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

[EzekielRaiden]

If by "optimized" you mean "is the very best possible version of their class"? then that's not the only use. It allows you to make viable characters without needing to pick the right race.

Because for some players, not having a 16 means they'll feel ineffective. You can argue math all you want, but they feel how they feel and telling them they shouldn't feel that way is both pointless and kind of rude, since telling people how to have fun is dismissing their own perception of fun.

And while that may or may not be a big plus to floating ASIs, it's a positive and the theoretical downside (people will just forget all the tropes and play short, bearded, surly, elves) simply does not manifest. That's why I favor it.

Extremely well-said. Honestly, it's funny how quickly one can fall into badwrongfun allegations without realizing it. Wishing to be mechanically effective is not an illegitimate wish, and feeling anxiety if one does not believe one is mechanically effective can easily dampen one's fun. It should be no sin to think that (say) a dwarf rogue sounds like fun, while also wishing to be mechanically effective as one.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I like to play against the grain - characters that are not run-of-the-mill. My PC was not the first dwarven wizard I've had and depending on how often I get to play, won't be the last no matter what the options are.

My first 5E PC was a dwarven rogue, so maybe you aren't the only one with a type.

Oh, that reminds me. My first dwarf wizard in 5e was a response to a group I joined who needed a rogue. The idea was that he used his spells and natural affinity for stonework to deal with traps, rather than just rely on the one skill check with everything focused to pushing the bonuses to the max. I did multiclass him to dip into rogue levels for fun, despite protests from the players who didn't think I knew how to min/max a character properly. (I know; I always know. I just choose not to.)

 

[FrogReaver]

So ... basically optimization and power gaming.

Nevermind this is a plus thread.

 

[FrogReaver]

My best answer is the OP is that for single race campaigns it allows further customization of character stats so that every character in that game doesn't feel as samey.

 

[Oofta]

I’m not going to pretend it isn’t for power gaming, and certainly not going to apologize for it. It’s a legitimate motivation for play.

Which is kind of my POV as well. To be clear, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, nor is it badwrongfun. But a rose by any other name and all that. You can say "it's so that we can all have the same race" or something, which is true, but all PCs being the same race wasn't a restriction anyway. The only reason that I can for people playing X race for Y class is to get a better score in some ability. You can justify it any way you want, just be honest about it.

Not sure if I'll open it up for my next home game or not but I had no problem using it in AL.

 

[FrogReaver]

Extremely well-said. Honestly, it's funny how quickly one can fall into badwrongfun allegations without realizing it. Wishing to be mechanically effective is not an illegitimate wish, and feeling anxiety if one does not believe one is mechanically effective can easily dampen one's fun. It should be no sin to think that (say) a dwarf rogue sounds like fun, while also wishing to be mechanically effective as one.

Having a minimum tolerance for mechanical effectiveness is not the same as being an optimizer. That minimum tolerance could be 13 in my main stats and no less than 8 in any others. *Usually it isn't but it illustrates the point well enough - no one would call such a player an optimizer or accuse him of being driven by optimization.

 

[Irlo]

I haven't had an opportunity to use the floating ASI option, but for me the appeal would be to maintain parity among the players. Years ago I was quick to move from rolled stats to arrays or point buys (and to avoid rolled hit points) for the same reason. More fun was lost with low results than was gained with high ones. I'm not entirely convinced that the difference between a +2 and +3 ability modifier for different characters in the same group would be felt in-game, but I'd be worried that some classes with features usable a number of times equal to that modifier would be less fun for players with lower primary ability scores.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe someday everyone be willing to play an all dwarf campaign? Actually, probably not. The prejudice against short runs deep in a lot of players.

I’d be up for it (I also love short races though)!

 

[billd91]

Which is kind of my POV as well. To be clear, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, nor is it badwrongfun. But a rose by any other name and all that. You can say "it's so that we can all have the same race" or something, which is true, but all PCs being the same race wasn't a restriction anyway. The only reason that I can for people playing X race for Y class is to get a better score in some ability. You can justify it any way you want, just be honest about it.

Not sure if I'll open it up for my next home game or not but I had no problem using it in AL.

That's largely my take on it too. It really is about optimization, maybe not the hardest core optimization, but if you're approaching the issue as in needing a >= 16 in your prime stat for that +3 or so rather than a +2 - it's about a significant degree of optimization. If that's your jam, that's your jam. But it is what it is and it's not worth denying it whether you see it as a rose by any other name or a pig with lipstick.

As far as playing a thematic all short race game, I'd totally be up for something like that, always have been - with fixed ASIs to boot. I played halfling and half-orc paladins in 3e/PF despite not having the most favorable ASIs so I'm not fussed by them. 5e makes it even easier to do so even with the fixed ASIs in the PH. I'm not bothered too much by Tasha's changes because both approaches have support - fixed for those of us who like to lean-in on the racial package and floating for those who don't. I'm a bit more concerned about the future because it looks like the lean-in groups won't get much consideration.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I use them so that I (or my players, if I am DM) can choose the race class combination that most appeals to me/them, without feeling pressure to optimize by choosing the “correct” combination.




And because of a secret, deeply-seated need to express ourselves as special snowflakes. OF COURSE. Duh.