D&D 5E (2014) Is Tasha's Broken?

[Maxperson]

The thing about optimization is that everybody does some of it. Just because you put a 15…or a 14, or a 12…in your primary, and then took a race that didn’t boost your primary ASI, doesn’t mean you didn’t do some optimization.

More than that, if the reason you took a race that didn't boost your primary stat is that it fit your character concept, you optimized roleplay with that choice.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

More than that, if the reason you took a race that didn't boost your primary stat is that it fit your character concept, you optimized roleplay with that choice.

No. Just no.

Picking an inferior race (mechanically) for your class does not somehow make you a better roleplayer. Roleplay and mechanical optimization are not a zero sum game. You can do both just fine without giving up the other. Having an effective character does not make you worse at roleplaying and having a mechanically awful character doesn't make you a better roleplayer.

This is a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

 

[Maxperson]

Why is making a halfling rogue with a +2 Dex fine and dandy but if I use floating ASIs to give my tiefling rogue a +2 I'm just being an optimizer?

There is no difference. But then there's nothing wrong with being an optimizer. If you want to eek out a miniscule increase in damage, optimize away.

I personally just prefer to optimize roleplaying options and the mental stats give a bigger increase to by ability to interact with game in a more meaningful way than a small damage increase. I'd rather be more successful at persuading the king to let his political prisoners go and become a social powerhouse, than be able to kill one of the dozens prison guards a bit faster every 2-5 encounters. The small amount of damage you get with the increase doesn't have nearly as much impact on the game as the stats dealing with the other pillars.

 

[Minigiant]

Another thing.

As a DM, I feel compelled to bring out the many aspects of player's PC to validate their choices.

When the results of their choices are activated by the player, are triggered constantly and frequently, or have effects the compound or support other repeated activation or triggers, it's less sweat off my back. I don't gotta do jack. However when results of their choices are not always present or frequently seen. Ugh. Because if the fighter chooses an INT race, I have to pray.

Please be an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Archer.
Please be an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Archer.
Please be an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Archer.
Please be an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Archer.

Because I feel compelled to stroke the fighter's INT 12 to validate their choice. Or head off their own validations of spamming History (INT) checks at everything (yes Ray, Alexis, and Malik I'm posting about you three).

All this coulda be solved if every class had strong uses for secondary ability scores or if the ability score were balanced against one another.

Just realized that most of the problem is the unbalanced ability scores.

 

[Maxperson]

No. Just no.

Picking an inferior race (mechanically) for your class does not somehow make you a better roleplayer.

Don't read into what I said. You're adding a bunch there that wasn't in my post.

I said if I do it for roleplaying, I am optimizing my roleplaying. I'm making a choice for ME to roleplay, which increases the roleplaying for ME. I never claimed superiority over other people in some way.

Look at it like this. Player A and player B roleplay equally well. Player A optimizes for combat and player B(me) optimizes for roleplay by picking an "inferior"(your word, not mine, and wrong word to boot) race that fits my concept. That is a choice that optimizes my roleplaying. It makes it easier to fit my concept, even if roleplaying ability is the same.

I mean, Player A and Player B can both roleplay being phenomenal investigators, but if Player B makes the choice to optimize that roleplay by picking up the Prodigy Feat and adding expertise to investigation skill, he has optimized his roleplay.

 

[Maxperson]

But...you can! A half-orc wizard is still against type, and in any campaign you play in you might be literally the only one in that universe. Orc and half-orc NPCs can all have really low intelligence. And you can give your half-orc wizard as low of an Int score as you like.

The fact that all around the world, at other tables, in other campaigns, there are more players choosing half-orc wizard than there used to be doesn't change anything. Those characters are literally not in your character's universe.

Giving an half-orc a low int isn't against type. To be against type, there must be a type to begin with. The Tasha's stat option removes types. Where before half-orcs didn't have an int bonus and were strong, now they're as smart as any other race out there and no stronger than any other race.

With WotC moving to make that the default, types are pretty much gone unless the non-ability racials become a lot stronger and more class oriented. The High Elf cantrip isn't enough to make High Elves a Wizard race. It needed that cantrip AND the inherent bonus to int.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Don't read into what I said. You're adding a bunch there that wasn't in my post.

I said if I do it for roleplaying, I am optimizing my roleplaying. I'm making a choice for ME to roleplay, which increases the roleplaying for ME. I never claimed superiority over other people in some way.

Look at it like this. Player A and player B roleplay equally well. Player A optimizes for combat and player B(me) optimizes for roleplay by picking an "inferior"(your word, not mine, and wrong word to boot) race that fits my concept. That is a choice that optimizes my roleplaying. It makes it easier to fit my concept, even if roleplaying ability is the same.

I mean, Player A and Player B can both roleplay being phenomenal investigators, but if Player B makes the choice to optimize that roleplay by picking up the Prodigy Feat and adding expertise to investigation skill, he has optimized his roleplay.

Ah, I did misunderstand you. Apologies.

And that is exactly why I like Tasha's floating ASIs rule. I don't have to give up mechanical power in order to optimize the character concept I have. If I want to play an Orc Moon Druid on Eberron, I can do so without taking a bonus to Strength that would probably be useless most of the campaign. Eberron Orcs are known for being "primal," so it would both fit the lore of the world and character concept I had to be able to switch that bonus to Strength over to Wisdom.

You get to "maximize roleplay" while also not giving up mechanical effectiveness.

 

[Maxperson]

So did Tieflings .... but before Tasha's they had a bonus in 5E.

3e was lame duck in that regard. In 2e which originated Tieflings, they had a charisma bonus and rightly so. 5e just restored that which 3e got wrong.

 

[Maxperson]

Ah, I did misunderstand you. Apologies.

And that is exactly why I like Tasha's floating ASIs rule. I don't have to give up mechanical power in order to optimize the character concept I have. If I want to play an Orc Moon Druid on Eberron, I can do so without taking a bonus to Strength that would probably be useless most of the campaign. Eberron Orcs are known for being "primal," so it would both fit the lore of the world and character concept I had to be able to switch that bonus to Strength over to Wisdom.

You get to "maximize roleplay" while also not giving up mechanical effectiveness.

It's interesting how the same thing can be right for one person and wrong for someone else. For me I want the floating ASIs to be gone, because that allows me to optimize my character concepts better. If I want to play a powerful Tiefling Sorcerer who has magic come to him easier and with greater power than other races, I can do that. If I want to play a Dwarven Sorcerer who while mining with his pick broke a gem containing magic from the making of the world and gained sorcerous uneasy unpredictable sorcerous powers(wild magic), I can do that, too. The set bonuses are there for me to use to add to my roleplay and concept. Again, that doesn't make my roleplaying better. I'm just explaining my personal reasons.

 

[Oofta]

No, bummer that you care so much about what other people think that it spoils your fun.

Sorry I don't meet the purity council's motivational standards, but I never said it "spoiled my fun". I said that I got a slight bit of enjoyment from showing people that insist that only super optimized PCs that fit particular mold X can be effective. That it's not a big deal, and I would have no problem taking advantage of the new rules if I ever get around to playing a dwarven wizard again.

But I should just accept that no matter what I say you'll find a way to turn it into something like me being a narcissist that only gets joy from other people's reactions.