D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[Maxperson]

I'm still not seeing any convincing argument that a +2 modifier vs a+3 modifier has any noticeable, meaningful impact on gameplay at levels 1-3 despite claims of being "gimped" or "disadvantaged" compared to other party members. The d20 is just too random, IMO, for a 5% difference to truly be highlighted. Heck, if it does become "noticeable", just swap out that dang d20 that has missed by 1 one too many times and bring out a new one with better mojo. Amirite?

I've already shown how it's only 1 single point of additional damage in the few hits during a fight, and 1 time out of 20 attacks(3-4 combats) you will hit an extra time for normal damage. It's trivial, but some people like or feel the need to eek out little bonuses.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I've already shown how it's only 1 single point of additional damage in the few hits during a fight, and 1 time out of 20 attacks(3-4 combats) you will hit an extra time for normal damage. It's trivial, but some people like or feel the need to eek out little bonuses.

Yes - this is what I'm talking about. Trivial =/= noticeable and meaningful to gameplay. Do you see any other examples that are non-trivial?

And, so we're clear, I'm not casting judgement on what people "like" or "feel". I'm asking pointedly about noticeable and meaningful effects on gameplay.

 

[clearstream]

Yep. See the problem with TCoE now?

I agree with you that the TCoE rules for reassigning racial ASIs is broken: it greatly over-rewards a few race picks making those so desirable as to visibly warp the meta around them. I believed that this thread was limited to considering floating ASIs, not Tasha's specifically. I understand "floating ASIs" to mean - as per the Feywild races -

Ability Score Increases
When determining your character’s ability scores, increase one of those scores by 2 and a different score by 1, or increase three different scores by 1. Follow this rule regardless of the method you use to determine the scores, such as rolling or point buy. The “Quick Build” section for your character’s class offers suggestions on which scores to increase. You’re free to follow those suggestions or to ignore them. Whichever scores you decide to increase, none of the scores can be raised above 20.

Were we talking about TCoE specifically all along, then you would have my agreement. I think though, that we are talking about floating ASIs as quoted above.

 

[clearstream]

Yes - this is what I'm talking about. Trivial =/= noticeable and meaningful to gameplay. Do you see any other examples that are non-trivial?

And, so we're clear, I'm not casting judgement on what people "like" or "feel". I'm asking pointedly about noticeable and meaningful effects on gameplay.

Yes, let's consider Charisma for a bard - 12 versus 14 versus 16 (I don't know why everyone is so focused on that one cut-off, there is nothing more special about 16 over 14, than 14 over 12 - they're all obtainable from the core game's recommended generation methods with either fixed or floating ASIs.)

• Bardic inspiration will be 1 use/rest, 2 uses, 3 uses. So 14 has 200% of the uses of 12. 16 has 150% of the uses of 14.
• Features that use bardic inspiration, like cutting words or mantle of inspiration, are all impacted.
• Charisma is also the bard's spellcasting ability, so their spells will have better DCs. Say a foe would save 8/20 times, with 12 they save 7/20, with 14, 6/20, with 16, 5/20. 7/8 is a 12.5% change. 5/6 is a 16.7% change, in number of times that a foe saves out of the number of times they would have saved otherwise.
• Same impact on the high-value Persuasion skill, and because the social interaction system uses thresholds, sometimes this will be the difference between not possible, to possible.
• The bard with gain 1, 2, or 3 spells in mind.

I find it visible in gameplay at the table, the difference between Bards with 12, 14, 16 or for that matter 18 or 20 in Charisma. But the ASIs will typically allow the modifiers of two abilities to be bumped upward. So the half-elven bard might also experience a reasonable improvement to their Dexterity, which will mean similarly better initiative, attack, damage, armor class, and perhaps a key skill like Stealth.

 

[Helldritch]

I agree with you that the TCoE rules for reassigning racial ASIs is broken: it greatly over-rewards a few race picks making those so desirable as to visibly warp the meta around them. I believed that this thread was limited to considering floating ASIs, not Tasha's specifically. I understand "floating ASIs" to mean - as per the Feywild races -



Were we talking about TCoE specifically all along, then you would have my agreement. I think though, that we are talking about floating ASIs as quoted above.

I do believe that all floating ASI methods are to be considered. At some point, dwarves, elves and other races not related feywild were mentioned. I am also aware of a table using exclusively TCoE method of +2/+1, 1 skill and one feat for all races, be they established or not. This prevents a lot of the power gaming, if not removing it entirely but the cost is that all races are now simply a matter of aesthetic. The rubber mask syndrome mybside so much dread is pretty much established at that table. But they seem to like it that way so far...

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Yes, let's consider Charisma for a bard - 12 versus 14 versus 16 (I don't know why everyone is so focused on that one cut-off, there is nothing more special about 16 over 14, than 14 over 12 - they're all obtainable from the core game's recommended generation methods with either fixed or floating ASIs.)

I appreciate your analysis.
+2 vs +3 is the discussion point because without ASI the most a PC could have in their main stat at character generation is 15 (+2 mod) and with ASI they could have a 16 or 17 (+3 mod). Presumptions include point buy (or standard array) and putting your high score into your main stat.

• Bardic inspiration will be 1 use/rest, 2 uses, 3 uses. So 14 has 200% of the uses of 12. 16 has 150% of the uses of 14.

So an additional BI per long rest between +2 and +3 - that could be noticeable in the course of an adventuring day.

