D&D 5E Wow! No more subraces. The Players Handbook races reformat to the new race format going forward.

[Chaosmancer]

And, yet, that's the default method for generating ability scores.

Even taking the Standard Array or Point-Buy Method, players tend to try to mitigate ASIs when playing a class that the race's ASI's don't benefit by placing higher scores in the class' relevant abilities. At that point, racial ASIs are just getting in the way and are a tax for creating a non-optimized race/class combination.

Obligatory point. Standard Array is also the default method. Point-Buy is the only optional method.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't, but it's irrelevant since the various planar races bear no genetic connection to one another. They were grouped under planetouched only because of a similarity in origins, not because they were one race.

In any case, planetouched don't exist in 5e. They are all individual races as they were in every other edition.

Why do genetics matter?

Also, hey, I made an entire point about humans and genetics that you are also ignoring.

So, are you just going to continue ignoring every argument I make in favor of just cherrypicking a sentence or two and repeating yourself?

 

[Maxperson]

Why do genetics matter?

Because that's what a race is. No genetic relation, not part of the same race.

Also, hey, I made an entire point about humans and genetics that you are also ignoring.

I must have missed it. But they are all genetically related.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm not here to police others words.

How am I supposed to argue on behalf of what 'others' may say?

That's not a tenable position.

Take up your argument with the person who holds the position.

I'm not asking you to police their words. Let us recap what has occurred here.

I was responding to Micah Sweet about balance. During that response I made the point that arguments for "story" being the response to why you would take mechanically inferior options is a bad argument. During that point, I said that people tend to respond to those of us who say that we don't want a story option that is weaker mechanically by calling us power gamers and saying we don't roleplay, ect.

You then ignored that point to say that we should pick weaker options because of story.

I responded to you that I addressed that argument, and you ignored it. We went back and forth a bit while I was trying to demonstrate my argument, and Ixal literally posted that those of us who don't want weaker mechanics for storytelling are power gamers and never truly roleplay anything.

I point out that there is someone literally saying the thing that I said people say, and you start accusing me of putting words in your mouth and demanding you police others. When what I'm ACTUALLY doing is showing that... my point was on the money. The thing I said happens, happened.

You weren't responsible for it. You didn't do it. It isn't your responsibility to handle it. But are you going to deny its EXISTENCE? Are you going to say I was wrong, that this argument doesn't happen, because you yourself didn't make it? Or can we at least agree that... it actually happened in this thread.

 

[Scribe]

Or can we at least agree that... it actually happened in this thread

I'll take your word for it.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It does.

"With their penchant for migration and conquest, humans are more physically diverse than other common races."

"Humans are the most adaptable and ambitious people among the common races. They have widely varying tastes, morals, and customs in the many different lands where they have settled."

And many more quotes about their variety. A +1 to everything goes right along with and matches that lore on variety and adaption.

Huh, that's weird. I don't see intelligent or knowledgeable or wise or charismatic on that list. You realize that those aren't physical diversities, right? Also, widely varying tastes, morals, and customs... aren't being intelligent, wise or charismatic.

Also, is "we all get the same +1 to every stat" really diverse? It seems kind of... identical. Like everyone is getting the same thing.

Because that's what a race is. No genetic relation, not part of the same race.

Do you see the word "genetics" in the PHB? I might have missed it

I must have missed it. But they are all genetically related.

Weird how you seem to miss so much of my posts. Maybe slow down a bit when reading them?

 

[Maxperson]

Huh, that's weird. I don't see intelligent or knowledgeable or wise or charismatic on that list. You realize that those aren't physical diversities, right? Also, widely varying tastes, morals, and customs... aren't being intelligent, wise or charismatic.

Keep looking. They are social and serve as ambassadors, diplomates, magistrates. merchants, etc. Those are mental stat heavy.

Do you see the word "genetics" in the PHB? I might have missed it

I don't see the words nitrogen or carbon dioxide, either. What do plants breathe? What do humans exhale?

Not everything has to be written down for it to be present. Especially on a game built around common understandings of things.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Huh, that's weird. I don't see intelligent or knowledgeable or wise or charismatic on that list. You realize that those aren't physical diversities, right? Also, widely varying tastes, morals, and customs... aren't being intelligent, wise or charismatic.

Also, is "we all get the same +1 to every stat" really diverse? It seems kind of... identical. Like everyone is getting the same thing.




Do you see the word "genetics" in the PHB? I might have missed it



Weird how you seem to miss so much of my posts. Maybe slow down a bit when reading them?

Now now, you know humans dont count in these discussions. They're the one race you cant differentiate mechanically.

 

[Minigiant]

okay but power creep by what scale?

if a ranger (the common easy target) or monk (slightly less common but not by much) are a 4 on a scale from 1-10 and the druid is a 9, then is bringing the ranger and monk up to a 7-8 power creep when it is still lower then the druid? Is giving out expertise to every class (like say all fighters are expertise in athletics, all mages arcane, all clerics religion) but keeping bard getting a few and rouge getting a few moth then bard they can put anywhere (and in the rogue case included in tools) power creep or equalization?

if we change fireball to doing d4's (yes I know never going to happen) so that no other 3rd level spell is out stripped a nerf or a rebalancing?

My point from the middle of in this topic thread is that the array for PCs is weak and the traits for races outside of the +2/+1 rather so minor.

If 5.5e is backwards compatible with previous official books, then there is little room to alter races and subraces. Buffing the weak and nerfing the strong to meet expectations does not pull classes and races out the expectation needed to be backwards compatible.

Hard buffing all races makes all previous content easy and not backwards compatible.

 

[Minigiant]

It depends on how you look at it. I could argue that, as PCs are supposed to represent someone in the world, as a member of a race that presumably also exists in the world, then they should share any characteristics that the race as a whole shared, unless there is a in-world reason why they wouldn't. Worldbuilding can and (I'm my opinion) should include the PCs and what they are. That was always the intent until recently. PC side and DM side were separate in some things, but they were all part of the same world.

Depends
I see PCs as either
1) Exemplars of their race's aspects physically, mentally, or culturally
Or
2) Complete biological, social, or spiritual anomalies.

You are either a walking stereotype or the complete opposite of what people would expect. That's why they are PCs not NPCs. PCs are abnormal. Abnormally basic or abnormally weird.

Even in the old days, there was a reason why your dwarf was not home in the mountain like 99.9999% of dwarves.