The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
EDIT: I would also be fine with 'suggested norms' so long as the freedom is still prevented to deviate from those norms. But in terms of Tasha-style complete freedom or hard set stat boosts of old I'd pick the Tasha's end easily.
These threads do tend to devolve into confrontational arguments, often incited by folks trying to be cute or clever and posting things to demean others. I offer this gem, which is a snarky, inflammatory remark that doesn't really have much useful contribution to a discussion like this:
The issue with "suggested" scores is that they are not a "suggestion".
Tell me - would you ever allow a player to run a dragonborn that did not have +2STR and +1CHA, even if they had a fan-goddamn-tastic reason for it?
I chose this particular statement because it throws anyone who doesn't immediately embrace and love the changes as a narrow-minded, mouth breathing moron. It ignores any and all reasons folks have for not wanting things replaced, but enhanced.
Now a couple folks have already addressed it and I have in other threads and would here as well. To most, a suggestion is indeed that, a suggestion. It's not a "must have" or "need to do" but a suggestion, wherein it describes how the average creature of said species develops. This is from genetics (some are BIG) culture (some species tend to read and study more as a culture than others) or any other core value or even environmental influence. It's the "norm" for that species and as such, certain species tend toward classes (occupations) that are suited to the norm for their species. Others don't fit the "norm" perhaps the Goliath was sickly when he/she was young and never gained the body mass and musculature of their classmates. That one might seek the way of the Wizard, from reading while others engaged in rough play, or perhaps a Priest, as they spent time in the church while the others wrestled. There's an endless list of reasons a certain hero might not fit the "norm" for their species and I, and my table, and from reading the forums, the greater bulk of the community are MORE than willing to accommodate, accept and even celebrate due to being different.
Inflammatory remarks from folks who insist everything be whitewashed don't help any more than tantrums about flushing the lore down the toilet. If Wizards truly wanted to make a more engaging, inclusive gaming environment, they would have put out a series of books, outlining the different worlds and species living there and showing how maybe Goblins in Wonderworld are the protectors of the realms, traveling in bands to stand up for those being abused or mistreated. The whitewashing of everything and removal of realm specific lore is a shortcut and lazy way to try and be more PC in todays fragile society.
I like, for sure, the addition of an optional rule so there's something IN PRINT saying players are "allowed" to do what they should have been allowed to do forever. Erasing the different histories of the different species in different worlds is what people lacking creativity do when faced with unrest.
It's here now, and it's here to stay. Now, instead of having a guide for who's the "good guys" and who's the "bad guys' DMs will need to sort it entirely on their own for each adventure. No more "easy mode" in setting up enemies that can be whacked indiscriminately lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
In all of the new races going forward, they don't have even a suggested set of ability score improvements, just the same +1 and +2. In my case, this can make those races a bit harder to explain to my players what those races are good at, as my players are pretty new to the game, and often look at ability scores as a way of appraising a race.
Every race has multiple paragraphs of description that make it pretty clear what those races are good at. Yeah, reading those is more work than scanning a couple stat boosts, but I'd argue that its time well spent, especially for new players.
As for players wanting to use content the DM hasn't approved, banning stuff has always been a thing you can do. But if all your friends are wanting to use the new stuff and you're the last holdout, you might want to consider just giving in. It's really not that bad. Or if you want to hold the line and enforce your rules even if it means finding a new group, you can do that too. It's your right and I wouldn't fault you for it.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
Honestly, I don't think there is a major dislike of the rule. I allow my players to use it if they like, but they often choose not to. I think people would just like the set ability score improvements as an option for their campaigns, without going against official rules. With the new races coming out in MotM and Volo's and MToF being made unofficial, a large portion of the official races don't have even suggested ability scores. This means that players don't have any idea what kind of class often goes with the race, which some people like to adhere to for the basics of their character creation.
To give an example, let's say a new player chose what race they wanted after their idea for the character's class was already chosen. Let's say the player wanted to be a slick rogue or bard. As written, the halfling's bonus to dexterity and luck ability together lend themselves to a either of the player's chosen classes. An elf would be a similar story with its weapon proficiency and dex bonus. Now, if the bonuses to stats were the same between races, there would be way more choice paralysis, because suddenly every single race is optimal.
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Countershere(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
Honestly, I don't think there is a major dislike of the rule. I allow my players to use it if they like, but they often choose not to. I think people would just like the set ability score improvements as an option for their campaigns, without going against official rules. With the new races coming out in MotM and Volo's and MToF being made unofficial, a large portion of the official races don't have even suggested ability scores. This means that players don't have any idea what kind of class often goes with the race, which some people like to adhere to for the basics of their character creation.
To give an example, let's say a new player chose what race they wanted after their idea for the character's class was already chosen. Let's say the player wanted to be a slick rogue or bard. As written, the halfling's bonus to dexterity and luck ability together lend themselves to a either of the player's chosen classes. An elf would be a similar story with its weapon proficiency and dex bonus. Now, if the bonuses to stats were the same between races, there would be way more choice paralysis, because suddenly every single race is optimal.
