I think people overestimate the blowback that making flexible ASIs will bring. And to me it just feels like a weird hill to die on. The far more interesting racial features are still there, the ASIs to me are, while useful in terms of character power, the most boring of the racial abilities. Dwarves aren't getting trance and fey ancestry, halflings aren't getting hellish resistance and infernal legacy. The actual cultures of races are not being eroded into shapeless blobs because of flexible ASIs. All it really comes down it that the tiefling sorcerer and the high elven sorcerer can now start off on the same playing field in terms of being able to start in 16 of their main stat via point buy/standard array. If they were removing racial features altogether, I would get the fuss. Because the non asi related features are the ones, IMO, that are actually interesting and are more than just making a number on the character sheet higher.
I really doubt it's going to cause any sort of huge backlash though. Oh sure, there will be some people throwing up arms, but will it actually have a negative long term impact on finances? I doubt it. If the new book in2024 is plagued with issues aside from that, it could do poorly. But it won't be because of flexible ASIs. I don't think enough of the general D&D audience cares enough about it for there to be any sort of boycott on this particular issue, and then there are sections of the fanbase like me and the groups I play in where everyone sees this as a GOOD change.
Maybe it would have if 5E had launched with flexible ASIs. I don't know, I didn't play back then. But today, I really doubt it's going to be that big of a deal in general. Not now with the 5E playerbase having grown so much, with an influx of new players without tethers to the past or traditions from previous editions.
The bolded bit is what I really don't get the floating ASI haters
Like, do you only define Elven culture in your campaigns with how dexterous they are?
Is there no such thing as a clumsy Elf in your world?
Maybe it's a me thing but that just seems so.... boring and lazy.
I like variety. I love the idea of an Orc who couldn't lift a greataxe but is dexterous and can evade his enemies attacks, or is charming and talks them out of fighting him (maybe before stabbing them in the back depending on their personality).
I love the idea of an Elf who isn't dexterous at all, who drops everything, trips over his own two feet, but is sturdy and can take the dozen hits someone else gives him before he strikes a hard brutal blow.
It's the same issue I have with the whole "always evil" classifications, I've always found them just lazy writing. If all drow are evil, your players have to play dumb for their characters to trust one. If some are or can be good, THEN they have to make moral judgments, play with or fight against the odds, wonder if they're making the right choice.
Monocultures are just...boring.
You can get away with it in like Star Trek where they're making one visit to this planet and then forgetting about it unless someone digs it up in 30 years or so, but for an entire setting forever? It's just so flat and lazy to me.
and the glorious thing about D&D is, if you don't want it at your table, it doesn't have to be.
You want all Elves to be defined by their dexterity and all Drow to be evil, then you can run it that way at your table.
Why does someone else being able to play the way they enjoy "ruin" something for you?
Again, I come from comics, and even there my mindset on this is different than a lot of fellow comic geeks but, I don't get getting upset at adaptation changes. Like I can get not liking them sometimes, I was a HUGE fan of the original Young Justice comic. The cartoon was so different from the comic I didn't watch it. Nowadays if I search "young justice superboy" I probably need to specify I mean the comic unless I want to see him in that "Just a T-shirt" costume I don't like. But ya know what?
If other folks love that cartoon, and that "lame" costume, that's fine. I still got my old issues I still got my colorful dorky Kon stories I loved right where they've always been.
Change ain't the enemy, variety ain't the enemy. People loving a thing you loved even in a very different way than you loved it isn't a flaw in the thing or in them.
That pesky Young Justice cartoon I didn't like? Without it DC probably wouldn't have made the recent Young Justice cartoon that got the lineup I loved back together again. Even got Kon back in a colorful costume with a ridiculous leather jacket.
I think people overestimate the blowback that making flexible ASIs will bring. And to me it just feels like a weird hill to die on. The far more interesting racial features are still there, the ASIs to me are, while useful in terms of character power, the most boring of the racial abilities. Dwarves aren't getting trance and fey ancestry, halflings aren't getting hellish resistance and infernal legacy. The actual cultures of races are not being eroded into shapeless blobs because of flexible ASIs. All it really comes down it that the tiefling sorcerer and the high elven sorcerer can now start off on the same playing field in terms of being able to start in 16 of their main stat via point buy/standard array. If they were removing racial features altogether, I would get the fuss. Because the non asi related features are the ones, IMO, that are actually interesting and are more than just making a number on the character sheet higher.
I really doubt it's going to cause any sort of huge backlash though. Oh sure, there will be some people throwing up arms, but will it actually have a negative long term impact on finances? I doubt it. If the new book in2024 is plagued with issues aside from that, it could do poorly. But it won't be because of flexible ASIs. I don't think enough of the general D&D audience cares enough about it for there to be any sort of boycott on this particular issue, and then there are sections of the fanbase like me and the groups I play in where everyone sees this as a GOOD change.
