D&D (2024) Should all races/lineages have +2/+1/+1 ASI?


log in or register to remove this ad


Horwath

Legend
The way I'm doing it, going forward, is to remove all 1st level ASIs from race/background/etc and have players assign their stats according to the standard point buy (27 points).

But, to replace the standard ASIs, players get to roll 5d4 for each ability score, in order, and use the higher result (between the roll and the buy) for each ability.
Why complicate things?

15->16 is worth 3 pts
16->17 is worth 3 pts

just add 9 pts(or 12 of you go with +2/+1/+1) to 27 and have max of 17 for point buy.

also, I see clear exploit with this, just point buy 15,15,15,8,8,8.

15 will probably not get a big boost, but 8 will get almost always.
 
Last edited:



Vaalingrade

Legend
"I really need for
It's literally that, whether you are tired of it or not. Generic means "characteristic of or relating to a class or group of things; not specific." If you make them all not specific, you're making them all generic. And what you mean by "more playable" is "less specific" right? You want them to not specify particularized ability scores as having a bonus or a minimum, right? That is making them "not specific" which is "generic."
This is just twisted semantics that signifies nothing.

You're going to see less pigeonholing into classes favored by ability score. That's less generic.
 

Divine2021

Adventurer
Too much of early DnD was tied to Tolkien assumptions. I still can't cope with dwarves wizards so don't ask me anything.

If there is no racial bias towards anything, the stat increases are meaningless.
This simply isn’t true. Tolkien was one influence among many. Lieber, Vance, Smith, Wellman, and above all Howard (among many others) have demonstrable influences on DnD, far more than Tolkien.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
This simply isn’t true. Tolkien was one influence among many. Lieber, Vance, Smith, Wellman, and above all Howard (among many others) have demonstrable influences on DnD, far more than Tolkien.
I wouldn't say more influence than Tolkien. Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, treants, and Type VI demons (to name a few) beg to differ.
 

Divine2021

Adventurer
I wouldn't say more influence than Tolkien. Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, treants, and Type VI demons (to name a few) beg to differ.
I’m not really interested in arguing about this, but the earliest DnD has, in my opinion, demonstrably clearer influences from the authors I listed than Tolkien. Perhaps not in races, but in regards to tone, objectives, and overall philosophy of the game.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
"I really need for

This is just twisted semantics that signifies nothing.

You're going to see less pigeonholing into classes favored by ability score. That's less generic.
All races/species being equally qualified at all times for all classes is not "less generic" when discussing how generic races/species are. The more you reduce races/species to mere flavor and less mechanics, the more generic it becomes.

By your logic, all weapons do the same damage and same thing would see no pigeonholing of weapons either, but that too would not be less generic. Pigeonholing is another way of saying specifying. This is what these words "generic" and "not generic" mean. It's not semantics, there is no competing definition here that's exactly what the word generic means in all contexts.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top