Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8205317" data-attributes="member: 6801228">But this has nothing to do with the point being discussed, which was that with a floating ASI the player had no guidance on what to pick. Who cares if the ASI represents training? That doesn't change the fact that the player has no guidance to pick them, and yet that doesn't seem to be an issue, but choosing because of an adaptable race is, as long as it is a new race, older races were fine.And so if the races concept includes adaptability there is no issue. You can't really argue against a future maybe on a rule, with no evidence. And ASI's don't always do a great job with that matching to concept thing, ie Loxodon.  And you are ignoring the entire side debate we have been having. Go look at the Lizardfolk Commoner from Ghosts of Saltmarsh and tell me how we are supposed to have every member of that race have no strength bonus (they have a str 15) and instead focus on Wisdom and Con (12 each I think) as their primary scores. I think they also had an INT penalty, despite their racial scores not giving that.</blockquote>