Maybe it would have if 5E had launched with flexible ASIs. I don't know, I didn't play back then. But today, I really doubt it's going to be that big of a deal in general. Not now with the 5E playerbase having grown so much, with an influx of new players without tethers to the past or traditions from previous editions.
The bolded bit is what I really don't get the floating ASI haters
Like, do you only define Elven culture in your campaigns with how dexterous they are?
Is there no such thing as a clumsy Elf in your world?
Maybe it's a me thing but that just seems so.... boring and lazy.
I like variety. I love the idea of an Orc who couldn't lift a greataxe but is dexterous and can evade his enemies attacks, or is charming and talks them out of fighting him (maybe before stabbing them in the back depending on their personality).
I love the idea of an Elf who isn't dexterous at all, who drops everything, trips over his own two feet, but is sturdy and can take the dozen hits someone else gives him before he strikes a hard brutal blow.
It's the same issue I have with the whole "always evil" classifications, I've always found them just lazy writing. If all drow are evil, your players have to play dumb for their characters to trust one. If some are or can be good, THEN they have to make moral judgments, play with or fight against the odds, wonder if they're making the right choice.
Monocultures are just...boring.
You can get away with it in like Star Trek where they're making one visit to this planet and then forgetting about it unless someone digs it up in 30 years or so, but for an entire setting forever? It's just so flat and lazy to me.
and the glorious thing about D&D is, if you don't want it at your table, it doesn't have to be.
You want all Elves to be defined by their dexterity and all Drow to be evil, then you can run it that way at your table.
Why does someone else being able to play the way they enjoy "ruin" something for you?
Again, I come from comics, and even there my mindset on this is different than a lot of fellow comic geeks but, I don't get getting upset at adaptation changes. Like I can get not liking them sometimes, I was a HUGE fan of the original Young Justice comic. The cartoon was so different from the comic I didn't watch it. Nowadays if I search "young justice superboy" I probably need to specify I mean the comic unless I want to see him in that "Just a T-shirt" costume I don't like. But ya know what?
If other folks love that cartoon, and that "lame" costume, that's fine. I still got my old issues I still got my colorful dorky Kon stories I loved right where they've always been.
Change ain't the enemy, variety ain't the enemy. People loving a thing you loved even in a very different way than you loved it isn't a flaw in the thing or in them.
That pesky Young Justice cartoon I didn't like? Without it DC probably wouldn't have made the recent Young Justice cartoon that got the lineup I loved back together again. Even got Kon back in a colorful costume with a ridiculous leather jacket.
I have been letting my players swap three racial ASI’s since long before Tasha’s Cauldron for this very reason, the booking half orc who was physically weaker then the others but made up for it in book smarts, the Tiefling who really couldn’t speak in public but was naturally stronger, the wood Elf who, compared to other wood elves, was loud and clumsy when trying to sneak through the forest so never got taken out to do wood elf things but seemed to have a natural resistance to poisons and being injured.
I really think of Tashas as oldskool just like unearthed arcana from 1st edition getting players the new hotness, or the options books from 2nd edition letting players change thing their class or race allows or does. I myself have 0 issue with it, let players play the hero's or anti-hero's they want to be its a game that changes over time it's not a religion with anything that says what you can or cannot do in life. If anyone here is of a devout religious person I do not mean any offense which is why I was being vague.
I gave up on 5e & current wotc a while ago for a number of reasons 1 they don't provide enough rules for dms 2 the cr system doesn't work & we've gotten one new class in 7 years 3 they don't provide material to run different kinds of settings. imo they have just gotten lazy
I've switched to pathfinder2e and wow what a difference! & before anyone says but mathfinder!!!! pathfinder2e is no more difficult than 5e as they trimmed down on the crazy bonus stacking ect. alot/most of the complaints I've seen about 5e have been addressed by going over to pf2e
1 the cr system actually works as intended if the encounter system says moderate severe extreme they mean it !
2 martial/ caster disparity is addressed casters can no longer end a boss encounter by themselves. martials like barbarian at high lvl can stomp the ground to create an earthquake rogues can potentially one shot enemies at high lvls go for specific body parts to give a negative condition. monks can pick different stances to focus on stuff like brawling precision etc .
3 weapons each weapon is different & means something some weapons help tripping opponents or have reach you can have weapons that are made of special metals like cold iron to hurt fey creatures for extra damage.