Even in your example though, you're including the non ASI racial features that weren't affected. You can still pick half orc for your tanky melee character who can once a day survive an attack with 1 HP instead of being KOd. You can still pick a halfling for the luck. You can still pick elf for trance to get a quicker long rest. You can still pick high elf to have an extra cantrip etc. Your rogue can still go wood elf to be able to hide while lightly obscured. There are still races with racial features better suited to certain classes or playstyles. It's just in the flavor/utility now instead of straight up numerical superiority.
I'd be fine with suggested but clearly optional bonuses being laid out for races, but between the old hard set racials and leaving it completely open, I think the open approach is the better one.
The entire reason behind the new approach is that tying every species firmly and unchangeably to Forgotten Realms lore makes it increasingly difficult to ever play a game in anything but the Forgotten Realms. If Wizards is going to start selling more and more books for settings other than the Forgotten Realms, then there needs to be more ability for base character blocks and stats to change with the setting they're in rather than trying to shoehorn Forgotten Realms characters into every conceivable setting.
As someone who has, in the past, argued against the Tasha's change becoming the default, this above from Yurei has actually made me consider it a different way. I can see Tasha's as the default if we still get world-specific lore than says "In the Forgotten Realms most Dwarfs are X" so that players know that is the only real option in their DM's FR campaign (unless they have a good reason otherwise), and if the PHB were rewritten to made Tasha's the default, it would be great to see a paragraph that tells players that in some worlds race/species X is mostly Y, and that you should check with your DM.
Yeah, I think my mind has been changed on this.
That said, I feel like Volo's and MToF should not be discontinued, but rather officially ruled as FR core lore, instead of default for all D&D.
I have no problems with the changes. When we played AD&D in the Greyhawk setting pre-Salvatore’s Drizzt books, Drow were evil. Period. In early FR Drow we’re evil. Period. But if I’m not mistaken, and I’m not that familiar with Ebberon setting, there have been Drow that are not evil, way before Tasha’s was a thing.
WotC is growing and with that comes changes. the floating ASI’s are now basically a character thing, not a race thing (not sure if it’s still part of race selection as I haven’t checked out MMM that came out today) but at least that’s how I see it.
If they want to say Dragonborn are typically strong and hardy but can vary in their physical and mental prowess. I wouldn’t find that bad. Leaving out the +X/+Y issue altogether. It still tells you that a typical Dragonborn would on average have a bonus in STR and CON.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
Honestly, I don't think there is a major dislike of the rule. I allow my players to use it if they like, but they often choose not to. I think people would just like the set ability score improvements as an option for their campaigns, without going against official rules. With the new races coming out in MotM and Volo's and MToF being made unofficial, a large portion of the official races don't have even suggested ability scores. This means that players don't have any idea what kind of class often goes with the race, which some people like to adhere to for the basics of their character creation.
To give an example, let's say a new player chose what race they wanted after their idea for the character's class was already chosen. Let's say the player wanted to be a slick rogue or bard. As written, the halfling's bonus to dexterity and luck ability together lend themselves to a either of the player's chosen classes. An elf would be a similar story with its weapon proficiency and dex bonus. Now, if the bonuses to stats were the same between races, there would be way more choice paralysis, because suddenly every single race is optimal.
Even in your example though, you're including the non ASI racial features that weren't affected. You can still pick half orc for your tanky melee character who can once a day survive an attack with 1 HP instead of being KOd. You can still pick a halfling for the luck. You can still pick elf for trance to get a quicker long rest. You can still pick high elf to have an extra cantrip etc. Your rogue can still go wood elf to be able to hide while lightly obscured. There are still races with racial features better suited to certain classes or playstyles. It's just in the flavor/utility now instead of straight up numerical superiority.
I'd be fine with suggested but clearly optional bonuses being laid out for races, but between the old hard set racials and leaving it completely open, I think the open approach is the better one.
Your assessment is fair, and I didn't explain what I meant as well as I'd wanted to. I'd be totally open with it being the main rule that you can choose, but have suggested improvements for races depending on setting. I can also understand that if you had to choose you'd take the new method of choosing stats.
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Countershere(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
...But if I’m not mistaken, and I’m not that familiar with Ebberon setting, there have been Drow that are not evil, way before Tasha’s was a thing. ...
As a brief aside (and because I'm playing an Eberron drow specifically because I found the idea fascinating)...
Nothing in Eberron is 'Good' or 'Evil'. Or rather, no specific species or culture is such. One of the primary selling points of the setting is that everything is grey and even traditionally Pure Evil characters can be something else in this setting. One can never assume a creature is 'Evil', no matter what it might be in other settings.
Drow in particular are extremely rare in 'typical' Eberron games, which take place in the Five Nations of Khorvaire. Drow, instead, are native to the shattered continent of Xen'drik, homeland of the giants, and come in three distinct flavors - the Vulkoori, jungle-dwelling tribal folk who hunt rogue, stunted giants and other monsters on the surface; the Sulatar that exist in a handful of isolated obsidian citadels throughout Xen'drik and cling to the final remnants of the elemental shaping techniques of the Age of Giants; and the Umbragen that survive in the depths of Khyber, wielding sophisticated spellwork in neverending warfare against the lurking horrors of that benighted realm.
