D&D 5E Is Tasha's More or Less The Universal Standard?

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I mean, text sucks at tone, but this comes across as dismissive of people who don't play your way?

I don't intend to be. I'm fine with people just picking their stats honestly. I just don't get why people want to roll, then don't want the roll, then want to take points off one stat and add to another... For me, its like just use point buy at that point lol!

Because it's more fun, primarily. The reason I choose any methodology in the game over another. I'm not playing Dark Souls. I'm dropping into the mind of an imagined person who I have concieved of in a fair amount of detail, but not every detail.

Roll and assigning isn't "sloppy", it's semi-randomized. It takes your basic layout, and gives you some small surprises to integrate into that layout.

As to your statement about class norms, no, that has never been my experience at all. Literally not once in 25 years or so of playing DND and it's derivatives have I seen a table full of class stereotypes when rolling, and rarely have I seen it happen even with point buy.

Like I said, it just comes across as point buy with extra steps, and hoping for approval to "beat" the system. IMO and all.

 

[ECMO3]

Big pet peeve.

Not just INT but 3/4 the stats. For fighter you want 1 of Str or dex high and con. I saw new players put high stats in Cha and in and Wis over them to be smart perceptive and likeable. Then found out that isn’t how d&d worlds work

I would disagree with this. Arcane Archers and Eldritch Knights both use intelligence as a core mechanic of their subclass.

That point aside, my #2 stat on a fighter is usually wisdom or charisma (unless playing one of the subclasses above and then it is intelligence). My #3 stat is usually Strength or Dex, the one that was not #1 to start with.

For me playing a Fighter on point buy, Constitution is usually a 12 and occasionally a 10, unless it is a Dragonborn or a Subclass that needs Constition for an ability DC (Rune Knight for example). The only class I generally will play with higher than a 12 on point buy is a Barbarian.

Most people on this forum put a lot of value in constitution regardless of class, but I find it in general to be the most useless ability in the game. If the game was just combat all the time or if there was not an abundance of healing I might see it different but Constitution has almost no use outside of combat in games I play. That means it is completely irrelevant for two-thirds of the game. Wisdom, Charisma, Strength and Dex all get a lot of use outside of combat in addition to some use in combat. Intelligence not as much as the others, but it is still used a lot more out of combat than Constitution is.

 

[CleverNickName]

What I hate the most is when someone decides to, say, play a high Intelligence Fighter and then realize the game doesn't really reward them for their choice...

5E really only rewards your choice if you choose Dexterity. Maaaybe Constitution too, but definitely Dexterity.

 

[James Gasik]

It kind of does reward you though. I'm playing a 16 INT fighter and that +3 bonus has helped out with investigation and various knowledge checks. You can't just rely on wizards or those trained in those skills in actual play.

If it works for you, but that's can be a fairly minor benefit to your investment depending on the game.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't intend to be. I'm fine with people just picking their stats honestly. I just don't get why people want to roll, then don't want the roll, then want to take points off one stat and add to another... For me, its like just use point buy at that point lol!

Like I said, we don't use multiple different methods in one game. Being generous with the rolling methodolgy just allows everyone to be in the same general range, while having some semi-randomized figures to contend with.

Like I said, it just comes across as point buy with extra steps, and hoping for approval to "beat" the system. IMO and all.

See, I still don't get what this mindset that sees it as having anything to do with "beating" anything comes from.

 

[Zardnaar]

I have a long-standing house-rule that started out as a joke in 3rd Edition: I let my players start with three 18s, but only if they also decide to start with three 3s.

So far, no takers.

Wildshaped druid with natural spell

 

[Magister Ludorum]

We use all of Tashas in every one of our games.

 

[Maxperson]

Again, quantity is not quality. Imposing a Intelligence based saving throw on Monsters is enough that some constantly complain about how OP Wizards are. Dexteriry has many uses that come up frequently, but when Intelligence comes up, it goes big.

Fine. I was only counting incoming saves and didn't separate out the outgoing saves. I'll give wizards that one(though I personally don't believe it) and now it's 5 to 2 for quality in favor of dex. Int is still way behind.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

For Int, you need an arcana check to copy scrolls into a spellbook, for Wizards and those with the Ritual Caster feat. Also to use a scroll above the level that you can cast, can be big if you get a fireball scroll at level 3, or a Raise Dead at level 6.

There's also identifying spells with an arcana check from Xanathar's.

 

[Cruentus]

Like I said, we don't use multiple different methods in one game. Being generous with the rolling methodolgy just allows everyone to be in the same general range, while having some semi-randomized figures to contend with.

See, I still don't get what this mindset that sees it as having anything to do with "beating" anything comes from.

In my group we have one player who always has to "beat" the system, or "win" DND. Always optimized, moans when he doesn't get the magic item, builds combos to avoid ever taking damage, tries to out damage everyone, complains when his HP rolls are low, etc. Its an attitude that exists, but in our case comes from a long history (over 40 years) of playing. He's always been that way. Everything is a competition.

I'm playing a fighter in a Basic campaign right now, and my highest stat is a 12 (as a Fighter, 3d6 six times, assign). I'm solidly keeping pace with the Dwarves and Elf (all with stats providing bonuses). I put my second highest stat in Cha to get better morale and follower buffs, as I intend to hire my way through the campaign. I'm having a blast.

We used all of Tasha's and Xanathar's in our two campaigns over the last three years. Tasha's options definitely pushed some combos and multi classes into absurd territory. In our second campaign those combos caused the game to come to an abrupt end (I was DMing). IF we ever go back to 5e (which is a big IF in our group), then I expect there will be some more curating of what goes into the campaign. But who knows what WOTC will drop into 5.5, and the things they label "optional" might end up becoming default as well.