Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8044019" data-attributes="member: 6801228">But that is heavily DM dependant. I know my saturday DM would never let us use nature to increase damage against an enemy. And sure, stealth, social skills, and a whole lot of other factors can come into play, but with the rules as they are they might only come up sometimes. Every player in the group doesn't need a high persuasion. But every player in the group is going to be making attack rolls. And, if we consider this in terms of classes, then we have to ask if the Fighter having a slightly better persuasion check matters if they are in the same party as a Bard with Expertise in Persuasion.Okay, but they don't want to play a non-dwarf. So why should we try and "tempt" them with something like an ASI? The current situation is either:They play a Dwarf (which they want to do) and are a worse bardThey play a non-Dwarf (which they don't want to do) and are an effective Bard. Why can't they play a Dwarven Bard and be as mechanically effective as if they decided to play a Dwarven Fighter? What your "temptation" actually does is dis-incentivize people from playing Dwarven Bards. Which is why it is so rare (I have found) for those other traits that support the class to be highlighted. Those people you feel are depriving themselves of opportunities are not interested in having a 14 in their prime ability. I've seen clerics who try it (a Dragonborn and a Gnome) and they were not fun for the players, because they lost too much and gained too little.Sure, Mountain Dwarf armor is great. And it is specifically great for a class that doesn't get armor. Staying with wizard, how many benefits do we get out of Halfing? Or Dragonborn or Goliath? Sure, maybe the Goliath who has mildly higher strength has slightly better grappling... but they are a wizard, they don't want to be grappling. The Dwarven Armor is the exception, not the rule. And being mildly better at the worst things I'm not expected to do.... yay? What benefit is that for me?Sure, that could work too.Right, but a human is 100% floating. They chose that array, and did so with a purpose.Most other races don't get that choice.eye rollSure, the solution to people feeling pressured to make optimal choices is just to play with different people who don't care. Great solution.Better idea. Instead of constantly trying to shop for a "perfect" group, how about we look into changing the rules.  You know, in a floating +2/+1 situation, you've still got a second score to float. You can have a wizard who is tougher, wiser, more nimble or more charismatic. So, you can still play a tough dwarven wizard or a nimble halfling wizard.So, Orcs don't worship the Gods? They wouldn't have a strong cleric class? Elves don't have famous Bards who have traveled the world? Ah, of course they do. Their clerics and Bards are just less powerful. And the lore you are trying to simulate is barely existent. Orcs are only stronger than humans who choose not to be strong, and you can set up arrays to have Elves and Tieflings who are stronger than specific orcs (using non-small races to avoid the endless "but are squirrels stronger than elephants" arguments, because surprise! Elves and Tielfings are medium and just as strong as halflings and gnomes) But, the fact that I never see Gnome Fighters or Elvin Clerics? That I never even see them mentioned anywhere? That is a break in Verisimilitude for me. All races should have Clerics, Wizards, Rogues, Bards and Fighters. And they should all be capable of being equally skilled in those professions.Well, thank you so much for your second time telling me to abandon my groups and look for better ones. But, see, my experience seems to not be unique. Look at any guide and you'll see people saying that certain races should never be chosen for certain classes, based entirely on their ASI's. So, this isn't a me problem, it is a weakness in the system.Right, but we never go and look at every  Goliath in the setting. We don't have census data on them. In fact, the ASI only affects the game on an individual level. The tendency of them having higher minimums really does not matter.Exactly, but you see that almost never, because that 16 in their main stat is more important than all of that cool flavor. I want these things.Sure, but most of those expectations have nothing to do with ASIs.Why are my dwarves not made of living stone? Why aren't they wielding Guns? Why are elves not living plants? What aren't Orcs Fungus? Aren't gnomes supposed to be able to turn invisible at whim?None of that is "shouldn't I deal +1 damage on strength attacks"</blockquote>

Verification