D&D 5E Why do you use Floating ASI's (other than power gaming)? [+]

[billd91]

To be clear, when I said I didn't want to feel ineffective compared to the guy next to me I meant that unless most of the group has weaker stats as well the difference is very noticeable and quite annoying. It would be the same if we were using rolled stats and part of the group rolled really well, or even if there's a big difference in optimization.

An example would be that I was in a group doing an old AL epic, which was very undertuned because it was their first attempt at a T3 adventure. I was playing a perfectly effective ancestral guardian barbarian, fairly defensive in nature, but didn't get to protect anyone because we had several powerful spellcasters and an offensive martial. At 1 point I ended up knocking a fire giant off a platform and jumping down on him, just because I wanted to get a chance to fight something before they got blown up.

Yeah, AL can be a little like that - particularly at events with scratch-built groups mustering at the table. You have no idea what people are going to have with them and how your characters will or will not synergize. And, if at a public event, chances are you don't have enough time to extend the interactions and other non-stat-based play options that you'd have in a home game that can still make the character fulfilling to play.

 

[MoonSong]

There's a line somewhere though. Whether you draw it at +3 or +1 or -2 or wherever isn't super relevant. At some point a player that comes away from character building with a -X in his primary stat is a worthless player for my style of gaming. That behavior is just not compatible with table expectations.

Even a hard line makes little sense. I bet you I could take an 8 charisma sorcerer to your table and still be plenty effective.

 

[Baron Opal II]

What I meant is the attitude "I need a +3 on my prime stat or I'm SOL" is not healthy. Mainly because it helps legitimize the: "and everybody else who fails to have one in their own character is a worthless player..."

Back in the day when I was playing Living City, I made a character who had five 13s and a 14, I think. Just to prove that I could make a character that could compete with the other optimized characters. It was successful, I contributed to the team and our objectives. But it did ruffle some feathers that I had the temerity to not squeeze every efficiency out of the process.

I mean, it's not like the DMs were trying to kill the characters. Losing one was rather rare.

 

[Older Beholder]

What I meant is the attitude "I need a +3 on my prime stat or I'm SOL" is not healthy

The idea that people need a +3, is an accusation other‘s keep making, demanding it be admitted even. This is a + thread about ways people use floating ASI’s that aren’t about the high stats.

Telling others they are unhealthy seems a bit of a stretch. I’m sorry you were kicked out of a group.

 

[Faolyn]

So when will we hear from the player that gave their half-orc fighter a boost to Intelligence instead of Strength? Or the dwarven cleric with more Charisma than Wisdom? Because that could be more creative than just making mechanically effective characters with uncommon race-class combinations. IMHO.

So... people who are fighters shouldn't be particularly strong? People who are clerics shouldn't be particularly wise?

 

[Faolyn]

Isn't the whole reason for this thread coming up with reasons why floating ASIs are good other than power-gaming? You cant just say "creativity" and leave it at that without explanation.

Every time I personally try to explain how one can creatively place a floating +2, people who don't like floating ASIs say "But you can do with that without a floating ASI! You're just trying to powergame!" No matter what example I use, that's the response I get. Even when I come up with an example that doesn't involve putting the +2 in your main stat, that's the response I get.

Actually, I'm wrong; there's one other response I get: "But you're making the races less distinct! All the halflings are going to be bodybuilders now!"

Which makes it look like there's nothing that people who don't like floating ASIs will accept, because they've already decided they don't like the idea.

So there's there's no reason to explain what "creativity" means. The people who like floating ASIs get it, and the people who think that it's only used by powergamers or that it will make races less distinct just don't or can't get it.

 

[Older Beholder]

I bet you I could take an 8 charisma sorcerer to your table and still be plenty effective.

Just to prove that I could make a character that could compete with the other optimized characters.

This whole mentality of making better characters than other people, be it with high stats, or low stats comes down to 'look how much better I am at the game', and it has nothing to do with ASI's

There are people who just don't see the game like that, who just want to make a character and have fun telling a story with friends.

 

[BookTenTiger]

After some time thinking about it, and reading and reflecting on this discussion, my main three reasons for using Floating ASIs are:

1) It's fun.

2) It gives me more control when I want to create a preconceived character, rather than one inspired by random rolls.

3) It moves D&D further from the weird semi-eugenic definition of race it's historically used.

 

[MoonSong]

The idea that people need a +3, is an accusation other‘s keep making, demanding it be admitted even. This is a + thread about ways people use floating ASI’s that aren’t about the high stats.

Telling others they are unhealthy seems a bit of a stretch. I’m sorry you were kicked out of a group.

Look at the whole context, you quoted my answer to a chain of quotes that started with these lines:

"One option the floating ASIs open for me is playing a MAD class such as monk, paladin, or barbarian without being forced to pick a race that has a boost in at least 1 of those stats. Say what you will about whether you can notice a 5% difference, a 10% difference is very noticeable. This is compounded if your AC depends on both those stats such as with a monk or unarmored barbarian. I don't feel like this is much in the way of optimization, it's more about not feeling like I'm ineffective compared to the guy next to me. Playing against type is cool, but I don't want to drag the rest of the party down by not pulling my weight. A tpk isn't fun unless it's meaningful and we had at least a decent shot."

Part of it is me being my usual dramatic self (when in doubt, check my tagline.), but, don't you read these lines as basically that admission? There have been posters here that have explicitly said "I just want the +3." As for being a plus thread, my very first post in htis thread was about how it is great for making characters that are less sterotypical and even completely against type which are good things. Now, this is less about passing moral judgement of individuals and more loathing about how normalized (and expected) high stats have become and how that has been particularly bad for me. Being thrown out by a controlling DM that can't see past the numbers wasn't the only incident, only the one that I find the nastiest. It is also the most recent -and weell it basically killed a lot of my motivation for gaming, I haven't truly recovered from the incident-.

 

[Older Beholder]

Look at the whole context, you quoted my answer to a chain of quotes that started with these lines:

"One option the floating ASIs open for me is playing a MAD class such as monk, paladin, or barbarian without being forced to pick a race that has a boost in at least 1 of those stats. Say what you will about whether you can notice a 5% difference, a 10% difference is very noticeable. This is compounded if your AC depends on both those stats such as with a monk or unarmored barbarian. I don't feel like this is much in the way of optimization, it's more about not feeling like I'm ineffective compared to the guy next to me. Playing against type is cool, but I don't want to drag the rest of the party down by not pulling my weight. A tpk isn't fun unless it's meaningful and we had at least a decent shot."

Part of it is me being my usual dramatic self (when in doubt, check my tagline.), but, don't you read these lines as basically that admission?

No, they're not saying they must have a +3, they're saying they find a couple of classes fall short of being fun (unless you pick the right race) without floating ASI's.

Again, I'm sorry you had a bad experience, but they really don't sound like people that would be fun to play with anyway. I hope you can find a group that suits your play style instead.