The closest to the moustache-twirling, self-destructively EvUlZ Olthian drow of the Forgotten Realms are the Sulatar, who believe it's their duty/destiny to cleanse the world with flames, but even then - they think that's because the world is broken and needs to be set to right. The Vulkoori are no more 'evil' than tribalistic wood elves in other settings are, and the Umbragen are actively a force for 'Good' depending on which interpretation you buy. Even the ones that fight monsters with the power of monsters are still fighting monsters, and they've kept some truly horrific things from breaking through to the surface to scourge Khorvaire more than once.
It's absolutely delightful, and so refreshing after fighting against the Forgotten Realms' endemic moral absolutism for so long.
To give an example, let's say a new player chose what race they wanted after their idea for the character's class was already chosen. Let's say the player wanted to be a slick rogue or bard. As written, the halfling's bonus to dexterity and luck ability together lend themselves to a either of the player's chosen classes. An elf would be a similar story with its weapon proficiency and dex bonus. Now, if the bonuses to stats were the same between races, there would be way more choice paralysis, because suddenly every single race is optimal.
But the halfling still has Lucky, and the elf still has weapon proficiencies. All removing set ASIs does is allow the player to make their choice based on actual features and abilities
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
When we played AD&D in the Greyhawk setting pre-Salvatore’s Drizzt books, Drow were evil. Period. In early FR Drow we’re evil. Period.
And when I DMed Against the Giants in high school in the 80s, I put in a drow double agent NPC who wasn't evil at all. RA didn't invent the idea, he just popularized it
From the very beginning, "canon" has always been more suggestion than rule in D&D. The idea of a table strictly adhering to Official Canon just seems so... drab to me
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
EDIT: I would also be fine with 'suggested norms' so long as the freedom is still prevented to deviate from those norms. But in terms of Tasha-style complete freedom or hard set stat boosts of old I'd pick the Tasha's end easily.
The issue I have with making Tasha's rule the default is that it's much easier for a player to ask to use Tasha's rule than it would be for a player to ask that the old default be used.
The different species are going to be naturally slightly better at certain things than other species. Yes, those things may change depending on the setting but they do exist in the setting. That's what the ASI represents. If a player wants to go against that and overcome that hurdle (which is a minor hurdle as a heroic adventurer), that was the option in the old rules. If orcs are different in your world, give them a different default ASI. If a player wants a different ASI, they could ask the DM, maybe pointing out the optional rule, and probably get the ok, especially if they gave a reason beyond "I want to min/max."
Now imagine the flip side of this. Making Tasha's rule the default eliminates that hurdle by default. All "races" are suddenly canonically the same in terms of ability scores. So, if the player in question wanted to overcome the hurdle of becoming a legendary figure of whatever class despite being part of a "race" that would make doing so difficult, now that player needs to convince not only the DM to make the different playable species better at certain things than others, but also convince all of the other players to agree to either modify their characters or come up with a reason they are an exception to what their species is good at.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
EDIT: I would also be fine with 'suggested norms' so long as the freedom is still prevented to deviate from those norms. But in terms of Tasha-style complete freedom or hard set stat boosts of old I'd pick the Tasha's end easily.
The issue I have with making Tasha's rule the default is that it's much easier for a player to ask to use Tasha's rule than it would be for a player to ask that the old default be used.
The different species are going to be naturally slightly better at certain things than other species. Yes, those things may change depending on the setting but they do exist in the setting. That's what the ASI represents. If a player wants to go against that and overcome that hurdle (which is a minor hurdle as a heroic adventurer), that was the option in the old rules. If orcs are different in your world, give them a different default ASI. If a player wants a different ASI, they could ask the DM, maybe pointing out the optional rule, and probably get the ok, especially if they gave a reason beyond "I want to min/max." Now imagine the flip side of this. Making Tasha's rule the default eliminates that hurdle by default. All "races" are suddenly canonically the same in terms of ability scores. So, if the player in question wanted to overcome the hurdle of becoming a legendary figure of whatever class despite being part of a race that would make doing so difficult, now that player needs to convince not only the DM to make the different playable species better at certain things than others, but also convince all of the other players to agree to either modify their characters or come up with a reason they are an exception to what their species is good at.
Also, I see no poll.
Huh, maybe a mod removed it since it was kinda pointless.
The poll was just if you wanted the Tasha's rule to not exist or not be the default. Only one out of 23 people voted the former, so it was kinda telling.
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Countershere(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
EDIT: I would also be fine with 'suggested norms' so long as the freedom is still prevented to deviate from those norms. But in terms of Tasha-style complete freedom or hard set stat boosts of old I'd pick the Tasha's end easily.
The issue I have with making Tasha's rule the default is that it's much easier for a player to ask to use Tasha's rule than it would be for a player to ask that the old default be used.
The different species are going to be naturally slightly better at certain things than other species. Yes, those things may change depending on the setting but they do exist in the setting. That's what the ASI represents. If a player wants to go against that and overcome that hurdle (which is a minor hurdle as a heroic adventurer), that was the option in the old rules. If orcs are different in your world, give them a different default ASI. If a player wants a different ASI, they could ask the DM, maybe pointing out the optional rule, and probably get the ok, especially if they gave a reason beyond "I want to min/max."
