Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8445377" data-attributes="member: 7032025">Indeed it is.And the only type of person that I've met who think that an orc needs a +2 to int to be smart and played as such is a powergamer. Especially since the game does not even set a racial limit to int and there are ASI in the game. Even without Tasha, your orc can be as smart as any elf or gnome.Playing D&D and denying that there are racial stereotypes is honestly really silly. When some species can read your mind (and eat it), when others can fly and others can't, when some have magical powers and others not, when some are naturally stronger and others naturally more clever. Stereotypes are there whether you like it or not. Stereotypes are a good thing in a fantasy game. Stereotypes are only bad when used for real people in the real world, which is basically stupid as there are no human races anyway, only ethnicities. But the bad use of "racial" stereotypes in the real world is what needs to be fought, not the same thing at all.And exactly the reverse, if you can't play (like someone in our groups did) an orc as a bard and creating a really fine character without the +2, it just means that you are just grasping for power.Fine, where is the fantasy in this ? Where does the specific fantastical abilities and differences in species and race come in ? You are basically making the game much blander than it needs to be. As in the case in all good books of the genre, it starts with the basic capabilities of the Race/Species, because this is also what influences culture and the way the species developed. Simplest example is the Aarakocra, they can fly, so it has shaped their society and culture. And it should be the same with other races/species, including for races that are inherently stronger or more clever (or weaker or stupider).And after all that, I wonder why you still defend Tasha's, since mechanics do not matter... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Yes, it is, and it's confirmed by your rant above. Please explain how floating ASIs fit in with that nice talk...Well, in our groups, we know who the powergamers are, and yes, they would never play anything else than these combinations, but fortunately they are not the majority, and seeing all the other including me playing a halfling sorceress or warlock and having mighty fun with them without floating ASIs is also slowly convincing them that it's not mandatory.My problem with the floating ASIs is that they make optimised characters stronger than what they were before, therefore widening the gap between powergamer and casual. There was already a small gap, but there is no call for widening that gap, and actually no reason to if I follow your argument above.All the more, by the way since floating ASIs only concern PCs anyway, so it has absolutely ZERO effect on culture. Orcs in general stay as they were, more stupid than humans as they have a general species int of 7. So it's not even doing anything for that...</blockquote>

Verification