Indeed that fault lies with my explanation or lack thereof.Yes, but you are telling me that I "don't get it", implying that I somehow don't understand. I do understand it. That we have different values of it doesn't mean one of lacks understanding.
Look... I'm going to chalk this up to poor wording, but saying "you don't understand" is very different than saying "you have a preference".
I mean, by RAW, Feats aren't required either. It might be much duller, but the math and such works out just as well.
At the end, ASIs are a fairly valid choice depending what kind of character you are building. For spellcasters it's generally more worthwhile because it has much more of an impact on what you can do and how effective you are. For non-spellcasters, it depends on what class you are. Monks and Barbarians can use an extra ASI to improve their stats because they can potentially be pretty MAD: Barbarians can really benefit from every physical stat, while raising a Monk's AC can definitely help them be less squishy. Compared to what you might chose as a Feat, they can vary.
Sure? But again, by RAW Feats don't even need to be included. My whole point is that ASIs versus Feats carries an opportunity cost. If you don't think so, that's fine, but don't tell me I "don't understand".