4 monsters every monster has a unique attack or ability & there's just more unique ones from different cultures
norse mythology Grendel. linnorms jotun trolls the norns. fafnhier ( stats in December)
Asian mythology classic Asian dragons oni terra-cotta warriors the am I pretty monster (Japanese myth)
fey too much to list
undead unique stuff like the grim reaper (that's actually terrifying) a worm that's made entirely of bodies different varieties of vampires zombies skeletons
monsters are weak to what you expect fire is weak to cold & vice versa fey are weak to cold iron undead to good & silver, demons to cold iron & good. so players can prepare specific stuff to be very effective in combat. the tarrasque is actually a pure force of destruction that even 20 lvl characters will tpk without artifacts.
certain monsters have vto be killed a certain way or they won't die or they will come back
5 pc death
every time a pc gets up from making a death save the next time they go down in the same day they auto fail a death save do thiers only a limited number of Times you can be healed back up in combat no more endless yo yo combat & monsters have more this ability brings you to 0 your dead period
6 the supplements piazo are consistently releasing new classes or race options or supplement books monsters. it's not insane but players & gms consistently get new material
stuff like an entire book on magic a book on steampunk a book on legendary monsters of the base setting a book on the undead with options for pcs to play undead.
7 paizo constantly answer community questions & do interviews & they listen to playtest feedback (both during the playtest ) & after by releasing a blog saying hey here was the design intention here is what we noticed players having complaints or concerns about hears what WE observed here is what we intend to fix or change based on feedback & here is a small preview of some stuff
oh & if players consistently request something they do it or probably will
8 adventure paths .APs go to a range of lvls 1-20 1 to 10 16 to 19. all levels of play are supported
9 items there's a ton more magic items & alchemy items & every item has a set price so gold is actually useful
now there's some things to watch/ be mentioned . conditions can take a bit to learn but once you get over the first few sessions you understand it . & unfortunately thier stuff gets delayed pretty much guaranteed because of the shipping crisis. people who primarily play casters & expect to do tons of damage to boss creatures with stuff like fireball & lightning bolt that's not what casters do against boss monsters.
seriously players & dms who complain about this stuff in 5e & are sick of it try pathfinder2e you'll probably like it
I personally can't go back to dming 5e or playing it its just to limiting
I understand that some just don't want to learn a new system but you should give it at least a chance & if you don't like it after playing fair enough but d&d5e/ 5.5 & wotc could learn alot from pf2e & paizo
This is a strong reminder to everyone to remain on topic, specifically the topic of the latest announcement of new books and the 'next evolution of D&D'. While some discourse may arise around the history of D&D, let us not detour off topic into arguments and fights about the history of D&D.
Like, do you only define Elven culture in your campaigns with how dexterous they are?
Is there no such thing as a clumsy Elf in your world?
Putting it simply: it's not the only thing, but it is one of many things. Removing the fixed bonuses removes one thing that defines elves. And obviously there are clumsy elves - the higher average is just that, the average. There are elves that are more dextrous than that average and there are others less so. A racial +2 to anything doesn't prevent diversity and certainly doesn't create a monoculture.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I gave up on 5e & current wotc a while ago for a number of reasons 1 they don't provide enough rules for dms 2 the cr system doesn't work & we've gotten one new class in 7 years 3 they don't provide material to run different kinds of settings. imo they have just gotten lazy
...
8 adventure paths .APs go to a range of lvls 1-20 1 to 10 16 to 19. all levels of play are supported
Three things:
First, while it's true only one new canon class has been introduced, the Blood Hunter is also an option...as well as hundreds, if not thousands, available via the Homebrew choice here at D&D Beyond. But even that criticism seems pretty weak, as they've introduced a generous variety of new subclasses for every class. If your DM allows multiclassing, you have a practically endless number of permutations to choose from when running a character.
Second, I agree that the lack of support for adventures for the third and fourth tiers is frustrating. Whether that's a tacit acknowledgment that characters become overpowered at that point, or a lack of expertise in adventure design, both, or something else, I don't know. But I really wish there were official adventures for the third and fourth tier of play.
Third: for the love of Cthulhu, please use upper case letters and punctuation.
How much time must pass before the DM needs a Ford 650 to haul all the hardcovers they need to research the pc classes and monsters.
With 5E's sourcebook output, a long ass time apparently.
The bigger question is why they'd even do that, though. Research isn't done at game time, you do that in the comfort of your own home. I only have my core three out for actual game time, and the MM in practice never gets cracked open while we're playing. I have all the monster info I need available in my prep work. The PHB and DMG don't see a ton of action at the game table either, but they probably would if I was newer at this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Also, the new Mordenkainen monster book is outright replacing two of the books one would otherwise need. Same with the new Core Three slated to hit in 2024, provided the public outcry doesn't get bad enough to derail that train. The whole point of a consolidated reissue is to reduce the book transport issue by assembling all buncha disparate rules into one place again.
