D&D 5E What To Do With Racial ASIs?

[TwoSix]

Well, there's two separate issues, really.

The first is that if you remove the stat adjustment from race, you need to put the points back into the system somehow. You also ideally do it in a manner that works for both point-buy AND for rolling. I'd say the best place is on both class (A free +2 to your main stat or stats) and background (a +1 to one of 3 or so associated stats, one of which is always Con.)

The second issue is more aesthetic. If you're not going to define race/ancestry in terms of their stats, how exactly are you going to change their definition?

 

[DND_Reborn]

you need to put the points back into the system somehow

See, this is the point I would contend with. You don't need these extra points really. Do most players want them, sure, but that is just because WotC has designed games so people are used to getting them.

In 1E, things generally had a +1 and a -1, so over all they were no better or worse than the standard normal. The game played perfectly fine, especially if you decreased the required number to start getting bonuses to 12 as it is in 5E instead of roughly 15 like in 1E.

If you're not going to define race/ancestry in terms of their stats, how exactly are you going to change their definition?

Races can easily be defined by all the other racial traits they get. ASI's can be removed (or floated) and the base race remains the same because of everything else that is part of their make up.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Here are my thoughts on the matter. A lot of this is repost from another thread.

People come up with all sort of convoluted background/culture/class/phase-of-the-moon based methods to assign the bonuses differently which ultimately amount to anyone getting to put the bonuses wherever the they want. If that's the goal just skip the nonsense and do point buy with higher cap and more points. Having races impose ability minimums and maximums in the point buy would be an elegant way to handle the capabilities of different species, but I doubt people who don't like racial bonuses to begin with would be pleased with that either.

Ultimately the issue is due the main stat of the classes being too important in comparison to anything else. This is not only an issue with the races, it leads to cookie-cutter statlines in general. One somewhat counter-intuitive method I considered was making your class' main stat cost more point in the point buy. So you basically had a choice between having your main stat to be 16 and two secondary stats to be 14, or your main stat to being 14 and two secondary stats being 16. Then that might lead to there being an actual choice instead of maxing your main stat always being the optimal route.

Personally really I want to keep some differentiation in ability scores for different species. I feel that their flavour value is pretty high. Legolas is inhumanly agile, Chewbacca is inhumanly strong and Spock is inhumanly smart. I want this to be represented and I want the abilities to actually mean something instead of just being arbitrary bonuses that do not really represent anything in the world. If high strength score on the character sheet does not correlate to a person being strong in the fiction, then I'd rather get rid of the ability scores altogether. Everyone can just have their boringly expected bonus and we can just call it 'Basic Bonus' or something. But I really feel that then something important would be lost.

I want the game to proceed from the assumption that the ability scores actually represent something and that the fantasy races are biologically distinct species, not just funny looking humans. And this will mean their abilities will not be identical. You can and should try to counter the imbalance caused by this somewhat. All races should offer some benefits regardless of which class you choose. But ultimately this is co-op game, not competitive one and perfect balance is not required. And when it comes to choosing between verisimilitude and balance, I will choose the verisimilitude.

 

[TwoSix]

See, this is the point I would contend with. You don't need these extra points really. Do most players want them, sure, but that is just because WotC has designed games so people are used to getting them.

In 1E, things generally had a +1 and a -1, so over all they were no better or worse than the standard normal. The game played perfectly fine, especially if you decreased the required number to start getting bonuses to 12 as it is in 5E instead of roughly 15 like in 1E.

Ok, you don't NEED to (I mean, the game is perfectly playable if your array is 7,8,9,10,11,12), but the expectation is there from the player base. Depends on whether we're discussing a future WotC game or a house rule. If we're discussing a revision to 5e by WotC, the points need to be put back. If we're discussing 6e, obviously the points can be balanced in a different manner. If it's your own game, you can do whatever you want.

Races can easily be defined by all the other racial traits they get. ASI's can be removed (or floated) and the base race remains the same because of everything else that is part of their make up.

That's fine to me. I just think a portion of the player base is attached to the familiar usage, and the subsequent narration that descends from it. (In other words, what having a +2 Dex or +2 Str means in terms of world-building.)

 

[Guest 6801328]

You shouldn’t have put a cap on the number of votes. You’ve got one choice that keeps racial bonuses, then four different versions of “get rid of them”.

 

[NotAYakk]

I'm ok with legolas being inhumanly agile, but then you shouldn't use his inhuman agility to determine core competence of his class.

Imagine if attack rolls and saving throws never used any attribute, just your proficiency bonus. Damage rolls would still add it.

Now a strength 12 to strength 20 fighter would be at least somewhat on the same plane.

And if at level 5 and 11 and 17 melee characters tended to get an extra weapon damage die instead of an extra attack, having +1 to +10 bonus in a stat would be significant but not overwealming. (8d6+1 is 29, 8d6+20 is 38; a big difference but not as great a +7 to +16 to hit is).

 

[Guest 6801328]

in any event, my (unserious) suggestion is to make the standard array 20, 16, 13, 12, 10, 8, and get rid of ASIs. Because everybody eventually gets there anyway, right?

Then I can just take cool feats instead of boring ASIs.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'm ok with legolas being inhumanly agile, but then you shouldn't use his inhuman agility to determine core competence of his class.

Imagine if attack rolls and saving throws never used any attribute, just your proficiency bonus. Damage rolls would still add it.

Now a strength 12 to strength 20 fighter would be at least somewhat on the same plane.

And if at level 5 and 11 and 17 melee characters tended to get an extra weapon damage die instead of an extra attack, having +1 to +10 bonus in a stat would be significant but not overwealming. (8d6+1 is 29, 8d6+20 is 38; a big difference but not as great a +7 to +16 to hit is).

That indeed would be one way to make the main ability scores less crucial.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You shouldn’t have put a cap on the number of votes. You’ve got one choice that keeps racial bonuses, then four different versions of “get rid of them”.

It was either a cap at 1 or 2 votes. I want people to make choices, not be able to vote for half the options because they are fine with whatever more or less.

By making it 2 votes, the idea was pick your favorite and a back-up you would be pretty much happy with as well.

The general point is either keep them or do something else with them or get rid of them.

Finally, the second option doesn't "get rid of them", it makes them float.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It was either a cap at 1 or 2 votes. I want people to make choices, not be able to vote for half the options because they are fine with whatever more or less.

By making it 2 votes, the idea was pick your favorite and a back-up you would be pretty much happy with as well.

The general point is either keep them or do something else with them or get rid of them.

Finally, the second option doesn't "get rid of them", it makes them float.

Wait, you could vote two different options? This will totally skew the results against keeping the bonuses. There are only one option for keeping the racial bonuses and several different for getting rid of them in various ways. So everyone who wants to get rid of them can vote two different options while those in favour of keeping them can vote only one.