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="Faolyn" data-source="post: 8446881" data-attributes="member: 6915329">And you've spoken to each "powergamer" to know that they're only using an option to create a more powerful character? And not just because the options work well together?You have a very skewed idea of what a powergamer is, if you think that a mere +2 makes a person one.That's not what stereotype means. You don't create a stereotype by putting a +2 in a different stat. You create a stereotype by having years worth of games, literature, and other media say that this race acts in this way.Nope. (But hey, nice to know that all of my characters would gain your approval.)Well, Scribe claimed that +3 wasn't better than +2, which isn't any sort of proof that I'm aware of. Is this New Math?But what's wrong with being different? And how do you know that there wasn't any explanation? And more importantly, why do you think someone who has learned how to perform a particular task--hefting weapons, understanding magic, schmoozing with people--wouldn't be good at it? Especially in a game like D&D, where--unless you're playing a character with expertise in something or who has a niche archetype trait--it's basically impossible for a person with a lower stat to learn/practice to be better at something than someone who is naturally gifted with a high stat.No, it just makes them bland and one-note. Orcs are strong! What else? Uh... orcs are good at combat! Anything else?Dull.And all races in GURPS start with all stats in 10 and you have to spend points to buy the individual traits or a racial template (the template for trolls in GURPS Dungeon Fantasy cost 20 points). In Cypher System, you have the option of taking your race as a descriptor (in lieu of a different descriptor), but you don't have to, especially if you wanted a descriptor like Charming or Foolish to be more important than Elf. In Fate, you would just put your race as part of your High Concept and maybe buy a stunt to go with it, to represent a racial ability. Unless the GM decides to go with racial Skills, in which case you'd buy "Elf" or "Troll" as a skill. Although I haven't played Dungeon World, it seems like race is just something you tick off on your playbook and doesn't matter all that much beyond maybe one or two abilities.So I don't know what your purpose here is, other than to say that games that aren't D&D do things differently than D&D does. At least when I talk about Level Up, it's based on D&D and is supposed to be 100% compatible with D&D.No, I'm just willing to acknowledge that (a) sentient beings are more than just their species' raw characteristics and (b) PCs are individuals, not entire species. I'm sure there are plenty of people who use "the famous guides," although I don't even know what those guides are. I'm assuming they're Youtube things. I pick a race and a class based on what I want to play. So does just about everyone else at my table. Getting to move a +2 around just ensures that the dice roll a bit better. Oh, and my table is incredibly story-oriented. That doesn't mean the dice aren't important.Since you claim that the interest has shifted because of Tasha's, then list some of the most common builds you've found on these famous guides that show how the power is drifting.Maybe the player was dumbfounded as to why anyone would require him to justify putting a 16 in Charisma, because who the heck does that? I mean, seriously: you have a person who was playing a half-orc fighter who didn't want his highest stat to be Strength but actually in one of his mental stats, and you are still being dismissive because he couldn't "explain" it to you? Wow. (FYI: the 4e warlord was a Charisma-based class.)Just about everything you've written here is badwrongfunning. You are incredibly dismissive of other playstyles; you drip with contempt for "powergamers," when you're not even using the term correctly (this <a href="https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0216.html" target="_blank">OOTS </a>is much closer to what most people think about when they think of powergaming). You assume that anyone who is "powergaming" can't be playing a story-oriented game. You required someone justify where they put their +2. All of this is so gatekeepy.And you haven't been reading some other forums then, either.And I guess you don't understand why this is problematic.I disagree. First off, culture should be at least somewhat setting-based. The core books should be as generic as possible. Secondly, there is too much negative baggage with the nearly 50-years of lore that D&D has: such as orcs as thugs and barbarians, or elves and dwarfs who are both good and bigoted towards others at the same time. By insisting that ASI or even traits inform culture, you continue to promote this stereotypes which at best are boring (because stereotype) and at worst are problematic (because of real-world implications, such as bigoted and good go hand-in-hand). Thirdly, there are, as I wrote in another post, something like 10 or 11 D&D playable races that give you +2 Strength. Any non-ASI traits or culture that you give those races to differentiate them from each other would also serve as bases for their culture even if they didn't have any ASI. And fourth, ASIs reward some race/class combos and punish others.</blockquote>

Verification