D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[Maxperson]

I'm with you on this.

And, FWIW, this is not only an argument against the stance that a PC "needs" that sweet sixteen over a 14 in their main stat to be effective but also an argument against the stance that taking that sweet sixteen over a 14 in their main stat is somehow the path to powergaming. Truth is, the +1 is barely noticeable over the course of a session. Either way.

Absolutely. In my current game I have 4 PCs. One has a main stat of 16, one 18, one 20 and one 22. They are all right around equally effective. Even the difference between the 16 and 22 isn't noticeable be me and I do all of the math regarding damage vs. monster hit points.

I've just plain stopped being worried about optimization as it doesn't mean what it used to.

 

[Maxperson]

Agreed. And once that 'need' is established, even if we intellectually unlearn it, it takes a pretty good feature to make you not go for the 16. In a fixed-ASI game, people won't go for a race that doesn't have the "right" ASIs without a strong motivator. They limit themselves, because of how the math is presented (not because of the end results of the math).

Floating ASIs eliminates that barrier to variety.

And I think there is a good argument for a floating bonus. There is also a good argument for fixed. That's why +2 fixed and +2 floating is the way to go. It takes both sides into account and allows both to get what they want.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

And I think there is a good argument for a floating bonus. There is also a good argument for fixed. That's why +2 fixed and +2 floating is the way to go. It takes both sides into account and allows both to get what they want.

Now we want +4 total? Sounds like powergaming to me...

 

[Maxperson]

Now we want +4 total? Sounds like powergaming to me...

I'm just trying to be fair and the numbers really don't matter much, so +4 total is fine by me.

 

[Lyxen]

I'm just trying to be fair and the numbers really don't matter much, so +4 total is fine by me.

As for me, the advantage of the +2 in general is that it prevents compensating for odd ability scores.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Sorry, but "my guy doing 1 point more damage than your guy" does not equate to "my guy is competent and yours is only slightly above average." Oh, and the average is 10.5(for the population), not 12-13. 12-13 is average for an exceptional adventurer. So 14-15 is is 4 to 5 points higher than the average warrior.

Haven't you ever felt proud of passing an exam with a top mark even when there was no consequence once the "passing grade" threshold was reached? I am not arguing it's a mechanical effect, it's how some people apparently feel with ability scores. Sure, you don't need anything, but on the spectrum of 3-18, one wants to be the closest as possible to 18, irrespective of whether it's actually needed for the game.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The thing is that this is exactly what the math say, the law of large numbers is for... well first it's for large numbers, and second it never mandates any results, it just says it it is likely to converge, but only after large numbers of dices have been rolled, which is never going to be the case even for multiple combats. In these, real randomness will prevail.

That is both true and very cleverly misleading.

Happy gaming.

 

[Maxperson]

Haven't you ever felt proud of passing an exam with a top mark even when there was no consequence once the "passing grade" threshold was reached? I am not arguing it's a mechanical effect, it's how some people apparently feel with ability scores. Sure, you don't need anything, but on the spectrum of 3-18, one wants to be the closest as possible to 18, irrespective of whether it's actually needed for the game.

Okay. I get wanting to feel good about a high number. That's different from arguing that it does 20-30% more damage, which when you look closer is nearly meaningless given the small numbers. Feelings aren't meaningless. The difference in the math between a 14 and 16 doesn't mean much with the way 5e is set up.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Now we want +4 total? Sounds like powergaming to me...

For some people, powergaming is "any time you notice the character sheet", so fixed ASIs are clearly powergaming.

 

[clearstream]

Standard Array only provides 16+ if you select the correct race.

When I say small select that's what I mean.

There are only so many Str races, if 15 is not sufficient by design, then you are expected to pick one.

I just find that unlikely as a design expectation.

"BUILDING BRUENOR, STEP 3

Bob decides to use the standard set of scores (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) for Bruenor’s abilities. Since he’s a fighter, he puts his highest score, 15, in Strength. His next-highest, 14, goes in Constitution. Bruenor might be a brash fighter, but Bob decides he wants the dwarf to be older, wiser, and a good leader, so he puts decent scores in Wisdom and Charisma. After applying his racial benefits (increasing Bruenor’s Constitution by 2 and his Strength by 2), Bruenor’s ability scores and modifiers look like this: Strength 17 (+3), Dexterity 10 (+0), Constitution 16 (+3), Intelligence 8 (–1), Wisdom 13 (+1), Charisma 12 (+1).

Bob fills in Bruenor’s final hit points: 10 + his Constitution modifier of +3, for a total of 13 hit points."