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

[doctorbadwolf]

@doctorbadwolf

I know you think floating ASI's won't cause players to fall into playing "their favorite race" for everything, but I wouldn't be surprised if a fair number did. I mentioned before one player in our group who plays dragonborn a LOT.

To be fair, I certainly believe those players (who stick to one race) will be a small number. But as it has been said, if they can play a race they love to play and not feel like it is subpar to other choices, what is wrong with that? Personally, I would see such behavior as a lost opportunity for the player (like I've encouraged our Dragonborn player to try other races and he has had fun with them, in particular loving his Gnome!), but I certainly won't fault them for playing a race they really enjoy.

In a similar light we have another player who plays monks and paladins almost exclusively. I told him for the new game I hope to run later this year, I really want him to at least try another class! I told him if he simply isn't enjoying a new class, I'll let him remake his PC. So, he agreed and I'll be anxious to see how it works out.

Over all, I think (if we insist on keeping the ASIs), floating them is the least of all evils. Remove them from race and just add them as the end part of determining your attributes. You can float them to whatever ability score you want for whatever reason. You're Paladin is stronger? Ok, sure, why? Because he is a Dragonborn, because he has a Solider background, or just because he is a warrior? Honestly, does it really matter? You can come up with any reason you want.

In the light of the halfling/orc comparison. Both are barbarians, both used point-buy for max 15 STR and added ASI +2 for total 17. Maybe the orc's is just genetics due to race, maybe the halfling's is because of his barbarian "training" (?) or his Far Traveler background? Thematically, you can reason it out however you want.

Finally, what I still have issue with, personally, is more about encumbrance and other physical factors related to races. In discussing this with our newly budding DM last night, he was shocked to learn Medium creatures don't have advantage over Small for grappling, or that small creatures could carry just as much via STR as medium. To me, ASIs are secondary, some of the other issues are really the points that break verisimilitude for me.

It's not that I don't think we'll see it at all, it's that I know damn well it won't be ubiquitous, and that we will also see a probably equal rise in people who only play one or two classes expanding what races they play.

The people who just prefer those combinations will keep using them, because why wouldn't they?

But I disagree that floating ASIs are the least bad option. IMO, giving both race and class an ASI where each has multiple options and they can't stack, is a better option. It works out to the same freedom, but keeps the associations and expectations the same.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

People keep saying “but players will just play their favorite race all the time!” like it’s a bad thing. What’s wrong with players playing their favorite race all the time? It’s their favorite race, let them play it!

also this

 

[Crimson Longinus]

People keep saying “but players will just play their favorite race all the time!” like it’s a bad thing. What’s wrong with players playing their favorite race all the time? It’s their favorite race, let them play it!

That certainly is one argument I really don't get either. Now people might have certain patterns and constantly make similar characters and I can see why it might get tiresome (not that merely being the same race would necessarily constitute as such,) but if that's the case I don't think that's an issue one should try to solve via rules.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's not that I don't think we'll see it at all, it's that I know damn well it won't be ubiquitous, and that we will also see a probably equal rise in people who only play one or two classes expanding what races they play.

The people who just prefer those combinations will keep using them, because why wouldn't they?

But I disagree that floating ASIs are the least bad option. IMO, giving both race and class an ASI where each has multiple options and they can't stack, is a better option. It works out to the same freedom, but keeps the associations and expectations the same.

A bit like PF2. I might be ok with something like that.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Yes, I agree that if you let people put their ASIs wherever we would see more high-strength halfling characters. Obviously. I don't want that though.

Yes but that can happen one of two ways:

The tiny minority of people who currently roll halfling barbarians (etc.) start with higher strength, but based on Doc’s thesis we can ignore them because “most” people don’t make that combo.

Or, the result of a floating ASI is that more people start playing oddball combos, but that undermines the theory that ASIs aren’t a significant factor in race decision.

Which is it?

 

[Charlaquin]

Finally, what I still have issue with, personally, is more about encumbrance and other physical factors related to races. In discussing this with our newly budding DM last night, he was shocked to learn Medium creatures don't have advantage over Small for grappling, or that small creatures could carry just as much via STR as medium. To me, ASIs are secondary, some of the other issues are really the points that break verisimilitude for me.

This might be a topic for another thread, but I would be in favor of expressing strength differences by way of carrying capacity. We already do it to an extent with Powerful Build, and I think that’s a great way to show that a race is extra strong without making them mire accurate with melee weapons. (Yes, I know, the score is called strength. A successful attack is also called a hit, it doesn’t mean HO are meat, let’s try not to get too bogged down with the terms and focus on the actual game effects.) But I’m pretty sure the reason small races don’t have reduced carrying capacity is that 5e doesn’t have small-sized equipment with decreased weight. If you have one, you need the other, and it’s a lot less work to just cut both out and assume that a Small character’s pound is in fact less than a Medium character’s pound, because all their stuff is sized appropriately for them.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yes but that can happen one of two ways:

The tiny minority of people who currently roll halfling barbarians (etc.) start with higher strength, but based on Doc’s thesis we can ignore them because “most” people don’t make that combo.