Also, the new Mordenkainen monster book is outright replacing two of the books one would otherwise need. Same with the new Core Three slated to hit in 2024, provided the public outcry doesn't get bad enough to derail that train. The whole point of a consolidated reissue is to reduce the book transport issue by assembling all buncha disparate rules into one place again.
I kinda doubt that is the point, honestly. It'll still be the same total number of pages, or thereabouts. I assume the reason is to offer an updated version of the rules in print, since even if a lot of the changes will be minor and/or mostly cosmetic a) a lot of people are going to prefer just throw money at it rather than spend hours doing tedious clerical work with sticky notes or printouts or just scribbling notes everywhere and b) it really looks bad if a newer customer picks up a book and immediately after (or even in the store already) finds out what they paid good money for is outdated info in an outdated format.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Like, do you only define Elven culture in your campaigns with how dexterous they are?
Is there no such thing as a clumsy Elf in your world?
Putting it simply: it's not the only thing, but it is one of many things. Removing the fixed bonuses removes one thing that defines elves. And obviously there are clumsy elves - the higher average is just that, the average. There are elves that are more dextrous than that average and there are others less so. A racial +2 to anything doesn't prevent diversity and certainly doesn't create a monoculture.
Me talking about monoculture was more in relation to the always evil alignments and such, didn't mean to imply that ASIs meant monoculture.
Still, yes it does in fact prevent diversity. If we're going with the generally accepted 8 is the lowest ability score allowed (Can't remember if that's stated explicitly, but the lowest example ability score even for rolled stats are 8s I believe) then that means there is no such thing as an elf with below average dexterity. An elf (or least an elf PC, which is what I'm majorly concerned with) cannot be clumsy, by definition.
Me talking about monoculture was more in relation to the always evil alignments and such, didn't mean to imply that ASIs meant monoculture.
Still, yes it does in fact prevent diversity. If we're going with the generally accepted 8 is the lowest ability score allowed (Can't remember if that's stated explicitly, but the lowest example ability score even for rolled stats are 8s I believe) then that means there is no such thing as an elf with below average dexterity. An elf (or least an elf PC, which is what I'm majorly concerned with) cannot be clumsy, by definition.
Generally accepted? Rolled (still the default stat generation method in the PHB) stats have no upper or lower limit other than what the dice allow. You can go as low as a 3 if you happen to roll all 1s.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Me talking about monoculture was more in relation to the always evil alignments and such, didn't mean to imply that ASIs meant monoculture.
Still, yes it does in fact prevent diversity. If we're going with the generally accepted 8 is the lowest ability score allowed (Can't remember if that's stated explicitly, but the lowest example ability score even for rolled stats are 8s I believe) then that means there is no such thing as an elf with below average dexterity. An elf (or least an elf PC, which is what I'm majorly concerned with) cannot be clumsy, by definition.
Generally accepted? Rolled (still the default stat generation method in the PHB) stats have no upper or lower limit other than what the dice allow. You can go as low as a 3 if you happen to roll all 1s.
In 2 out of the 3 ways, a majority of those that can be used on this site, you can't make a character with a score lower than 8.
So in the majority of ways to build a character you're not getting a way lower.
So in the majority if ways to build a character, it's still stifling in exactly the way I said it was.
Stop looking for the weasel words and the actual meaning behind what is said, please.
Edit to add: Actually that comment completely ignoring what was said to be pedantic, reminded me of this exchange we had a few months ago. Nevermind actually looking for actual meaning behind the words. I think I'm gonna finally use that ignore user feature for once. I really doubt any convo between us would ever result in anything useful.
Me talking about monoculture was more in relation to the always evil alignments and such, didn't mean to imply that ASIs meant monoculture.
Still, yes it does in fact prevent diversity. If we're going with the generally accepted 8 is the lowest ability score allowed (Can't remember if that's stated explicitly, but the lowest example ability score even for rolled stats are 8s I believe) then that means there is no such thing as an elf with below average dexterity. An elf (or least an elf PC, which is what I'm majorly concerned with) cannot be clumsy, by definition.
Generally accepted? Rolled (still the default stat generation method in the PHB) stats have no upper or lower limit other than what the dice allow. You can go as low as a 3 if you happen to roll all 1s.
In 2 out of the 3 ways, a majority of those that can be used on this site, you can't make a character with a score lower than 8.
So in the majority of ways to build a character you're not getting a way lower.
So in the majority if ways to build a character, it's still stifling in exactly the way I said it was.
Stop looking for the weasel words and the actual meaning behind what is said, please.
Edit to add: Actually that comment completely ignoring what was said to be pedantic, reminded me of this exchange we had a few months ago. Nevermind actually looking for actual meaning behind the words. I think I'm gonna finally use that ignore user feature for once. I really doubt any convo between us would ever result in anything useful.
