Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Unearthed Arcana: Gothic Lineages & New Race/Culture Distinction
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8201497" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>So, you would decide "I want this character to have a strength of 16" then write down 18 on the sheet? Because to be clear, I'm not imagining someone who says "I will give them a 16 because with the +2 that's an 18" because again, most people don't consider what stat then get the end result, they just write down the end result.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And what it tells you is the same thing for Halflings, Elves, Goblins, Tabaxi, Aarcrockra and Kenku. </p><p></p><p>But what I've noticed is that people tend to take the same information (+2 dex) and interpret it differently for each race, and I'm always left wondering how they know that +2 dex means halflings have nimble fingers while +2 dex means that Elves are lithe and graceful and +2 dex means that Tabaxi are fast with cat-like reflexes. And it is never all three, it is always that each race has one of these attributes that their shared bonus "means".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>1) It doesn't "remove" them, it allows them to be swapped for something of equal value. </p><p></p><p>2) You literally admitted the thing. It is fine for an individual. Because unsurprisingly not all people follow their culture, and heck it makes more sense in someways, allowing for dwarven warriors to be even more skilled craftsmen, because they are no longer "wasting" weapon profs. My dwarven fighter was already proficient in all four of those weapons, so that gave him more time to master even more tools, instead of just one. Or maybe he branched out and had other interests. This doesn't remove or destroy anything.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is information that is relatively useless, especially in your bell curve world. See, basic humans also have a +1 to wisdom (they get +1 to all stats). So Lotusden halflings are... just as perceptive as humans. Which makes them just average. Which makes them the same as everyone else... Unless we go that any race without a +1 wisdom is less perceptive. </p><p></p><p>And this is the thing that I think most people forget when they tout this "bell curve world" where the bonuses tell them what the race is good at. In 1e and other early versions of the game, humans didn't get any ASIs. Now, your basic non-V. Human gets a +1 to everything. So the entire bell curve is shifted one space for every stat, if you want to use humans as the baseline they have always been. Which drastically shifts the narrative of how this all used to work.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Gnolls don't have a racial write up as PC. So, I guess you are talking about the DMG information. Which, first of all, is deep in the customizing monsters section. It literally comes between "make your own monster" and "give monsters class levels"</p><p></p><p>It is also wildly out of date and full of inaccuracies. Just a few examples:</p><p></p><p>Dwarves on that chart get a +2 strength or a +2 Wisdom in addition to +2 Con. They also don't gain any hp buff from Hill Dwarf, or Mountain Dwarf Armor. Or the Dwarven Weapon Training. </p><p></p><p>Drow aren't given their Drow Weapon Training. Also, it is hilarious to realize that if you applied the "drow" bonuses to just about anything in the NPC section, you'd never get the drow statblock. </p><p></p><p>Elves, again no weapon training, no subrace abilities. I guess this is all what that "refer back to the PHB" asterisks must be for, because this is getting a bit embarrassing how poorly these depict the race, let's try a non-PHB one. </p><p></p><p>Goblins, -2 strength, that has never been the case for an officially printed goblin PC option. Even when Volo's had negatives for Orc Intelligence and Kobold strength, goblins never had this. </p><p></p><p>Kobolds here have -4 strength, double what they ended up with</p><p></p><p>Hobgoblins have none. Nothing. No bonuses or penalties at all. So much for them being smarter than dwarves. </p><p></p><p>Lizardfolk -2 Intelligence and +2 strength, nothing like what was printed in Volos. </p><p></p><p>Kenku had an ability called Ambusher, that vanished when switching to Volos. </p><p></p><p></p><p>So, yeah, I could look at that chart and see that Gnolls have -2 Intelligence, but considering how different, incomplete, and just flat out wrong that information is by now, I don't see why I should. Pretty much nothing in it is accurate anymore. </p><p></p><p></p><p>But also, returning to dwarves, you seemed to have missed why I found your argument silly. Yes, Mind Flayers are super intelligent evil geniuses... that doesn't tell us anything about any other race. Mindflayers are smarter than just about anything else. So saying it makes perfect sense for Hobgoblins to be smarter than dwarves, because MindFlayers exist and are smart, makes no sense. I don't have to fundamentally change dwarves to make them as smart as humans, who get a +1 INT. Or as smart as Hobgoblins. Who originally had no bonus. </p><p></p><p>This is the thing that drives me nuts, you have taken a position that these bonuses are so important that their removal fundamentally changes the race, and yet the changes to lizardfolk and hobgoblins seem to not even have registered with a lot of people. You say removing the Intelligence bonus to hobgoblins would fundamentally alter them, and yet, it was added in the first place, mid-edition, to a resounding.... silence.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See, you skipped right past the point. Where I bolded, that is where you proved that this debate has nothing to do with NPCs. </p><p></p><p>"Oh, this Rakshasa's default intelligence is too low for what I want. Guess he's smarter, bump" </p><p></p><p>Or, most people would play him as smart as they want, and not change his stats. Because his intelligence doesn't get used at all. This is one of the reasons a Mindflayers intelligence is so high, because they actually use their intelligence in combat, via their intelligence based abilities. It is the same reason why there is no monster meant to be fighting in melee who has a terrible str and dex, unless they are CR 0 animals.