• Features that use bardic inspiration, like cutting words or mantle of inspiration, are all impacted.

1 extra use of these things per long rest. That checks.

• Charisma is also the bard's spellcasting ability, so their spells will have better DCs. Say a foe would save 8/20 times, with 12 they save 7/20, with 14, 6/20, with 16, 5/20. 7/8 is a 12.5% change. 5/6 is a 16.7% change, in number of times that a foe saves out of the number of times they would have saved otherwise.

Not sure if I follow your math here. The difference between saving against a DC 12 vs a DC 13 is exactly 5% (assuming an enemy had to roll to save). My argument is that this is just not noticeable in gameplay if it happens on average 1 out of 20 times. The enemy is far more likely to fail or succeed handily than fail/succeed by 1.

• Same impact on the high-value Persuasion skill, and because the social interaction system uses thresholds, sometimes this will be the difference between not possible, to possible.

Again, just 5% difference between +2 and +3 - when rolls are even required. Your possible/not possible threshold is DC of 22 vs 23 which is approaching very difficult territory. Good thing to save that BI for!

• The bard with gain 1, 2, or 3 spells in mind.

The bard does not prepare spells. They know what they know and can cast them according to their spell slots.
This argument would apply to a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid, though - although number of prepared spells is driven far more by caster level as play progresses. A one spell difference in prepared spells due to a +2 vs +3, I would argue, is not meaningful at low levels where spell slots are the main limiter.

I find it visible in gameplay at the table, the difference between Bards with 12, 14, 16 or for that matter 18 or 20 in Charisma. But the ASIs will typically allow the modifiers of two abilities to be bumped upward. So the half-elven bard might also experience a reasonable improvement to their Dexterity, which will mean similarly better initiative, attack, damage, armor class, and perhaps a key skill like Stealth.

The question was: do you see a noticeable and meaningful difference in gameplay at the table between a +2 and a +3 modifier. The answer, after my critique of your analysis, seems to be: "sorta" in that the Bard has 1 fewer BIs to dole out (or use to fuel other abilities).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yep, it's funny how quickly, in certain circles, "diversity" becomes "just another elite".

Mod Note:

Everyone- let’s be careful about using language that could be interpreted as a political dog whistle.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, let's consider Charisma for a bard - 12 versus 14 versus 16 (I don't know why everyone is so focused on that one cut-off, there is nothing more special about 16 over 14, than 14 over 12 - they're all obtainable from the core game's recommended generation methods with either fixed or floating ASIs.)

• Bardic inspiration will be 1 use/rest, 2 uses, 3 uses. So 14 has 200% of the uses of 12. 16 has 150% of the uses of 14.
• Features that use bardic inspiration, like cutting words or mantle of inspiration, are all impacted.
• Charisma is also the bard's spellcasting ability, so their spells will have better DCs. Say a foe would save 8/20 times, with 12 they save 7/20, with 14, 6/20, with 16, 5/20. 7/8 is a 12.5% change. 5/6 is a 16.7% change, in number of times that a foe saves out of the number of times they would have saved otherwise.
• Same impact on the high-value Persuasion skill, and because the social interaction system uses thresholds, sometimes this will be the difference between not possible, to possible.
• The bard with gain 1, 2, or 3 spells in mind.

I find it visible in gameplay at the table, the difference between Bards with 12, 14, 16 or for that matter 18 or 20 in Charisma. But the ASIs will typically allow the modifiers of two abilities to be bumped upward. So the half-elven bard might also experience a reasonable improvement to their Dexterity, which will mean similarly better initiative, attack, damage, armor class, and perhaps a key skill like Stealth.

I don't find that stuff noticeable at all. All these percentages that look high(ie 20-25%, 200%, 16.7%) are bumping up small numbers, not large ones. It's not going from 50 to 100, it's going from 2 to 3 uses of an ability, or 6.5 damage to 7.5 damage, 1 or 2 additional failed saves out of 20 casts(multiple combats), and so on. It's not generally going to be noticeable.

 

[FrozenNorth]

All that said, detaching ASI from race is not a bad idea. I think I might enjoy a ruleset where the ASI at chargen is +1 for class, +1 for background, and +1 floating (with max +2 to any one ability score).

By way of comparison, in PF2, everyone starts with a 10 in all stats. Races give two fixed +2, one floating +2, one fixed penalty, except humans, which have two floating +2. You get a fixed +2 to you main stat from your class. Your background provides a choice between two +2, and after that, you get four floating +2 that you can apply where you wish. Your aren’t allowed to stack bonuses from a same source.

Overall, I’m not that much of a fan of the system, as it has the effect of restricting race AND background (plus it prevents you from getting an 18 in anything except your main stat).

 

[jmartkdr2]

By way of comparison, in PF2, everyone starts with a 10 in all stats. Races give two fixed +2, one floating +2, one fixed penalty, except humans, which have two floating +2. You get a fixed +2 to you main stat from your class. Your background provides a choice between two +2, and after that, you get four floating +2 that you can apply where you wish. Your aren’t allowed to stack bonuses from a same source.

Overall, I’m not that much of a fan of the system, as it has the effect of restricting race AND background (plus it prevents you from getting an 18 in anything except your main stat).

It does a good job if you think of the starting ability scores coming from your training rather than being innate to the person before training began. It's more of a life-path system.