You can use any way at all on this site, including anything homebrewed you come up with. Regardless, and regardless of what the actual meaning behind what you said may be, 8 is not the lowest score allowed. If you feel that two variant methods not providing an opportunity to end up with a lower score warrants a claim of general acceptance you're entitled to that opinion, but I don't have to agree with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Me talking about monoculture was more in relation to the always evil alignments and such, didn't mean to imply that ASIs meant monoculture.
Still, yes it does in fact prevent diversity. If we're going with the generally accepted 8 is the lowest ability score allowed (Can't remember if that's stated explicitly, but the lowest example ability score even for rolled stats are 8s I believe) then that means there is no such thing as an elf with below average dexterity. An elf (or least an elf PC, which is what I'm majorly concerned with) cannot be clumsy, by definition.
Generally accepted? Rolled (still the default stat generation method in the PHB) stats have no upper or lower limit other than what the dice allow. You can go as low as a 3 if you happen to roll all 1s.
In 2 out of the 3 ways, a majority of those that can be used on this site, you can't make a character with a score lower than 8.
So in the majority of ways to build a character you're not getting a way lower.
So in the majority if ways to build a character, it's still stifling in exactly the way I said it was.
Stop looking for the weasel words and the actual meaning behind what is said, please.
The default way, and I daresay the most common way, is to roll your stats. The minimum for this method is (as rolled) 3, which leaves plenty of room for a clumsy Elf, since Elves can have a minimum dexterity of 5 (although very unlikely for several reasons, beyond racial bonuses). That there are two other alterbative methods for getting stats doesn't negate that this method exists and can yield clumsy Elves, clumsier Elves than it's even the clumsiest Orc via other methods.
By way of analogy, there far more ways to travel than vehicles with four wheels, let alone just by car, but that doesn't negate the fact that most people will most commonly travel by car, and certainly doesn't imply cars don't exist.
Clumsy Elves can exist in my world because I roll my stats, and I suspect most do.
My take on this is, should a Goliath, on average, possess the same strength as a halfling? Physically speaking, it's pretty much an impossibility. Physics almost demands otherwise. Having "racial" bonuses is logical and improves player agency - it gives the player more meaningful choices. Do I want the Drow's superior Darkvision? Well, I have to take the hit of having an ASI in Cha rather than, say, Con. If I can pick which, then there are fewer consequences to my choices. Having a Drow Wizard in an adventure that takes place in darkness becomes a less consequential. Just pick intelligence and I have my cake as well as eating it. Does it decrease diversity that way? Actually, I'd rephrase it as, does it decrease choice? Sure, but that's also the point of the rules. Pure choice isn't inherently good in a game - that's why RAW doesn't let me simultaneously have, as racial features, superior darkvision, shape-shifting, the endurance trait that let's you drop to 1HP instead of 0HP, a breath attack and the ability to fly. Restrictions in choice brings meaning to choice and actually brings real diversity.
Now, I do have an objection to racial bonuses. I don't like the name. Orcs, Humans, Elves...they aren't races. Worse, ASIs or not, name implies inherent differences in abilities. In reality, the only meaningful differences are abilities in coping with different sun levels. Goliaths aren't merely a different race to High Elves, whi by virtue of their "race" can do things that Goliaths can't inherently do. Therefore, they shouldn't be called races. Ironically, from what I've read, it was a reaction to real world events - and they left the one problematic part, the bit that makes people compare the differing abilities with real world races.
If someone wants to get rid of "racial" ASIs at their table, I'm not bothered in the least. However, I wouldn't want them removed from D&D because here part of the immersion. Having Halfings, on average, weaker than Goliaths is logical, and gives meaning when you pump their Str stat up to 20, making the Halfling who can lift a Goliath with one arm so hilarious.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Halflings with a 20 STR - heck, even an 18 - just seems ridiculous. They're not going to instill them in the coming update, but I miss the ability score limits from earlier editions. I'd likely use fewer of them - I'd do away with any CHA limits, for instance, as well as W and I limits - sticking only with very obvious physical ones (gnomes and halflings just aren't going to be as maximally strong as half-orcs or goliaths).
Halflings with a 20 STR - heck, even an 18 - just seems ridiculous. They're not going to instill them in the coming update, but I miss the ability score limits from earlier editions. I'd likely use fewer of them - I'd do away with any CHA limits, for instance, as well as W and I limits - sticking only with very obvious physical ones (gnomes and halflings just aren't going to be as maximally strong as half-orcs or goliaths).
Despite their 20 STR they still can't use heavy weapons well and can't Grapple bigger creatures.
You are already at a disadvantage for most STR builds.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The bolded bit is what I really don't get the floating ASI haters
Like, do you only define Elven culture in your campaigns with how dexterous they are?
Is there no such thing as a clumsy Elf in your world?