Now imagine the flip side of this. Making Tasha's rule the default eliminates that hurdle by default. All "races" are suddenly canonically the same in terms of ability scores. So, if the player in question wanted to overcome the hurdle of becoming a legendary figure of whatever class despite being part of a "race" that would make doing so difficult, now that player needs to convince not only the DM to make the different playable species better at certain things than others, but also convince all of the other players to agree to either modify their characters or come up with a reason they are an exception to what their species is good at.
Also, I see no poll.
If someone wants that hurdle they can still have that hurdle. They can just choose to not put their race ASIs into the class's main stat. That hurdle though is basically just being one ASI behind someone who chose the 'correct' race for that class. That....isn't very interesting to me. The RP/story aspect of going against the grain of their society and overcoming adversity is interesting, but having your main stat modifier be one lower than everyone else isn't very interesting to me flavor wise. But if it is interesting to someone else, they can still choose to go that route. You can put your tashas asis into anything, including sub optimal stats if that's what you really want to do. You haven't really lost anything, but not people wanting to play formerly sub optimal class/race combos are no longer penalizing themselves and I think that freedom is great. And it still leaves the possibliity for someone to play sub optimal on purpose for RP if they just put those starting asis into something else. Even for new races you can still do that if you want to. Want your plasmoid wizard to have a disadvantage? Put those asis into dex and con or something. You have the freedom to do that still.
And this change isn't to the races in general. It is specifically a PC options. Elves are still generally dexterous, orcs are still generally strong. Those norms still exist, they just aren't enforced for player character specifically anymore in Tashas onward. While still leaving you the freedom to opt into being at a disadvantage if that appeals to you for RP. People can now be more flexible with their choices without being penalized and someone who wants to pick a half orc wizard or something to overcome adversity can still choose non optimal starting asis for the same purpose as before. And the general cultures and physical norms of the races are not changing unless your DM specifically changes them.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
EDIT: I would also be fine with 'suggested norms' so long as the freedom is still prevented to deviate from those norms. But in terms of Tasha-style complete freedom or hard set stat boosts of old I'd pick the Tasha's end easily.
The issue I have with making Tasha's rule the default is that it's much easier for a player to ask to use Tasha's rule than it would be for a player to ask that the old default be used.
The different species are going to be naturally slightly better at certain things than other species. Yes, those things may change depending on the setting but they do exist in the setting. That's what the ASI represents. If a player wants to go against that and overcome that hurdle (which is a minor hurdle as a heroic adventurer), that was the option in the old rules. If orcs are different in your world, give them a different default ASI. If a player wants a different ASI, they could ask the DM, maybe pointing out the optional rule, and probably get the ok, especially if they gave a reason beyond "I want to min/max."
Now imagine the flip side of this. Making Tasha's rule the default eliminates that hurdle by default. All "races" are suddenly canonically the same in terms of ability scores. So, if the player in question wanted to overcome the hurdle of becoming a legendary figure of whatever class despite being part of a "race" that would make doing so difficult, now that player needs to convince not only the DM to make the different playable species better at certain things than others, but also convince all of the other players to agree to either modify their characters or come up with a reason they are an exception to what their species is good at.
Also, I see no poll.
If someone wants that hurdle they can still have that hurdle. They can just choose to not put their race ASIs into the class's main stat. That hurdle though is basically just being one ASI behind someone who chose the 'correct' race for that class. That....isn't very interesting to me. The RP/story aspect of going against the grain of their society and overcoming adversity is interesting, but having your main stat modifier be one lower than everyone else isn't very interesting to me flavor wise. But if it is interesting to someone else, they can still choose to go that route. You can put your tashas asis into anything, including sub optimal stats if that's what you really want to do. You haven't really lost anything, but not people wanting to play formerly sub optimal class/race combos are no longer penalizing themselves and I think that freedom is great. And it still leaves the possibliity for someone to play sub optimal on purpose for RP if they just put those starting asis into something else. Even for new races you can still do that if you want to. Want your plasmoid wizard to have a disadvantage? Put those asis into dex and con or something. You have the freedom to do that still.
And this change isn't to the races in general. It is specifically a PC options. Elves are still generally dexterous, orcs are still generally strong. Those norms still exist, they just aren't enforced for player character specifically anymore in Tashas onward. While still leaving you the freedom to opt into being at a disadvantage if that appeals to you for RP. People can now be more flexible with their choices without being penalized and someone who wants to pick a half orc wizard or something to overcome adversity can still choose non optimal starting asis for the same purpose as before. And the general cultures and physical norms of the races are not changing unless your DM specifically changes them.
No, you can't. And I explained why. "That isn't very interesting to me" is not a justification for removing the possibility for everyone.
You are saying "it isn't much of a penalty and therefore isn't interesting" in one sentence and turning around and saying it's good to make it so every species is identical in terms of ability scores because now people can play those species without being penalized. Well, like you said, it wasn't much of a penalty to start with them, so unless you're minmaxing, the claim that you shouldn't start with a "bad" combination because of said penalty is ludicrous. But here's the thing. Nothing is changing for those minmaxers. They (you) could have still played those characters.
