Level Up (A5E) Where to put ability bonuses during character creation

[Derren]

Yup. When the goal is just to discredit the opposing viewpoint, a common tactic is to pretend that even the slightest optimization is synonymous with the most extreme form of optimization. But, as you point out, "minmaxing" is a specific type of optimization. I.e., using Point Buy to get 3 15's and 3 9's is minmaxing. Choosing your race in order to get +2 to your primary stat ain't that.

I find it ironic that somebody tries to play the roleplaying card in an argument about ASIs.

You are the one who insists that not having a +2 to your primary stats prevents people from playing a character.
If you refuse to play such a character its on you. Nothing is stopping you to play something else. Don't complain that you always play the same race/class combination.
If other people do it, why do you care? Why do you think you can tell others that they must play different races?

 

[Undrave]

Funny, you are the one who want to change things because you do not like how others play.
When you value a +2 to your main ability over an interesting, non-minmaxed character concept its on you. If you want to play something else than the usual race/class combinations no one is stopping you.
Why should ability score modifiers be changed into something nonsensicals because some people value a +2 over an interesting character concept and refuse to play something not minmaxed?

Also, just because a race and class align in term of ability score does not mean the character is not interesting. Even a boring ol' Human/Fighter can be interesting depending on your ROLEPLAYING.

There isn't some kind of magical balance where your only options are 'optimized race-class combination' and 'interesting character', that's a false equivalence. The only thing picking a non-optimal race (or just the least popular combination from the Beyond stats) does is make you a 'special snowflake' character that's 'not like everybody else'. That's not being 'interesting', that's just being contrarian for the sake of it.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Still trying to distort others' arguments, huh?

You are the one who insists that not having a +2 to your primary stats prevents people from playing a character.

An effect on overall distribution is not the same as "preventing" other race/class combinations. Do you understand the difference?

If you refuse to play such a character its on you. Nothing is stopping you to play something else. Don't complain that you always play the same race/class combination.

We have repeatedly stated that it's the overall impact on the game. Do you understand the difference?

If other people do it, why do you care? Why do you think you can tell others that they must play different races?

Noticing a bias in distribution is not the same as telling other people what they must play. Do you understand the difference?

You are the one telling other people what they must play. A floating ASI still lets you play every character you can play now. The only thing it allows is for new character builds that you are under no obligation to play. The only possible reason to object to that is that it would bother you if other people play those builds. Why do you want to dictate this to others?

Why do you insist on telling other people what they can and cannot play, when it has zero impact on you? Are your roleplaying abilities so fragile that they depend on racial ASIs? Do you feel personally threatened by the existence of a strong halfling or a smart orc? If this triggers you, why can't you just say "not at my table" and leave the other 13,499,995 players of D&D to make their own choices? Why the pathetic, desperate need for control over other people's characters?

It's sad, really.

 

[Derren]

Also, just because a race and class align in term of ability score does not mean the character is not interesting. Even a boring ol' Human/Fighter can be interesting depending on your ROLEPLAYING.

Oh I agree, they can. But usually people who play a race/class combination only because the stats match don't RP much in my opinion. Which begs the question what you want to achiev by removing flavor from races and make ASI variable? Those who select thei characters by stats first will continue to do so. Combinations might change but you still have certain optimal ones that are picked more often.
And those who build their characters around a concept first don't neccessarily pick optimal combinations anyway and are not affected by this at all.
So who would benefit from moving ASI? All you did was to remove flavor from races for no real reason.

 

[Derren]

An effect on overall distribution is not the same as "preventing" other race/class combinations. Do you understand the difference?



We have repeatedly stated that it's the overall impact on the game. Do you understand the difference?



Noticing a bias in distribution is not the same as telling other people what they must play. Do you understand the difference?

You are the one telling other people what they must play. A floating ASI still lets you play every character you can play now. The only thing it allows is for new character builds that you are under no obligation to play. The only possible reason to object to that is that it would bother you if other people play those builds. Why do you want to dictate this to others?

Why do you insist on telling other people what they can and cannot play, when it has zero impact on you? Are your roleplaying abilities so fragile that they depend on racial ASIs? Do you feel personally threatened by the existence of a strong halfling or a smart orc? If this triggers you, why can't you just say "not at my table" and leave the other 13,499,995 players of D&D to make their own choices? Why the pathetic, desperate need for control over other people's characters?

It's sad, really.

Why do you care about the " overall impact"?
Who gave you the right to call something a biased distribution?

You are the one who is judging how "13,499,995" people play as something that needs to be changed according to your personal whims.
You have no business in criticising other people, most of who you do not even know on what characters they play in an RPG. And you certainly have no business in enforcing your vision of an "unbiased distribution" on others.
If you can't handle playing characters based on a concept instead of stats its on you. That you think floating ASI allows for new character builds points to that. And if others do it then it is not your business telling them that they play something wrong.
You are the only one here who wants to enforce something on others.

 

[Undrave]

And those who build their characters around a concept first don't neccessarily pick optimal combinations anyway and are not affected by this at all.
So who would benefit from moving ASI? All you did was to remove flavor from races for no real reason.

Their character would get numerically better, not sure why that's not a benefit?

And a +2 to a stat is not 'Flavor'. Having a dragon breath is flavor, having poison resistance is flavor, being able to teleport is flavor...

also, what about the suggestion I floated that you could trade the +2 for a Feat as if it was a regular ASI?

 

[Derren]

Their character would get numerically better, not sure why that's not a benefit?

And a +2 to a stat is not 'Flavor'. Having a dragon breath is flavor, having poison resistance is flavor, being able to teleport is flavor...

also, what about the suggestion I floated that you could trade the +2 for a Feat as if it was a regular ASI?

An orc being stronger than a human is also flavor.

 

[Undrave]

Why do you care about the " overall impact"?
Who gave you the right to call something a biased distribution?

You are the one who is judging how "13,499,995" people play as something that needs to be changed according to your personal whims.
You have no business in criticising other people, most of who you do not even know on what characters they play in an RPG. And you certainly have no business in enforcing your vision of an "unbiased distribution" on others.
If you can't handle playing characters based on a concept its on you. And if others do it then it is not your business telling them that they play something wrong.
You are the only one here who wants to enforce something on others.

What part of "opening up the number of potential combination" imposes anything on players? they can still play the exact same character they're playing now, only they have MORE OPTIONS available to them. I don't know how you find that limiting at all.

 

[Derren]

What part of "opening up the number of potential combination" imposes anything on players? they can still play the exact same character they're playing now, only they have MORE OPTIONS available to them. I don't know how you find that limiting at all.

Tell me one combination which is currently not possible.

 

[Guest 6801328]

What part of "opening up the number of potential combination" imposes anything on players? they can still play the exact same character they're playing now, only they have MORE OPTIONS available to them. I don't know how you find that limiting at all.

Matthew 7:6