Maybe it's a me thing but that just seems so.... boring and lazy.
I like variety.
I love the idea of an Orc who couldn't lift a greataxe but is dexterous and can evade his enemies attacks, or is charming and talks them out of fighting him (maybe before stabbing them in the back depending on their personality).
I love the idea of an Elf who isn't dexterous at all, who drops everything, trips over his own two feet, but is sturdy and can take the dozen hits someone else gives him before he strikes a hard brutal blow.
It's the same issue I have with the whole "always evil" classifications, I've always found them just lazy writing.
If all drow are evil, your players have to play dumb for their characters to trust one.
If some are or can be good, THEN they have to make moral judgments, play with or fight against the odds, wonder if they're making the right choice.
Monocultures are just...boring.
You can get away with it in like Star Trek where they're making one visit to this planet and then forgetting about it unless someone digs it up in 30 years or so, but for an entire setting forever? It's just so flat and lazy to me.
and the glorious thing about D&D is, if you don't want it at your table, it doesn't have to be.
You want all Elves to be defined by their dexterity and all Drow to be evil, then you can run it that way at your table.
Why does someone else being able to play the way they enjoy "ruin" something for you?
Again, I come from comics, and even there my mindset on this is different than a lot of fellow comic geeks but, I don't get getting upset at adaptation changes.
Like I can get not liking them sometimes, I was a HUGE fan of the original Young Justice comic. The cartoon was so different from the comic I didn't watch it.
Nowadays if I search "young justice superboy" I probably need to specify I mean the comic unless I want to see him in that "Just a T-shirt" costume I don't like.
But ya know what?
If other folks love that cartoon, and that "lame" costume, that's fine.
I still got my old issues
I still got my colorful dorky Kon stories I loved right where they've always been.
Change ain't the enemy, variety ain't the enemy. People loving a thing you loved even in a very different way than you loved it isn't a flaw in the thing or in them.
That pesky Young Justice cartoon I didn't like?
Without it DC probably wouldn't have made the recent Young Justice cartoon that got the lineup I loved back together again. Even got Kon back in a colorful costume with a ridiculous leather jacket.
I have been letting my players swap three racial ASI’s since long before Tasha’s Cauldron for this very reason, the booking half orc who was physically weaker then the others but made up for it in book smarts, the Tiefling who really couldn’t speak in public but was naturally stronger, the wood Elf who, compared to other wood elves, was loud and clumsy when trying to sneak through the forest so never got taken out to do wood elf things but seemed to have a natural resistance to poisons and being injured.
I really think of Tashas as oldskool just like unearthed arcana from 1st edition getting players the new hotness, or the options books from 2nd edition letting players change thing their class or race allows or does. I myself have 0 issue with it, let players play the hero's or anti-hero's they want to be its a game that changes over time it's not a religion with anything that says what you can or cannot do in life. If anyone here is of a devout religious person I do not mean any offense which is why I was being vague.
I gave up on 5e & current wotc a while ago for a number of reasons 1 they don't provide enough rules for dms 2 the cr system doesn't work & we've gotten one new class in 7 years 3 they don't provide material to run different kinds of settings. imo they have just gotten lazy
I've switched to pathfinder2e and wow what a difference! & before anyone says but mathfinder!!!! pathfinder2e is no more difficult than 5e as they trimmed down on the crazy bonus stacking ect. alot/most of the complaints I've seen about 5e have been addressed by going over to pf2e
1 the cr system actually works as intended if the encounter system says moderate severe extreme they mean it !
2 martial/ caster disparity is addressed casters can no longer end a boss encounter by themselves. martials like barbarian at high lvl can stomp the ground to create an earthquake rogues can potentially one shot enemies at high lvls go for specific body parts to give a negative condition. monks can pick different stances to focus on stuff like brawling precision etc .
3 weapons each weapon is different & means something some weapons help tripping opponents or have reach you can have weapons that are made of special metals like cold iron to hurt fey creatures for extra damage.
4 monsters every monster has a unique attack or ability & there's just more unique ones from different cultures
norse mythology Grendel. linnorms jotun trolls the norns. fafnhier ( stats in December)
Asian mythology classic Asian dragons oni terra-cotta warriors the am I pretty monster (Japanese myth)
fey too much to list
undead unique stuff like the grim reaper (that's actually terrifying) a worm that's made entirely of bodies different varieties of vampires zombies skeletons
monsters are weak to what you expect fire is weak to cold & vice versa fey are weak to cold iron undead to good & silver, demons to cold iron & good. so players can prepare specific stuff to be very effective in combat. the tarrasque is actually a pure force of destruction that even 20 lvl characters will tpk without artifacts.
certain monsters have vto be killed a certain way or they won't die or they will come back
5 pc death
every time a pc gets up from making a death save the next time they go down in the same day they auto fail a death save do thiers only a limited number of Times you can be healed back up in combat no more endless yo yo combat & monsters have more this ability brings you to 0 your dead period
6 the supplements piazo are consistently releasing new classes or race options or supplement books monsters. it's not insane but players & gms consistently get new material
stuff like an entire book on magic a book on steampunk a book on legendary monsters of the base setting a book on the undead with options for pcs to play undead.