</p><p></p><p>And so, if you want your dwarves to be tough... bump their con. It is literally that simple. You seem to think that if the Racial ASIs in the <strong>Player's</strong> Handbook are changed that the Dungeon Master suddenly must change their world to reflect the new reality of the entire race of <strong>Non-Player</strong> Characters. But that is simply not the case anymore. It may have been the case decades ago in previous editions, but it isn't how 5e is designed. </p><p></p><p>Floating ASIs apply to the players, but they do not need to reflect anything about the larger population, because the DM can always change that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8201497, member: 6801228"] So, you would decide "I want this character to have a strength of 16" then write down 18 on the sheet? Because to be clear, I'm not imagining someone who says "I will give them a 16 because with the +2 that's an 18" because again, most people don't consider what stat then get the end result, they just write down the end result. And what it tells you is the same thing for Halflings, Elves, Goblins, Tabaxi, Aarcrockra and Kenku. But what I've noticed is that people tend to take the same information (+2 dex) and interpret it differently for each race, and I'm always left wondering how they know that +2 dex means halflings have nimble fingers while +2 dex means that Elves are lithe and graceful and +2 dex means that Tabaxi are fast with cat-like reflexes. And it is never all three, it is always that each race has one of these attributes that their shared bonus "means". 1) It doesn't "remove" them, it allows them to be swapped for something of equal value. 2) You literally admitted the thing. It is fine for an individual. Because unsurprisingly not all people follow their culture, and heck it makes more sense in someways, allowing for dwarven warriors to be even more skilled craftsmen, because they are no longer "wasting" weapon profs. My dwarven fighter was already proficient in all four of those weapons, so that gave him more time to master even more tools, instead of just one. Or maybe he branched out and had other interests. This doesn't remove or destroy anything. Which is information that is relatively useless, especially in your bell curve world. See, basic humans also have a +1 to wisdom (they get +1 to all stats). So Lotusden halflings are... just as perceptive as humans. Which makes them just average. Which makes them the same as everyone else... Unless we go that any race without a +1 wisdom is less perceptive. And this is the thing that I think most people forget when they tout this "bell curve world" where the bonuses tell them what the race is good at. In 1e and other early versions of the game, humans didn't get any ASIs. Now, your basic non-V. Human gets a +1 to everything. So the entire bell curve is shifted one space for every stat, if you want to use humans as the baseline they have always been. Which drastically shifts the narrative of how this all used to work. Gnolls don't have a racial write up as PC. So, I guess you are talking about the DMG information. Which, first of all, is deep in the customizing monsters section. It literally comes between "make your own monster" and "give monsters class levels" It is also wildly out of date and full of inaccuracies. Just a few examples: Dwarves on that chart get a +2 strength or a +2 Wisdom in addition to +2 Con. They also don't gain any hp buff from Hill Dwarf, or Mountain Dwarf Armor. Or the Dwarven Weapon Training. Drow aren't given their Drow Weapon Training. Also, it is hilarious to realize that if you applied the "drow" bonuses to just about anything in the NPC section, you'd never get the drow statblock. Elves, again no weapon training, no subrace abilities. I guess this is all what that "refer back to the PHB" asterisks must be for, because this is getting a bit embarrassing how poorly these depict the race, let's try a non-PHB one. Goblins, -2 strength, that has never been the case for an officially printed goblin PC option. Even when Volo's had negatives for Orc Intelligence and Kobold strength, goblins never had this. Kobolds here have -4 strength, double what they ended up with Hobgoblins have none. Nothing. No bonuses or penalties at all. So much for them being smarter than dwarves. Lizardfolk -2 Intelligence and +2 strength, nothing like what was printed in Volos. Kenku had an ability called Ambusher, that vanished when switching to Volos. So, yeah, I could look at that chart and see that Gnolls have -2 Intelligence, but considering how different, incomplete, and just flat out wrong that information is by now, I don't see why I should. Pretty much nothing in it is accurate anymore. But also, returning to dwarves, you seemed to have missed why I found your argument silly. Yes, Mind Flayers are super intelligent evil geniuses... that doesn't tell us anything about any other race. Mindflayers are smarter than just about anything else. So saying it makes perfect sense for Hobgoblins to be smarter than dwarves, because MindFlayers exist and are smart, makes no sense. I don't have to fundamentally change dwarves to make them as smart as humans, who get a +1 INT. Or as smart as Hobgoblins. Who originally had no bonus. This is the thing that drives me nuts, you have taken a position that these bonuses are so important that their removal fundamentally changes the race, and yet the changes to lizardfolk and hobgoblins seem to not even have registered with a lot of people. You say removing the Intelligence bonus to hobgoblins would fundamentally alter them, and yet, it was added in the first place, mid-edition, to a resounding.... silence. See, you skipped right past the point. Where I bolded, that is where you proved that this debate has nothing to do with NPCs. "Oh, this Rakshasa's default intelligence is too low for what I want. Guess he's smarter, bump" Or, most people would play him as smart as they want, and not change his stats. Because his intelligence doesn't get used at all. This is one of the reasons a Mindflayers intelligence is so high, because they actually use their intelligence in combat, via their intelligence based abilities. It is the same reason why there is no monster meant to be fighting in melee who has a terrible str and dex, unless they are CR 0 animals. And so, if you want your dwarves to be tough... bump their con. It is literally that simple. You seem to think that if the Racial ASIs in the [B]Player's[/B] Handbook are changed that the Dungeon Master suddenly must change their world to reflect the new reality of the entire race of [B]Non-Player[/B] Characters. But that is simply not the case anymore. It may have been the case decades ago in previous editions, but it isn't how 5e is designed. Floating ASIs apply to the players, but they do not need to reflect anything about the larger population, because the DM can always change that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Unearthed Arcana: Gothic Lineages & New Race/Culture Distinction
Top