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="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 8197464" data-attributes="member: 6802951">Bear in mind that way back on page 13 I explained why I don't use racial ASIs.I am not objecting to the use of floating ASIs in this discussion with Faolyn and yourself. Faolyn has been making rather unpleasant accusations about what people in this thread have been saying, and I've been trying to get them to show where they have actually said those things, or to stick to arguments that have actually been made.The only thing I've been discussing with you is the binary "you need a max stat or else you suck" statements you seemed to be making and the inter-player and real-life implications of that mindset. As I have stated, I've no issue with the understanding that a +2 bonus is worse than a +3 bonus, just the attitude that the +3 is necessary for a viable character or the whole "If you don't have a 16 in strength, you're not a strong person" statement made.I've no issue that your experience differs from mine, and I'm not accusing you of being the type of person who would actually put their beliefs into practice by telling a new player who assigned a number of 14s rather than a 16 to their character that it sucks, or someone that they aren't intelligent because they only got a B on a test.Is a +3 bonus actually the average?Because that was the only part of the post that had issues with (that I hadn't covered elsewhere).As stated, I've got no problem with this. Just the attitude that it is necessary for a viable character.Do you think that having one pip on a d20 lower chance for somethings in exchange for one or more pips better for other (albeit rarer) things was an issue because it actually came up a lot in rolling, or because the player knew it was always present even when they didn't actually roll within one pip of success?(Not making a value judgement here:- I am legitimately curious. If someone is being made to feel worthless I would normally be looking at class, subclass, and spotlight time. That level of difference in some rolls would not have occurred to me to be an issue, so more information would be welcome.)the +3 bonus is the maximum, not the average. (outside of rolling, in which I think you'll agree all bets are off). I do not believe that anyone here has an issue with a character having a 16 stat. - My issue is being told that it is necessary for a viable and playable character.They are literally quotes from your posts.I am objecting to being told a further +2 in addition to assigning a high stat is necessary for a character. - But mostly with Chaosmancer.The reason I started questioning your posts, were the claims that you were making about what people had been saying. They did not seem to match up to what they were actually saying.If someone says "I don't think halflings should be able to get a +2 bonus to Strength in addition to simply assigning a high score there."and you say "They say that halflings shouldn't have above average strength" then you are claiming that they are saying something that they are not saying.Most of what I have said you have said are quotes from your actual posts.On the contrary, the system I use allows a 16 to be assigned whether you're a halfling or a half-orc.However, I am still interested in why you would claim I "can't seem to imagine a halfling with a Strength of 16" since making false claims about what people are saying is precisely what I am discussing with you.I think the question seems to be whether you are satisfied with your character being an exceptional member of their race, at the peak of their potential, or whether being able to go over and above that, beyond your race for that extra +1 is necessary.I'm using optimiser as a neutral term in the sense of someone who simply needs to be the best at what they can do to feel happy with their character - which is perfectly valid.As distinct from munchkin or minmaxer who would be willing to deliberately overshadow the rest of the party and/or try to take advantage of rules loopholes to do so.</blockquote>

Verification