last time I saw a single digit con (not counting when it was drained or damaged down) was 2e.
D&D 5E Wow! No more subraces. The Players Handbook races reformat to the new race format going forward.
- Status
Faolyn
(she/her)
No, because you still have the +2/+1. (They were never called "racial bonuses" in the first place, so they haven't even been renamed.)
And it is a choice, because you can choose to put the floating ASI in the traditional stats, or you can choose to put them in different stats. You can choose for every elf you make to have +2 Dex and every tiefling have +2 Cha, even if it wouldn't benefit your class. Just like how it's always been. You haven't lost that ability, even if they're not called
First, declaring that something is a fallacy doesn't actually mean it's wrong.
Secondly, are you saying that you literally can't figure out where to put the bonuses without the rules telling you where they go?
Faolyn
(she/her)
Tell that to the bard in one of the games I'm in. I know the PC has either +0 or -1 in Con, and we had to stare at the player over the tops of our collective glasses to get him to start rerolling the 1s and 2s for hp when we leveled up. I think when the PC was 4th or 5th level they had 17 hp. The player likes RPing low stats. Everyone at our table does, really, but I think this is the first time anyone had made Con their dump stat.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
I don`t think so.
By your argumentation, every dwarf must have a con of 16...
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
What's more, the gods of aRNGee have dictated that 4.62% of dwarves will roll a 6 and that 9.72% of elves will roll an 8. That means that there will be fewer than half the number of dwarves with an 8 con as there are elves with an 8 con. 9.39% of elves will have a 5-6 con, while only 1.84% of dwarves will have a 5-6 con. And only elves will have cons below 5.
Dwarves are a healthier race which matches the fluff quotes above.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
No. This is a blatantly wrong misstatement of my position.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
I've seen it in every edition but 4th, which I did not really play(A couple of con sessions don't count).
um...I see endurance, I see inner metal, I see sturdy... all that can have many ways to read it that doesn't involve a stat at all.
but why do you care what goes into the stats? That is the question I have asked and still don't get. I mean at the end of the day ESPECIALLY if you are rolling (and I don't understand that either) why does it matter how they got the stats?
or to put it another way, back in the first bit of 4e/PF I went to a Pathfinder game where I knew people would be cheating on stats, so I showed up with the stats I wanted and when the DM asked "How did you roll these?" I said "Didn't just took what I wanted for concept...but I bet your brother 'rolled' way better." he waited until everyone showed there sheets (and he asked each how they rolled) and I was in the lower half of the spectrum. His brother, he "rolled 4d6 drop the lowest 6 times and placed where he wanted" and even had the scrap paper with the rolls... and had 2 18's a 17, and nothing below 13... the DM said I could keep my stats since he was starting to assume everyone did what I did...
rolling has SUCH a huge swing (except not between cheaters, rerolling new characters until you are happy and suiciding low stat characters) that I can't believe any race modifier matters.
Scribe
Legend
The flaw here is rolling.
No serious discussion can take place if we a rolling stats.
I like RPing low stats too, so do SOME of the players in my greater circle, but con is just SO deadly to have at a negative.
(my favorites are Str, and Wis to have at 8's for RP effect)
- Status
Similar Threads
