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: 8191643" data-attributes="member: 6915329">All of those are things up to the table to decide, not the game itself. The rules should be written to allow for the most inclusivity, not because some people can't handle the idea of a halfling that is unusually strong, or healthy, or smart, or wise, or personable.Because while people here are focusing on the "horrors" of a halfling with a +2 bonus to Strength, what is actually happening is, because you want to deny that floating +2, you are also saying that halflings can't be anything but dexterous, and goliaths can't be anything but strong, and gnomes can't be anything but smart, and tieflings can't be anything but charismatic, and so on.You are literally saying that all races need to remain in their little boxes and that all players need to limit themselves because some players are incapable of imagining that there's a strong halfling or a smart orc or a wise goliath.And quite frankly, I don't care about those players. They need to expand their horizons a bit. Or, y'know, put their floating ASI in the stat that makes them feel safe and happy.Here, I'll give you another example. My preference for medieval fantasy to be kind of low tech, or at the least, to have realistic levels of technology.The Artificer completely flies in the face of that. It bugs the hell out of me that Artificers are able to make complex machinery in six seconds while in the middle of a tense situation like a combat. Even "fantasy realism" insists that wondrous devices should require at least days worth of work in a workshop somewhere, and more likely months, and should be limited to things like a weirdly complex and working clockwork device or maybe an ornithopter that really flies and simple distilled elixirs.And yet, the artificer is a thing, and is capable of creating an equivalent of the Iron Man suit of armor in an hour--and not only in an hour, but while resting. Fighting for a minute or casting a spell or two ruins your ability to get the benefits of a rest, but creating gauntlets, by hand, without using magic to do so, that can shoot lightning bolts is easy-peasy! It would take a wizard months to do the same thing!This completely destroys any logical sense of fantasy realism, it makes wizards look incompetent, and it destroys my sense of immersion. And yet, it exists. It's an official class with official archetypes. So, to keep fantasy realism alive, we have two options:1: Completely remove it from the game. it's completely illogical, it doesn't even mesh with a Medieval-style setting, I don't like it. Get angry with WotC if they even think about publishing anything for the artificer in a further book. Don't allow it to be in 5.5 or 6e because it's so against fantasy realism.2: Don't allow it in my personal game. It doesn't exist in my setting. That way, everyone else can enjoy, or not enjoy, the artificer as they see fit. If I have a player who wants to play an artificer in my setting, too bad for them, and possibly too bad for me. I have to deal with the consequences of that player's desire myself, but that's on me. Not on you or anyone else who likes the artificer.This is what you guys need to do with those floating ASIs. You don't like 'em, then don't use them. You know what the ASIs are for about a hundred races and subraces. If any new races come out, you can easily guess what their ASIs are based on description and picture, take them from the list of mini-templates in the DMG, or adapt them from an earlier edition. That's maybe a couple of minutes of work for you.That way, you get your precious racial limitations and everyone else gets what they want.It doesn't hint at them being dexterous either. In fact, it describes halflings as stout, which is pretty much the opposite of agile and supports the idea of them maybe having a sturdy, solid build; that is, the possibility of strength. It doesn't even say halflings have "clever fingers." And even if you prefer to see stout mean fat, well, that itself goes against the Stout halfling's Constitution bonus. The PH does describe halflings as curious and personable, which would support a bonus to Intelligence or Charisma. But only one halfling gets a Cha bonus (two, if you count Dragonmarked halflings) and that's only a +1, and none get an Int bonus. Strangely, some get a Wisdom bonus, even though they're not described as having the kind of philosophical outlook on life that would support that.So what were you saying about descriptions again?</blockquote>

Verification