Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Twig" data-source="post: 8200306" data-attributes="member: 31754">Yes, humans are more naturally charming and persuasive than elves. Slightly, like 2.5% better on average. And they are, on average, 2.5% less dexterous. And sure, Lotusden halflings can be wiser and more perceptive than gnomes. Why not? Isn't that more interesting than, "No, they are the same as everyone else." And why can't hobgoblins be smarter than dwarves? Illithids are smarter than dwarves, they are smarter than just about everyone! Why is it a problem with gnomes and hobgoblins but not Illithids? For that matter why is it okay for minotaurs and gnolls to be dumber but not orcs? It makes no sense.Put those Racial ASIs back and nothing you said changes. Your dwarf still has his highest stat in intelligence because he is a battlefield commander and put his highest ability in intelligence and then put his class ASIs in intelligence as he leveled up. The fact that he has a +2 in Con and a +1 Wis or +2 Str doesn't change the fact that his highest stat can be Int. And he is, at worst, 5% behind a human that also focused on intelligence. Until the dwarf catches up and becomes the same. But that is just if you don't allow Tasha's optional rules. Which I would allow. So in my game you would not have a problem.Your elf bard of 230 years has a high Charisma because he put his 15 there and then added another +2 at level 4, and another +2 at level 8. Is he as Charismatic as a Half-Elf or Human bard? Does it matter? Are you competing against the another bard in the party? How often does that +1 make a difference? Honestly probable a lot less than 5% since not everything you are doing is going to require a roll. Again, in my game I would allow the optional rule and it wouldn't be an issue.Now I have to ask, are we just talking about PCs? Or are we including NPCs? Because if we are just talking about PCs, as I said, I'm fine with it. Your dwarf has a below average constitution for a "typical" dwarf because reasons, it can be anything you want. Be creative! Of course if your Con is a 12 or 14, you really don't need a reason at all, it is still well within typical dwarf constitution range. And the +2 Cha is easy enough to explain as "He spent all his time playing music and entertaining his friends when he was young." Fair enough! Sounds good! Or it could be as unusual as "was gifted with a fae-like glamour by a nymph after he protected her grove from rampaging goblins." Even better! Now I have a back story I can work with!But if we remove default racial ASIs from NPCs, what does that say about dwarves in general? Nothing, it says nothing about them. "Bold and hardy, dwarves are know as skilled warriors, miners and workers of stone and metal." Really? Why are they known as such? With the new rules, if you remove all defaults, this is really not true anymore. "Their courage and endurance are also easily a match for any of the larger folk." Well, I guess? In that their courage and endurance are exactly the same. Why even mention it?I guess the are slow (25' movement), have darkvision, are resistant to poison and have stonecunning. Or do they have stonecunning? Does it count as a proficiency that can be moved around? (Honest question here.)Hill dwarves are a little tougher because of dwarven toughness, I guess. And mountain dwarves are... slightly better than everyone else at what ever it is they are trying to do? Like, they can an extra +2 ASI somewhere instead of just +1 and get an extra proficiency with any armor, weapon or tool? So they are not better at any one thing in particular, they are just better at... something. I just don't see how that is a better story.</blockquote>

Verification