7 paizo constantly answer community questions & do interviews & they listen to playtest feedback (both during the playtest ) & after by releasing a blog saying hey here was the design intention here is what we noticed players having complaints or concerns about hears what WE observed here is what we intend to fix or change based on feedback & here is a small preview of some stuff
oh & if players consistently request something they do it or probably will
8 adventure paths .APs go to a range of lvls 1-20 1 to 10 16 to 19. all levels of play are supported
9 items there's a ton more magic items & alchemy items & every item has a set price so gold is actually useful
now there's some things to watch/ be mentioned . conditions can take a bit to learn but once you get over the first few sessions you understand it . & unfortunately thier stuff gets delayed pretty much guaranteed because of the shipping crisis. people who primarily play casters & expect to do tons of damage to boss creatures with stuff like fireball & lightning bolt that's not what casters do against boss monsters.
seriously players & dms who complain about this stuff in 5e & are sick of it try pathfinder2e you'll probably like it
I personally can't go back to dming 5e or playing it its just to limiting
I understand that some just don't want to learn a new system but you should give it at least a chance & if you don't like it after playing fair enough but d&d5e/ 5.5 & wotc could learn alot from pf2e & paizo
This is a strong reminder to everyone to remain on topic, specifically the topic of the latest announcement of new books and the 'next evolution of D&D'. While some discourse may arise around the history of D&D, let us not detour off topic into arguments and fights about the history of D&D.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Putting it simply: it's not the only thing, but it is one of many things. Removing the fixed bonuses removes one thing that defines elves. And obviously there are clumsy elves - the higher average is just that, the average. There are elves that are more dextrous than that average and there are others less so. A racial +2 to anything doesn't prevent diversity and certainly doesn't create a monoculture.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
How much time must pass before the DM needs a Ford 650 to haul all the hardcovers they need to research the pc classes and monsters.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
At the risk of starting some fights, a lot of old schoolers who don't care for RPing and current players who value stats/optimization over RPing do.
I personally don't use that as the only or even primary defining trait, but yes, some folks do.
Three things:
First, while it's true only one new canon class has been introduced, the Blood Hunter is also an option...as well as hundreds, if not thousands, available via the Homebrew choice here at D&D Beyond. But even that criticism seems pretty weak, as they've introduced a generous variety of new subclasses for every class. If your DM allows multiclassing, you have a practically endless number of permutations to choose from when running a character.
Second, I agree that the lack of support for adventures for the third and fourth tiers is frustrating. Whether that's a tacit acknowledgment that characters become overpowered at that point, or a lack of expertise in adventure design, both, or something else, I don't know. But I really wish there were official adventures for the third and fourth tier of play.
Third: for the love of Cthulhu, please use upper case letters and punctuation.
With 5E's sourcebook output, a long ass time apparently.
The bigger question is why they'd even do that, though. Research isn't done at game time, you do that in the comfort of your own home. I only have my core three out for actual game time, and the MM in practice never gets cracked open while we're playing. I have all the monster info I need available in my prep work. The PHB and DMG don't see a ton of action at the game table either, but they probably would if I was newer at this.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Also, the new Mordenkainen monster book is outright replacing two of the books one would otherwise need. Same with the new Core Three slated to hit in 2024, provided the public outcry doesn't get bad enough to derail that train. The whole point of a consolidated reissue is to reduce the book transport issue by assembling all buncha disparate rules into one place again.
Please do not contact or message me.
I kinda doubt that is the point, honestly. It'll still be the same total number of pages, or thereabouts. I assume the reason is to offer an updated version of the rules in print, since even if a lot of the changes will be minor and/or mostly cosmetic a) a lot of people are going to prefer just throw money at it rather than spend hours doing tedious clerical work with sticky notes or printouts or just scribbling notes everywhere and b) it really looks bad if a newer customer picks up a book and immediately after (or even in the store already) finds out what they paid good money for is outdated info in an outdated format.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Me talking about monoculture was more in relation to the always evil alignments and such, didn't mean to imply that ASIs meant monoculture.
Still, yes it does in fact prevent diversity.
If we're going with the generally accepted 8 is the lowest ability score allowed (Can't remember if that's stated explicitly, but the lowest example ability score even for rolled stats are 8s I believe) then that means there is no such thing as an elf with below average dexterity.
