given shot considering the swinginess of a d20.
What feels like a justified, true belief from your viewpoint is not a justified, true belief from my viewpoint. And you possess nothing persuasive that can alter that. (Hence you end up trapped into repetition.) One way to move that forward is that we can suppose that there is a possible world in which what you say is true, and then we can talk about what that world looks like, even though we aren't justified in claiming we are in that world. We can then look at the other possible world, where what you believe turns out not to be true, and think about what that world looks like.
The difference is that what I say is factually true and actually supported by many people around here in terms of actual statistics and impact on the ga's . And a number of proponents of floating ASIs say it plainly, it does not feel that the character has the proper power without a 16. And I have no problem with that, they just plainly say it "my character would be OK without it, but I expect a certain level of power".
This is more or less what I am doing. I am saying that a similarity between the set of such worlds with fixed versus floating ASIs is that if I want, I can have a +3 in both of them. So your anxieties about the motives of players choosing that +3 is a very weak divider between those possible worlds. As
@TwoSix has to my mind shown, it doesn't matter whether they are using fixed or floating ASIs, if their character wouldn't feel heroic/powerful enough to them, they can remedy that in worlds that have fixed ASIs just as much as in ones that have floating.
And here we are, these are people who openly say that they want more power, and they will do it even in a world with fixed ASIs, even if it means modifying the character concept. It's a power option, Q.E.D.
And this is where I can switch to pragmatism, and notice that a consequence of being in such possible worlds as have floating ASIs is that a player about whom you would have that anxiety, is able to play any race at all. While in the 'fixed' worlds, they can play only races that have their needed ASI. And for players who don't have that motive - which at the very least we can agree might exist - it doesn't matter which world they were in.
(Just for clarity, I am speaking of four possible worlds - all the combinations of motivated/not-motivated by power with fixed/floating ASIs.)
And if it's the case at your table that you are mostly motivated by power and that floating ASIs are the best way for you to manage that, I'm happy for you that you have found the solution.
At our tables however, we have mostly storyteller/roleplayers, and very few powergamers, but it's those people who still cause some difficulties now and then if unchecked. For example the strongest case that we have is also the only multiclass (coincidence), a gloomstalker/assassin optimised for first strike and who not only dumped charisma but also insisted on a Bhaalspawn background. The problem is that this player is also a bit of a loudmouth negotiator and it took a while for him to admit that his over-optimised first striker was absolutely inept at social interaction, with no charisma, no social skills and a Bhaalspawn's "Supernatural Infamy". After failing most of his checks and his companions (in character) being annoyed at missed alliances and opportunities telling him to shut up when talking to important people (actually, it was the fact that he was not acting optimally for the group that I think finally got to him), he finally blew an ASI to get a feat and at least some social skills, which he now uses carefully.
But that guy is clearly a spotlight hogger who will do anything, technically or roleplayingly, and he needs to be controlled, and we do this by severely controlling the options and the opportunities for power gap, amongst other things.
He is also a very good friend, and also the powergaming DM that I have spoken about. The good thing is that we are always clear at our tables about all of this, but, I suspect a bit like you, he is just incapable of playing a character that is not powerful enough in his eyes. And his eyes only, because he has no idea what the stats of the others are. Of course, he is perfectly capable of a bit of reverse engineering, but it has its limits and as no-one else wants to discuss that, the trouble stops there.
The only difficulty in his campaigns, is that he does a lot of projection on the PCs of his players, and gives us extra powers and powerful items that we don't really need, which means that the combats get really swingy, as most of us are loath to use all these tricks all the time, but when the situation is bad, suddenly it's a powerfest that he cannot really control. Most of us prefer a more stable game, but his adventures and campaigns are great, so we do with the extra gifts...
