D&D General How do you like your ASIs?

[Minigiant]

So I’m a long time player, 30+ years and I’m playing a human Paladin and I am doing a plain, old boring human. Not a variant human. A plain old boring human. So… I took it because I rolled kinda poor for all but 3 ability scores and it let me level those other 3 to a plus 0 and play an affective Paladin. You really shouldn’t slam something as “for newbs” when there are perfectly valid reasons to run with it newb or not.

Paladin is one of the top 3 classes in 5e and one of the few MAD classes that work.

Human Paladin working is an anomaly.

Original Human was designed to be easy to run. It was designed so anyone could make an effective human PC with little additional complexity or thought. There's nothing wrong with liking it.

However "+1 to all stats" is as "this was designed so you don't have to think about it" as you can get. You don't even get a bonus skill, tool,or language. Not "Humany" race feature.

Just "Add 1 to all your stats. Done". Perfect for first timers and quick builds.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Paladin is one of the top 3 classes in 5e and one of the few MAD classes that work.

Human Paladin working is an anomaly.

You know the bolded bit to be true because...? Why does the PHB include a narrative of a human paladin in the opening paragraph of the paladin class description in the PHB?

Are there other class/race combos that work only by exception or anomaly, in your opinion?

Original Human was designed to be easy to run. It was designed so anyone could make an effective human PC with little additional complexity or thought. There's nothing wrong with liking it.

Anyone can "make an effective human PC" with a human but they are an outlier if it is an effective paladin?

However "+1 to all stats" is as "this was designed so you don't have to think about it" as you can get. You don't even get a bonus skill, tool,or language. Not "Humany" race feature.

"One extra language of your choice" but otherwise accurate about the features of Human. However, I'm not sure about the value judgement of "so you don't have to think about it". I personally believe many first time players, when choosing a race, are more attracted to the artwork and description of the races that spur imagination than they are repelled by the "complexity" of the abilities of the various races. YMMV.

Just "Add 1 to all your stats. Done". Perfect for first timers and quick builds.

You make claims that imply designer intent. If Human is "perfect for... quick builds", why didn't the designers include them as part of the Quick Build sections for each class in the PHB?

 

[Minigiant]

You know the bolded bit to be true because...? Why does the PHB include a narrative of a human paladin in the opening paragraph of the paladin class description in the PHB?

Are there other class/race combos that work only by exception or anomaly, in your opinion?

The community. Most fans consider paladin one of 5es stronger classes.

Paladin just happens to be the only really strong MAD class in base 5e. You could maybe say the same with Human Ranger but only with later subclasses and Tasha's adjustments.

Anyone can "make an effective human PC" with a human but they are an outlier if it is an effective paladin?

It was a design goal. Human gets you a 16 with every class.

One extra language of your choice" but otherwise accurate about the features of Human. However, I'm not sure about the value judgement of "so you don't have to think about it". I personally believe many first time players, when choosing a race, are more attracted to the artwork and description of the races that spur imagination than they are repelled by the "complexity" of the abilities of the various races. YMMV.

I meant the 5e playtest spent MONTHS trying to design an easy mode Human Fighter for new players.

Human was purposefully designed to be easy for newbs.

You make claims that imply designer intent. If Human is "perfect for... quick builds", why didn't the designers include them as part of the Quick Build sections for each class in the PHB?

They didn't include any race in class quick build.

But Human was designed to be easy in playtest.

 

[Maxperson]

You know the bolded bit to be true because...? Why does the PHB include a narrative of a human paladin in the opening paragraph of the paladin class description in the PHB?

Are there other class/race combos that work only by exception or anomaly, in your opinion?

Since all race/class combos work with a 15 in the main stat, I guess they are all anomalies.

You make claims that imply designer intent. If Human is "perfect for... quick builds", why didn't the designers include them as part of the Quick Build sections for each class in the PHB?

Gnome bard is one of their examples in the gnome class. A race with no charisma bonus at all.

"Laughing as she tunes her cittern, a gnome weaves her subtle magic over the assembled nobles, ensuring that her companions' words will be well received."

 

[Lyxen]

The community. Most fans consider paladin one of 5es stronger classes.

So what ? Optimised paladins of specific archetypes and with specific feats, for sure, paladins in general, I'm not so sure.

It was a design goal. Human gets you a 16 with every class.

No, it does not, reminder: rolling stats is still the only official way to generate stats, so a human guarantees absolutely nothing.

I meant the 5e playtest spent MONTHS trying to design an easy mode Human Fighter for new players.

An easy more fighter, yes, human, again not so sure.

Human was purposefully designed to be easy for newbs.

And where is the proof of that ?

 

[Maxperson]

No, it does not, reminder: rolling stats is still the only official way to generate stats, so a human guarantees absolutely nothing.

That's not correct. The array isn't an optional rule. It's a default stat generation option. That player has the choice to either roll or choose an array as the stat generation methods.

Point buy is the only variant listed.

Not that it changes your point. Since a large percentage of people roll for stats, a human cannot be guaranteed to give a 16 for the primary class ability score.

 

[Lyxen]

That's not correct. The array isn't an optional rule. It's a default stat generation option. That player has the choice to either roll or choose an array as the stat generation methods.

You're absolutely right, for some reason I remembered it as a variant, but it's just an alternative: "If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8."

Point buy is the only variant listed.

Not that it changes your point. Since a large percentage of people roll for stats, a human cannot be guaranteed to give a 16 for the primary class ability score.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

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.

Its also an argument against the idea that giving a race +2 noticably defines a characteristic of that particular race.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Or C) it's a mix, or D) nobody has. More than 2 options.

I've gone to an adventuring week, rather than day. It solves most of the nonsensical issues.

How have you adjusted rests in this case, if at all? Long rest 1/week?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Its also an argument against the idea that giving a race +2 noticably defines a characteristic of that particular race.

Maybe?

To me, the +2 signals that that player race is, on average, slightly better than a commoner at that ability, as defined by the monster manual. Noticeably better in game play? No. That squarely depends on what score the player puts down for that ability. Which begs the question: why have ASI for race at all?