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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8202058" data-attributes="member: 6801228">See, you are just working under a completely different set of circumstances. You decided he was a dwarf just to make him stronger, but if I wanted him stronger... I'd just make him stronger. I wouldn't just make him a dwarf to make him stronger.And you've said those races are nothing without those +2 Dex scores, but you are missing the point. +2 Dex is meaningless. It means speed, it means grace, it means clever fingers, it means skill at archery, it means whatever we need it to mean, but it can't mean the same things. No one, absolutely no one would say that Goblins are as Graceful as Elves. Elves get +2 Dex, and that means they are Graceful. Goblins also have +2 Dex. But they are absolutely not graceful. So... +2 Dex doesn't mean you are graceful. It can't, because everyone else with that +2 Dex isn't graceful. Only Elves are.1) Then why did you say Tasha's was removing proficiencies if you don't think Tasha's removes anything? You seem to have not realized your own statement. 2) So, this has a few levels. Firstly, everything for Dwarves and Elves and Halflings ect ect ect, is completely written. Nothing done in 5e is going to erase those defaults. So if you are worried Dwarves will no longer have defaults, just open your PHB, because they are right there. Secondly, you seem to agree that changing a PC doesn't change the Race, so there is no problem. But thirdly, I don't think we need to continue to have default languages or ASIs for every single lineage going forward. We have floating ASIs and Floating Languages already. High Elves get +1 Language. +1 Language is fine. So, if a new lineage is designed with a floating ASI and a Floating Language? Then it is fine. Because this new lineage has been designed this way. Their default is this design. Say we need a default ignores the fact that this is also a default.Right, this system isn't perfect. It is already a mess of contradictions. So acting like changing things is suddenly creating contradictions that never existed is just false.Humans are worse than the best, as good as their second best, and better than their average. But, we think of humans as the average. The 3d6 Bell Curve model was based off humans getting no bonus, so changing that situation as changed every assumption.Some things? Just about every single monstrous NPC is wrong. Multiple PCs are only partial. You are accusing me of throwing out a baby, but the very existence of a baby within this bathwater is questionable.Saying "this must be true because it is on this chart" is very weak when you can easily point out that the majority of the chart is wrong.I'm not rehashing that debate. There is a very clear difference between having a penalty and being able to float your bonus. And the point I was made in there was hiding in your post. If they changed every single monstrous NPC in the chart when they made it a PC, then why would I assume that the Monstrous NPC on the chart is accurate? None of them were accurate.What is the default for a Human commoner? 10 Con. Dwarves are tougher in general with 12 Con? I've got a DnD beyond game pulled up, let me just post this real fastHuman -> Con 12Human -> Con 14Kalashatar-> Con 12Kenku -> Con 14Aasimar-> Con 15And I'm actually shocked to see those two 12's. The average I see on players is 14. So... if Dwarves are exceptional for having a 12, and most PCs have between a 12 and 16... are dwarves really exceptional from the player's perspective? They have the average lowest values that I normally see.So, what defaults are we comparing too? 10? 12? 16? Is the default the human commoner? The 12 that is the lowest score most players have for their "average". The 16 that is the default for their prime stat?</blockquote>

Verification