Unearthed Arcana WOTC still can't get the backgrounds right in the new FR book.

[ECMO3]

It makes perfect sense. I'm just not assuming bad faith on the part of the players. Minimums should not be a part of the game. If someone wants a bonus in the same stat he puts a low stat, that's on him.

The point is if Soldiers need a high Strength to "soldier" then my 8 strength Rogue should not even be able to take that background.
If they don't need a high strength to "soldier" then why is a strength ASI tied to that background?

It makes no logical sense.

 

[Maxperson]

The point is if Soldiers need a high Strength to "soldier" then my 8 strength Rogue should not even be able to take that background.
If they don't need a high strength to "soldier" then why is a strength ASI tied to that background?

It makes no logical sense.

Old war injury keeping you from lifting, pushing, dragging, hitting as much as you used to. Or you're a paper pusher army clerk. Or... Just takes a bit of imagination.

 

[CreamCloud0]

This far into the franchise’s life i think tying specific ASI to any part of character creation is something we can drop and move past, floating ASI were working fine...enough, and if the designers want something to make character creation options balanced and distinct from each other, well, there are plenty of other things to use which don’t influence one of the most fundamental backbone mechanics of characters.

 

[nevin]

you optimize 100% for stats and balance and story will come by it self.

Story does not need optimization and balance, mechanics needs it.

as for background, it should have been from the start.

pick ability bonuses, either +2/+1 or +1/+1/+1
pick 2 skills
pick 1 feat for 1st level.
pick one tool, language or a weapon.

all printed background can only be guidelines for new players. If they even need it.

and there is nothing more miserable for a new player who read the cool idea and made the character because it was cool to find out that every other player with more experience min maxed and they are always second fiddle. It's the pathfinder trap of giving bad options to players and calling it "Story".....you can give well designed classes that can all be min maxed and have story two. They aren't exclusive.

 

[MGibster]

The point is if Soldiers need a high Strength to "soldier" then my 8 strength Rogue should not even be able to take that background.
If they don't need a high strength to "soldier" then why is a strength ASI tied to that background?

Maybe they sustained an injury that left them with a lower Strength? WotC has pivoted away from restrictions on characters based on species, I can't imagine they want to place restrictions on backgrounds.

 

[Scott Christian]

and there is nothing more miserable for a new player who read the cool idea and made the character because it was cool to find out that every other player with more experience min maxed and they are always second fiddle. It's the pathfinder trap of giving bad options to players and calling it "Story".....you can give well designed classes that can all be min maxed and have story two. They aren't exclusive.

Because they make the stat bonuses part of the background. If the background was only about story (like it was in 2014) it would not be an issue.

I can't believe we are about to revive the +1 debate again!

No one notices the difference over the course of a session whether your character has a +2 or +3. You notice because you "feel it." Playing "second fiddle" is absolutely a ridiculous argument. I have seen people acquire greater output in damage by just choosing the right spell, weapon, or positioning. This doesn't even take into account the way players spend bonuses at later levels. It is so silly, and has no justification even being a debate.

If you want your character to have the max bonus from level 1, just say it. Just tell the DM, hey I want max stats regardless of what I choose.

 

[ECMO3]

Old war injury keeping you from lifting, pushing, dragging, hitting as much as you used to. Or you're a paper pusher army clerk. Or... Just takes a bit of imagination.

So I have to put an old war injury or other imagination into my background to explain it?

 

[ECMO3]

and there is nothing more miserable for a new player who read the cool idea and made the character because it was cool to find out that every other player with more experience min maxed and they are always second fiddle.

There is something a lot more miserable than this - when your Barbarian who dumped Charisma and has no Charisma proficiency and built his character for pure combat insists on leading every non-combat social interaction.

 

[Maxperson]

So I have to put an old war injury or other imagination into my background to explain it?

Or, and work with me here, don't pick the soldier background and then tank strength. If you create the problem, it's YOUR problem, not the game's.

 

[Horwath]

and there is nothing more miserable for a new player who read the cool idea and made the character because it was cool to find out that every other player with more experience min maxed and they are always second fiddle. It's the pathfinder trap of giving bad options to players and calling it "Story".....you can give well designed classes that can all be min maxed and have story two. They aren't exclusive.

That is called L2P.
and it's completely normal phenomenon.
your 2nd character will be better made than the 1st and 3rd will be better than the 2nd.

or maybe you can ask the DM to rework your character after a few sessions when you learn the game.