Or, the result of a floating ASI is that more people start playing oddball combos, but that undermines the theory that ASIs aren’t a significant factor in race decision.

Which is it?

It will be the combination of both. I have at no point argued* that ASIs won't affect the race selection at all. The amount of immersion-breakingly-strong halflings will increase, that much is clear. Exactly how much we cannot say. But there really isn't the contradiction you imply.

(* Probably. It has been a long thread so who really knows... )

 

[FrogReaver]

People keep saying “but players will just play their favorite race all the time!” like it’s a bad thing. What’s wrong with players playing their favorite race all the time? It’s their favorite race, let them play it!

They say that because of the arguments you are making for want non racial ASIs. It’s solely a jab at your arguments for them.

 

[Helldritch]

We are at a point in RPG where lore is the cause of Racial ASI and where Racial ASI support the lore. Which came first? The chicken or the proverbial egg? (rethorical question here, do not answer please). By removing Racial ASI you remove a bit of the lore. Up to which point, lore will no longer apply. After a time, since race can do anything in any combination, you remove the surprise element from doing something out of the expected since nothing is ever expected.

In the long run, this will punish the players that want to play the underdog because of the surprise factor it will give them (I know that until the dwarven wizard has cast two or three spells, his enemies assume he has used a magical item). No longer will a DM play the surprise factor on the foes of the players because nothing is unexpected (or expected). If you have no reasons to assume X because the rules do not suport it a tiny bit, then the world should not assume X either.

Again, in the begining you will see a wide variety of races and classes combination. Then, after a few games when the novelty wears off, you start to see patterns in the characters your players will make. It will not be that evident at first. Then after a little while, you'll realise that sometimes, a restriction is a big bonus in its application. Racial ASI are there to make character's creation richer and not the opposite. Yes it makes it harder (but not much) to make certain class combinations, but in doing so, it makes these combinations all the more interesting.

As for playing the same race all the time is wrong...
Up to a certain point, it is not. Players are entitled to play their favorite race and again I see nothing wrong in that. But knowing that playing your elf might gimp you in doing a strength base barb might force you to leave your comfort zone to do something else and make you realise that: "Hey! Half-Orcs are not so bad after all!" or "Good lord! That Dragonborn was something to play!" It gives you a chance, a reason, a motivation to explore something new. Sure you can make an elf and make it a barb, a paladin, a monk or any class you want. But you know that certain combinations are a wee bit better. We are lucky that in 5ed, a character is not really punish to make unusual combo. Try to do that with the 1ed racial maximums and we'll see. The goal in RPG is to explore and pretend we are something else. Always pretending the same thing seems to go against this exploration of variety that I love so much.

 

[DND_Reborn]

But I disagree that floating ASIs are the least bad option. IMO, giving both race and class an ASI where each has multiple options and they can't stack, is a better option. It works out to the same freedom, but keeps the associations and expectations the same.

I agree it is certainly a more logical approach than floating, but IMO it complicates the issue even more so and is just moving the issue partly away from race and onto class and/or background. Numerous people (including myself) have argued for a system that spreads things out, as where floating accomplishes the same goal without needing to specify the sources of the ASIs necessarily.

However, I am not playing today and have the time for a thought experiment on it. Let us (for argument's sake) suppose that the system granted 1 ASI from race, 1 ASI from background, and 1 ASI from class (making it as "complex" as possible). The only limit is you can't use more than two ASIs for any one ability score. Race could be fixed (in this example, or make it an option of two if you wish).

Suppose Halflings grant DEX +1 (fixed).
Suppose Orcs grant STR +1 (fixed).
Suppose Barbarians grants STR +1 or CON +1 (the class options mirror the saves they are proficient in).
Suppose Soldier grants STR +1 or DEX +1.

The player wants a strong PC for good attacks, etc. as a barbarian, but wants to play a Halfling, so picks STR +1 for both class and background. Now the PC has STR +2 and DEX +1 (from Halfling).

Another player wants a strong Orc, gaining STR +2 (Orc and either class or background) and perhaps DEX +1 (from background).

Now the two PCs could have the exact same scores, but get them in different ways.

NOTE: this is nothing new, people have been discussing such ideas on the forum for a LONG time.

Now, since backgrounds are completely fluid, it's been brought up that a custom background could support any two ASIs easily, which I agree with, but this in essence just makes that choice "float."

Ok, so your suggestion might have (for this very reason!) included only race and class. I suppose you could do something like this:

Race grants one ASI +1 which is fixed (or choice of two??? whichever really).
Class grants two ASI +1 which mirror proficient saves: thus, Barbarian would be STR, CON. You can choose the same ASI twice if you want.
You cannot add more than 2 to any one score.

Thus, the halfling would get STR +2 (double choice for barbarian) and DEX +1 (race).
The orc would also get STR +2 (one orc, one barbarian) and CON +1 (barbarian, cannot select STR again).

To easily adopt this into the current rules:

• The ASI +2 from a race becomes a fixed ASI +1 (subrace ASIs are ignored).
• Each class offers two ASI +1, choices may be the same.
• No more than two ASIs can be applied to any one ability score.

Alternatively, since variant human gets a feat, humans have no Fixed ASI for race. I like that better myself.