An elf (or least an elf PC, which is what I'm majorly concerned with) cannot be clumsy, by definition.
Generally accepted? Rolled (still the default stat generation method in the PHB) stats have no upper or lower limit other than what the dice allow. You can go as low as a 3 if you happen to roll all 1s.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
In 2 out of the 3 ways, a majority of those that can be used on this site, you can't make a character with a score lower than 8.
So in the majority of ways to build a character you're not getting a way lower.
So in the majority if ways to build a character, it's still stifling in exactly the way I said it was.
Stop looking for the weasel words and the actual meaning behind what is said, please.
Edit to add:
Actually that comment completely ignoring what was said to be pedantic, reminded me of this exchange we had a few months ago.
Nevermind actually looking for actual meaning behind the words. I think I'm gonna finally use that ignore user feature for once.
I really doubt any convo between us would ever result in anything useful.
You can use any way at all on this site, including anything homebrewed you come up with. Regardless, and regardless of what the actual meaning behind what you said may be, 8 is not the lowest score allowed. If you feel that two variant methods not providing an opportunity to end up with a lower score warrants a claim of general acceptance you're entitled to that opinion, but I don't have to agree with it.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The default way, and I daresay the most common way, is to roll your stats. The minimum for this method is (as rolled) 3, which leaves plenty of room for a clumsy Elf, since Elves can have a minimum dexterity of 5 (although very unlikely for several reasons, beyond racial bonuses). That there are two other alterbative methods for getting stats doesn't negate that this method exists and can yield clumsy Elves, clumsier Elves than it's even the clumsiest Orc via other methods.
By way of analogy, there far more ways to travel than vehicles with four wheels, let alone just by car, but that doesn't negate the fact that most people will most commonly travel by car, and certainly doesn't imply cars don't exist.
Clumsy Elves can exist in my world because I roll my stats, and I suspect most do.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My take on this is, should a Goliath, on average, possess the same strength as a halfling? Physically speaking, it's pretty much an impossibility. Physics almost demands otherwise. Having "racial" bonuses is logical and improves player agency - it gives the player more meaningful choices. Do I want the Drow's superior Darkvision? Well, I have to take the hit of having an ASI in Cha rather than, say, Con. If I can pick which, then there are fewer consequences to my choices. Having a Drow Wizard in an adventure that takes place in darkness becomes a less consequential. Just pick intelligence and I have my cake as well as eating it. Does it decrease diversity that way? Actually, I'd rephrase it as, does it decrease choice? Sure, but that's also the point of the rules. Pure choice isn't inherently good in a game - that's why RAW doesn't let me simultaneously have, as racial features, superior darkvision, shape-shifting, the endurance trait that let's you drop to 1HP instead of 0HP, a breath attack and the ability to fly. Restrictions in choice brings meaning to choice and actually brings real diversity.
Now, I do have an objection to racial bonuses. I don't like the name. Orcs, Humans, Elves...they aren't races. Worse, ASIs or not, name implies inherent differences in abilities. In reality, the only meaningful differences are abilities in coping with different sun levels. Goliaths aren't merely a different race to High Elves, whi by virtue of their "race" can do things that Goliaths can't inherently do. Therefore, they shouldn't be called races. Ironically, from what I've read, it was a reaction to real world events - and they left the one problematic part, the bit that makes people compare the differing abilities with real world races.
If someone wants to get rid of "racial" ASIs at their table, I'm not bothered in the least. However, I wouldn't want them removed from D&D because here part of the immersion. Having Halfings, on average, weaker than Goliaths is logical, and gives meaning when you pump their Str stat up to 20, making the Halfling who can lift a Goliath with one arm so hilarious.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Halflings with a 20 STR - heck, even an 18 - just seems ridiculous. They're not going to instill them in the coming update, but I miss the ability score limits from earlier editions. I'd likely use fewer of them - I'd do away with any CHA limits, for instance, as well as W and I limits - sticking only with very obvious physical ones (gnomes and halflings just aren't going to be as maximally strong as half-orcs or goliaths).
This is not the time or the place for the two hundred thousandth argument about Tasha stats and species diversity.
Please do not contact or message me.
Isn’t it some sort of tradition for there to be random inane arguments about topics that are only loosely connected to the OP though?
I'm the Valar (leader and creator) of The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit/Anything Tolkien Cult!
Member of the Cult of Cats, High Elf of the Elven Guild, and Sauce Priest & Sauce Smith of the Supreme Court of Sauce.
If you want some casual roleplay/adventures in Middle Earth, check out The Wild's Edge Tavern, a LotR/Middle Earth tavern!
JOIN TIAMAT'S CONGA LINE!
Extended Sig
Despite their 20 STR they still can't use heavy weapons well and can't Grapple bigger creatures.
You are already at a disadvantage for most STR builds.