Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9554605" data-attributes="member: 7045806">I don't think this is a problem for the design of the game. It's a player to table mismatch. That mismatch is in how the player wants to play and how the DM, or group, desires for the game to play. And this mismatch will manifest regardless of ASIs floating or not.We see this type of debate come up a lot in these forums. We have a behavior problem, a player using a mechanic purely for mechanical benefit in a narrative game and is, presumably in opposition to the rest of the group. The way ASIs are presented in species/races actually doesn't solve the underlying issue. Its like if you are in a boat and a scuba diver is drilling holes in the bottom of the boat. You stick a plug in one hole. You didn't address the underlying issue. You band-aided a symptom.Here we have that exact situation. Binding ASIs to the species plugs a hole. But the underlying issue is the player's behavior being unaligned with the group's expectations. This behavior will just manifest in other ways, be it with feats or another mechanic or during play itself.The only way to effectively solve the issue is social and is to address the player. If you try to just &quot;plug holes&quot; you will find that there is always a new one popping up. Always a new annoying loophole players can use to cause problems. But if you just choose like-minded players, those loopholes stop mattering and the flexibility is all upside.A long way of saying, this is a player problem and not a rule problem.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DinoInDisguise, post: 9554605, member: 7045806"] I don't think this is a problem for the design of the game. It's a player to table mismatch. That mismatch is in how the player wants to play and how the DM, or group, desires for the game to play. And this mismatch will manifest regardless of ASIs floating or not. We see this type of debate come up a lot in these forums. We have a behavior problem, a player using a mechanic purely for mechanical benefit in a narrative game and is, presumably in opposition to the rest of the group. The way ASIs are presented in species/races actually doesn't solve the underlying issue. Its like if you are in a boat and a scuba diver is drilling holes in the bottom of the boat. You stick a plug in one hole. You didn't address the underlying issue. You band-aided a symptom. Here we have that exact situation. Binding ASIs to the species plugs a hole. But the underlying issue is the player's behavior being unaligned with the group's expectations. This behavior will just manifest in other ways, be it with feats or another mechanic or during play itself. The only way to effectively solve the issue is social and is to address the player. If you try to just "plug holes" you will find that there is always a new one popping up. Always a new annoying loophole players can use to cause problems. But if you just choose like-minded players, those loopholes stop mattering and the flexibility is all upside. A long way of saying, this is a player problem and not a rule problem. [/QUOTE]

Verification