Your claim that "those cultures and physical norms aren't changing unless the DM wants them to" is a completely dishonest statement intended to just disregard the entire argument against this change. Yes. Making the various species identical in terms of ability score improvement does indeed change the physical norms of those species. Now the average orc has a strength of 10, just like humans. The average elf has a dex of 10, just like humans. The average gnome has intelligence of 10, just like a human. You say that they now just don't apply to the players anymore, but they never did. If you had a good enough of a reason, you could ignore your genetics. With Tasha's (like you said), that possibility was solidified. Now, it is a requirement that you either warp reality as a player character for absolutely no reason whatsoever, or the species are all identical in terms of ability scores.
The claimed reason for the change (not actually the reason, but I can't say the reason here) is that they wanted to make it setting agnostic. So rather than having a default that the DM could change if their setting differed from virtually every other setting, they made all of the species the same with no mention that the DM should set static ability scores for their world. Instead, implying that all species in every world should now be identical in terms of ability scores.
This is the last time I'm responding to someone who ignores these arguments in their response.
Nothing you're saying is new, Zub. All of this has been covered, extensively, in older threads that turned into twenty-page tire fires before the mods locked them and started up the Vacation Points dispenser. You're making the exact same arguments that people have used to try and ban/tear down the Tasha's rules since TC was announced, and people will doubtless make the same arguments in response: bioessentialism is bad, and also PC stat blocks have never been indicative of overall species and sociocultural trends.
Nothing you're saying is new, Zub. All of this has been covered, extensively, in older threads that turned into twenty-page tire fires before the mods locked them and started up the Vacation Points dispenser. You're making the exact same arguments that people have used to try and ban/tear down the Tasha's rules since TC was announced, and people will doubtless make the same arguments in response: bioessentialism is bad, and also PC stat blocks have never been indicative of overall species and sociocultural trends.
Best to quit while nobody's behind, yet.
And all of it gets ignored by the people "arguing" against it.
I and the vast majority of people in these threads have no problem with Tasha's rule being an optional rule.
Correct. PCs have never been indicative of species and sociocultural trends. That's why you roll your stats or get the standard array/point buy rather than just start with 10s across the board plus the racial ASI as you would if you were just a normal person. That's why you can fly through the levels in a matter of weeks becoming almost a godlike figure. But you're still a member of your species. An orc hero is going to start out being a bit stronger physically than a goblin hero with the same starting class and rolls played by the same individual.
Stop trying to intimidate people into silence with lies. I have only seen you comment strawman arguments or completely ignore everything that others have said. If nobody were behind me, then there wouldn't be other people agreeing or "thanking" me. The moment you resort to intimidation is the moment you've admitted to losing the debate.
Making the various species identical in terms of ability score improvement does indeed change the physical norms of those species. Now the average orc has a strength of 10, just like humans. The average elf has a dex of 10, just like humans. The average gnome has intelligence of 10, just like a human.
Well, orcs in the Monster Manual still have a STR of 16, while commoners (listed as humanoid, any race) still have a STR of 10
So either it's not at all true that "the average orc" has a STR of 10, or it was true long before Tasha's. Take your pick
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Making the various species identical in terms of ability score improvement does indeed change the physical norms of those species. Now the average orc has a strength of 10, just like humans. The average elf has a dex of 10, just like humans. The average gnome has intelligence of 10, just like a human.
Well, orcs in the Monster Manual still have a STR of 16, while commoners (listed as humanoid, any race) still have a STR of 10
So either it's not at all true that "the average orc" has a STR of 10, or it was true long before Tasha's. Take your pick
"This book that was written along with the original rules used the original rules, so therefore the new rules don't change the original rules and Wizards is completely consistent in everything it does, so I win. Ha."
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Countershere(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
I'm confused. Rules around the core PHB characters hasn't changed... or am I missing something? I mean - Tasha's is still optional for them, isn't it?
As someone who likes to home-brew settings, I think decoupling species from the core setting is a good move although it still makes assumptions about the universe that may or may not hold in a home-brew (fey, shodowfell, astral plane, etc). As others have noted, though, the removal of certain cultural defaults (evil goblins) means there's no more playing against type because there is no type. You can build the type into your setting, of course, but it's not the same. But I guess you can't have it both ways - do I want a stereotype or do I want flexibility for my setting? Honestly, I'm not sure. Some ASI combinations are a bit weird, like strong halflings, but whatever floats your boat.
I guess I just have a hard time really understanding the dislike for the rule.
To me, while ability score increases are powerful, they are the most flavorless, least interesting part of racial features.
Tieflings aren't getting trance, humans aren't getting relentless endurance, half elves aren't getting infernal legacy.
The ability to swap the asis around helps to say, allow someone to play a race/class combo without feeling like they're holding the group back. It allows the wood elf bard and the tiefling bard to start on basically equal footing.
But race selection still matters. For your character's background and family history. For the non ASI related racial features. It allows people to more freely create the character they want without having to choose between limiting their race options or taking a penalty to their main stat.
It doesn't erase the history of the races or their culture. A player character is an individual. Elves can still be generally dexterous, tieflings charismatic, etc. All cultures and groups have exceptions within them. And player characters are generally heroic and exceptional individuals.
I can better understand the dislike of the 'build your lineage' system thing in Tashas, I forget the exact name of it, but I've always just had a hard time seeing any downside to the tashas asi modifications and am glad to see it becoming standard in new races.
Now if they tried to say, make the custom lineage thing standard adn removed ALL racial features, that I could more easily understand an uproar over, basically turning eveyr race into a variant human. But the boring numbers only ASI bonuses? I really don't see a downside unless someone REALLY wants to stick to their stock fantasy tropes and enforce those tropes on everyone.
EDIT: I would also be fine with 'suggested norms' so long as the freedom is still prevented to deviate from those norms. But in terms of Tasha-style complete freedom or hard set stat boosts of old I'd pick the Tasha's end easily.
These threads do tend to devolve into confrontational arguments, often incited by folks trying to be cute or clever and posting things to demean others. I offer this gem, which is a snarky, inflammatory remark that doesn't really have much useful contribution to a discussion like this:
I chose this particular statement because it throws anyone who doesn't immediately embrace and love the changes as a narrow-minded, mouth breathing moron. It ignores any and all reasons folks have for not wanting things replaced, but enhanced.
Now a couple folks have already addressed it and I have in other threads and would here as well. To most, a suggestion is indeed that, a suggestion. It's not a "must have" or "need to do" but a suggestion, wherein it describes how the average creature of said species develops. This is from genetics (some are BIG) culture (some species tend to read and study more as a culture than others) or any other core value or even environmental influence. It's the "norm" for that species and as such, certain species tend toward classes (occupations) that are suited to the norm for their species. Others don't fit the "norm" perhaps the Goliath was sickly when he/she was young and never gained the body mass and musculature of their classmates. That one might seek the way of the Wizard, from reading while others engaged in rough play, or perhaps a Priest, as they spent time in the church while the others wrestled. There's an endless list of reasons a certain hero might not fit the "norm" for their species and I, and my table, and from reading the forums, the greater bulk of the community are MORE than willing to accommodate, accept and even celebrate due to being different.
Inflammatory remarks from folks who insist everything be whitewashed don't help any more than tantrums about flushing the lore down the toilet. If Wizards truly wanted to make a more engaging, inclusive gaming environment, they would have put out a series of books, outlining the different worlds and species living there and showing how maybe Goblins in Wonderworld are the protectors of the realms, traveling in bands to stand up for those being abused or mistreated. The whitewashing of everything and removal of realm specific lore is a shortcut and lazy way to try and be more PC in todays fragile society.
I like, for sure, the addition of an optional rule so there's something IN PRINT saying players are "allowed" to do what they should have been allowed to do forever. Erasing the different histories of the different species in different worlds is what people lacking creativity do when faced with unrest.
It's here now, and it's here to stay. Now, instead of having a guide for who's the "good guys" and who's the "bad guys' DMs will need to sort it entirely on their own for each adventure. No more "easy mode" in setting up enemies that can be whacked indiscriminately lol.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Every race has multiple paragraphs of description that make it pretty clear what those races are good at. Yeah, reading those is more work than scanning a couple stat boosts, but I'd argue that its time well spent, especially for new players.
As for players wanting to use content the DM hasn't approved, banning stuff has always been a thing you can do. But if all your friends are wanting to use the new stuff and you're the last holdout, you might want to consider just giving in. It's really not that bad. Or if you want to hold the line and enforce your rules even if it means finding a new group, you can do that too. It's your right and I wouldn't fault you for it.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Honestly, I don't think there is a major dislike of the rule. I allow my players to use it if they like, but they often choose not to. I think people would just like the set ability score improvements as an option for their campaigns, without going against official rules. With the new races coming out in MotM and Volo's and MToF being made unofficial, a large portion of the official races don't have even suggested ability scores. This means that players don't have any idea what kind of class often goes with the race, which some people like to adhere to for the basics of their character creation.
To give an example, let's say a new player chose what race they wanted after their idea for the character's class was already chosen. Let's say the player wanted to be a slick rogue or bard. As written, the halfling's bonus to dexterity and luck ability together lend themselves to a either of the player's chosen classes. An elf would be a similar story with its weapon proficiency and dex bonus. Now, if the bonuses to stats were the same between races, there would be way more choice paralysis, because suddenly every single race is optimal.
Subclass Evaluations So Far:
Sorcerer
Warlock
My statblock. Fear me!
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Counters here(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
Even in your example though, you're including the non ASI racial features that weren't affected. You can still pick half orc for your tanky melee character who can once a day survive an attack with 1 HP instead of being KOd. You can still pick a halfling for the luck. You can still pick elf for trance to get a quicker long rest. You can still pick high elf to have an extra cantrip etc. Your rogue can still go wood elf to be able to hide while lightly obscured. There are still races with racial features better suited to certain classes or playstyles. It's just in the flavor/utility now instead of straight up numerical superiority.
I'd be fine with suggested but clearly optional bonuses being laid out for races, but between the old hard set racials and leaving it completely open, I think the open approach is the better one.
I have no problems with the changes. When we played AD&D in the Greyhawk setting pre-Salvatore’s Drizzt books, Drow were evil. Period. In early FR Drow we’re evil. Period. But if I’m not mistaken, and I’m not that familiar with Ebberon setting, there have been Drow that are not evil, way before Tasha’s was a thing.
WotC is growing and with that comes changes. the floating ASI’s are now basically a character thing, not a race thing (not sure if it’s still part of race selection as I haven’t checked out MMM that came out today) but at least that’s how I see it.
If they want to say Dragonborn are typically strong and hardy but can vary in their physical and mental prowess. I wouldn’t find that bad. Leaving out the +X/+Y issue altogether. It still tells you that a typical Dragonborn would on average have a bonus in STR and CON.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Your assessment is fair, and I didn't explain what I meant as well as I'd wanted to. I'd be totally open with it being the main rule that you can choose, but have suggested improvements for races depending on setting. I can also understand that if you had to choose you'd take the new method of choosing stats.
Subclass Evaluations So Far:
Sorcerer
Warlock
My statblock. Fear me!
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Counters here(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
As a brief aside (and because I'm playing an Eberron drow specifically because I found the idea fascinating)...
Nothing in Eberron is 'Good' or 'Evil'. Or rather, no specific species or culture is such. One of the primary selling points of the setting is that everything is grey and even traditionally Pure Evil characters can be something else in this setting. One can never assume a creature is 'Evil', no matter what it might be in other settings.
Drow in particular are extremely rare in 'typical' Eberron games, which take place in the Five Nations of Khorvaire. Drow, instead, are native to the shattered continent of Xen'drik, homeland of the giants, and come in three distinct flavors - the Vulkoori, jungle-dwelling tribal folk who hunt rogue, stunted giants and other monsters on the surface; the Sulatar that exist in a handful of isolated obsidian citadels throughout Xen'drik and cling to the final remnants of the elemental shaping techniques of the Age of Giants; and the Umbragen that survive in the depths of Khyber, wielding sophisticated spellwork in neverending warfare against the lurking horrors of that benighted realm.
The closest to the moustache-twirling, self-destructively EvUlZ Olthian drow of the Forgotten Realms are the Sulatar, who believe it's their duty/destiny to cleanse the world with flames, but even then - they think that's because the world is broken and needs to be set to right. The Vulkoori are no more 'evil' than tribalistic wood elves in other settings are, and the Umbragen are actively a force for 'Good' depending on which interpretation you buy. Even the ones that fight monsters with the power of monsters are still fighting monsters, and they've kept some truly horrific things from breaking through to the surface to scourge Khorvaire more than once.
It's absolutely delightful, and so refreshing after fighting against the Forgotten Realms' endemic moral absolutism for so long.
Please do not contact or message me.
But the halfling still has Lucky, and the elf still has weapon proficiencies. All removing set ASIs does is allow the player to make their choice based on actual features and abilities
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
And when I DMed Against the Giants in high school in the 80s, I put in a drow double agent NPC who wasn't evil at all. RA didn't invent the idea, he just popularized it
From the very beginning, "canon" has always been more suggestion than rule in D&D. The idea of a table strictly adhering to Official Canon just seems so... drab to me
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The issue I have with making Tasha's rule the default is that it's much easier for a player to ask to use Tasha's rule than it would be for a player to ask that the old default be used.
The different species are going to be naturally slightly better at certain things than other species. Yes, those things may change depending on the setting but they do exist in the setting. That's what the ASI represents. If a player wants to go against that and overcome that hurdle (which is a minor hurdle as a heroic adventurer), that was the option in the old rules. If orcs are different in your world, give them a different default ASI. If a player wants a different ASI, they could ask the DM, maybe pointing out the optional rule, and probably get the ok, especially if they gave a reason beyond "I want to min/max."
Now imagine the flip side of this. Making Tasha's rule the default eliminates that hurdle by default. All "races" are suddenly canonically the same in terms of ability scores. So, if the player in question wanted to overcome the hurdle of becoming a legendary figure of whatever class despite being part of a "race" that would make doing so difficult, now that player needs to convince not only the DM to make the different playable species better at certain things than others, but also convince all of the other players to agree to either modify their characters or come up with a reason they are an exception to what their species is good at.
Also, I see no poll.
Huh, maybe a mod removed it since it was kinda pointless.
The poll was just if you wanted the Tasha's rule to not exist or not be the default. Only one out of 23 people voted the former, so it was kinda telling.
Subclass Evaluations So Far:
Sorcerer
Warlock
My statblock. Fear me!
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Counters here(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
If someone wants that hurdle they can still have that hurdle. They can just choose to not put their race ASIs into the class's main stat. That hurdle though is basically just being one ASI behind someone who chose the 'correct' race for that class. That....isn't very interesting to me. The RP/story aspect of going against the grain of their society and overcoming adversity is interesting, but having your main stat modifier be one lower than everyone else isn't very interesting to me flavor wise. But if it is interesting to someone else, they can still choose to go that route. You can put your tashas asis into anything, including sub optimal stats if that's what you really want to do. You haven't really lost anything, but not people wanting to play formerly sub optimal class/race combos are no longer penalizing themselves and I think that freedom is great. And it still leaves the possibliity for someone to play sub optimal on purpose for RP if they just put those starting asis into something else. Even for new races you can still do that if you want to. Want your plasmoid wizard to have a disadvantage? Put those asis into dex and con or something. You have the freedom to do that still.
And this change isn't to the races in general. It is specifically a PC options. Elves are still generally dexterous, orcs are still generally strong. Those norms still exist, they just aren't enforced for player character specifically anymore in Tashas onward. While still leaving you the freedom to opt into being at a disadvantage if that appeals to you for RP. People can now be more flexible with their choices without being penalized and someone who wants to pick a half orc wizard or something to overcome adversity can still choose non optimal starting asis for the same purpose as before. And the general cultures and physical norms of the races are not changing unless your DM specifically changes them.
No, you can't. And I explained why. "That isn't very interesting to me" is not a justification for removing the possibility for everyone.
You are saying "it isn't much of a penalty and therefore isn't interesting" in one sentence and turning around and saying it's good to make it so every species is identical in terms of ability scores because now people can play those species without being penalized. Well, like you said, it wasn't much of a penalty to start with them, so unless you're minmaxing, the claim that you shouldn't start with a "bad" combination because of said penalty is ludicrous. But here's the thing. Nothing is changing for those minmaxers. They (you) could have still played those characters.
Your claim that "those cultures and physical norms aren't changing unless the DM wants them to" is a completely dishonest statement intended to just disregard the entire argument against this change. Yes. Making the various species identical in terms of ability score improvement does indeed change the physical norms of those species. Now the average orc has a strength of 10, just like humans. The average elf has a dex of 10, just like humans. The average gnome has intelligence of 10, just like a human. You say that they now just don't apply to the players anymore, but they never did. If you had a good enough of a reason, you could ignore your genetics. With Tasha's (like you said), that possibility was solidified. Now, it is a requirement that you either warp reality as a player character for absolutely no reason whatsoever, or the species are all identical in terms of ability scores.
The claimed reason for the change (not actually the reason, but I can't say the reason here) is that they wanted to make it setting agnostic. So rather than having a default that the DM could change if their setting differed from virtually every other setting, they made all of the species the same with no mention that the DM should set static ability scores for their world. Instead, implying that all species in every world should now be identical in terms of ability scores.
This is the last time I'm responding to someone who ignores these arguments in their response.
Nothing you're saying is new, Zub. All of this has been covered, extensively, in older threads that turned into twenty-page tire fires before the mods locked them and started up the Vacation Points dispenser. You're making the exact same arguments that people have used to try and ban/tear down the Tasha's rules since TC was announced, and people will doubtless make the same arguments in response: bioessentialism is bad, and also PC stat blocks have never been indicative of overall species and sociocultural trends.
Best to quit while nobody's behind, yet.
Please do not contact or message me.
And all of it gets ignored by the people "arguing" against it.
I and the vast majority of people in these threads have no problem with Tasha's rule being an optional rule.
Correct. PCs have never been indicative of species and sociocultural trends. That's why you roll your stats or get the standard array/point buy rather than just start with 10s across the board plus the racial ASI as you would if you were just a normal person. That's why you can fly through the levels in a matter of weeks becoming almost a godlike figure. But you're still a member of your species. An orc hero is going to start out being a bit stronger physically than a goblin hero with the same starting class and rolls played by the same individual.
Stop trying to intimidate people into silence with lies. I have only seen you comment strawman arguments or completely ignore everything that others have said. If nobody were behind me, then there wouldn't be other people agreeing or "thanking" me. The moment you resort to intimidation is the moment you've admitted to losing the debate.
Well, orcs in the Monster Manual still have a STR of 16, while commoners (listed as humanoid, any race) still have a STR of 10
So either it's not at all true that "the average orc" has a STR of 10, or it was true long before Tasha's. Take your pick
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
"This book that was written along with the original rules used the original rules, so therefore the new rules don't change the original rules and Wizards is completely consistent in everything it does, so I win. Ha."
What?
Just reminding people to keep cool heads here. This discussion has turned into an argument in the past, and I would rather it not do that here.
I'm not specifically calling any of you out here, just a general reminder.
Subclass Evaluations So Far:
Sorcerer
Warlock
My statblock. Fear me!
Hosted a battle between the Cult of Sedge and the Forum Counters here(Done now). I_Love_Tarrasques has won the fight, scoring a victory for the fiendish Moderators.
I'm confused. Rules around the core PHB characters hasn't changed... or am I missing something? I mean - Tasha's is still optional for them, isn't it?
As someone who likes to home-brew settings, I think decoupling species from the core setting is a good move although it still makes assumptions about the universe that may or may not hold in a home-brew (fey, shodowfell, astral plane, etc). As others have noted, though, the removal of certain cultural defaults (evil goblins) means there's no more playing against type because there is no type. You can build the type into your setting, of course, but it's not the same. But I guess you can't have it both ways - do I want a stereotype or do I want flexibility for my setting? Honestly, I'm not sure. Some ASI combinations are a bit weird, like strong halflings, but whatever floats your boat.