|
roleplaying to stats is pretty boring because like, the only flaws you can express with them is "is smart/dumb strong/weak", more or less. Anything more complex will rely on you actually like, roleplaying. There is no stat for daddy issues, or dead friends.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
Eh, it's possible to make it work. My wizard right now has high int and negative wisdom, and she's pretty impetuous/brash/doesn't consider the consequences of her actions as a result.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:27
|
|
|
yeah sure you can but you can also play a character as brash and unwise regardless of stats
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:28
|
|
|
My -1 modifier for strength bard just breaks a nail every time he tries to exert himself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:29
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:this is fun because playing characters that are good at everything with few/no shortcomings is boring and I'd say actually kind of difficult honestly. You can do what you want however In D&D you play heroes and adventurers. You can role play the frail wizard thematically. Mechanically, if your wizard has a third fewer hitpoints than baseline or gets automatically mind controlled or feared every encounter, the party would have left them at a library long ago. If you want stats to tell the story of your character, there's an incredibly robust OSR community and plenty of games that are mechanically more inclined for that kind of play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:32
|
|
|
It's just bad roleplaying, much like the high charisma bard constantly butting in and trying to take over conversations because 'if we have to roll persuasion or deception I should be the one to do it" or because they're the leader of the party or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
Stabbey_the_Clown posted:Is there something stopping you from playing an Orc Wizard now? If that's the character you're interested in, there's nothing wrong with trying it, and making the non-traditional race/class combination part of your characterization. Some of my character concepts in progress have non-optimized race/class combinations because it adds some inner conflict and doubt. -2 to int is actually really bad in the case of the orc! The weird thing about 5e is that, especially at low levels, it leans into racial determinism hard as to get above a +2 modifier in your main stat you need to be the "correct" race, in a system where +1s are deliberately hard to get for the questionable design of bounded accuracy. You don't actually need mechanical backing to roleplay imposter syndrome. The game is not better when the white elves are better wizards than the black elves because the white elves are genetically smarter. If you want to have your orc be the first member of his family to go to wizard school you can do that without making him genetically inferior to all the elves hanging around. PCs are supposed to be specially trained elites compared to your average D&D peasant, so opening up the play space so people don't feel dumb for playing Tiefling Strength warriors, Dragonborn Rogues, and halfling barbarians is good unless you want to tell Charles Murray stories. Don't tell Charles Murray stories.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:35
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:No, but.. Considering the standard array gives you an 8 it's literally impossible to play a character who doesn't have a thing that sets them back. The idea however is to not force a player to pick between being the character they want, and being able to do their job well. The only different between a +2 int race wizard and a not +2 int race wizard is that they spent 4 more levels with a 5% higher chance of their poo poo just not working. That's not interesting in the slightest. Half-orc wizard has to pay the price of failing more often over the course of their career for the privilege of having tusks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:38
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Well how important is it to you that the sidequest happen in Phlan? Why not just rename it as being another city along the way? Baldur's Gate or Elturel could use more attention in HotDQ. Another way of looking at it would be using it to create adventure set-pieces throughout the journey. Maybe Freona's Tea Kettle is a small caravan that will join the larger wagon train heading out of Baldur's Gate, and all the various narratives refer to the travellers and the small villages they are passing by. Having the tea kettle be part of the caravan is a rad idea, I'm just constrained by the AL rules for this one
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
Syrinxx posted:I guess this is what it comes down to. Are you permitted in AL to just run a module in a different location? Or should i just magically teleport them to Phlan for a session Just don't tell them how far away Phlan is. It is literally Plot far away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:-2 to int is actually really bad in the case of the orc! Oh, sorry. I mis-read that and thought it was a Half-Orc. I've only looked at the stats for a full Orc a couple of times on the point build calculator and forgot about the -2 INT. Glagha posted:Considering the standard array gives you an 8 it's literally impossible to play a character who doesn't have a thing that sets them back. The idea however is to not force a player to pick between being the character they want, and being able to do their job well. That's fine, I have no problem with the proposed change to uncouple attributes from race. quote:The only different between a +2 int race wizard and a not +2 int race wizard is that they spent 4 more levels with a 5% higher chance of their poo poo just not working. That's not interesting in the slightest. Half-orc wizard has to pay the price of failing more often over the course of their career for the privilege of having tusks. It's not interesting to you. That's perfectly fine. You can play how you want. No one is going to hold a gun to your head to force you into playing a character who doesn't get a +2 in their chosen stat. There is however, a difference between playing as specific characters, such as Wilbur Greenmeadow, Halfling, and Tieneval, High Elf.I could make both of them Wizards, and Tieneval would be mechanically better at it, but I don't have anything in mind for Tieneval, whereas I do for Wilbur. Stabbey_the_Clown fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Jun 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:10
|
|
|
Syrinxx posted:I guess this is what it comes down to. Are you permitted in AL to just run a module in a different location? Or should i just magically teleport them to Phlan for a session I can't imagine someone would have an issue with it, particularly since DDEX-01 is basically just five different mini-adventures that are only loosely related. But if it's not kosher with someone you have to listen to, then just drop the word Phlan from any exposition and use "a small town" or "a merchant faire" instead. You don't have to contest that it is in Phlan, but you don't have to confirm that it is either. For all intents and purposes, the actual location of the town is totally immaterial and none of the characters will return.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:12
|
|
|
Stabbey_the_Clown posted:There is however, a difference between playing as Wilbur Greenmeadow, Halfling, and Tieneval, High Elf.I could make both of them Wizards, and Tieneval would be mechanically better at it, but I don't have anything in mind for Tieneval, whereas I do for Wilbur. There's the issue though. You just accept that Wilbur is a worse wizard than Tieneval. Why should Wilbur be a worse wizard? Because Wilbur isn't an elf? We're just going to go ahead and do the racial determinism bit and say elves are better than halflings at being wizards? And is the fact that Wilbur fails more often at wizarding make Wilbur more interesting? Or is Wilbur more interesting in spite of the game penalizing them for being the wrong race? I don't even know what you're arguing because you told me that you like uncoupling ability scores from races. This would mean you're no longer being punished for playing Wilbur instead of Tieneval.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
Farg posted:roleplaying to stats is pretty boring because like, the only flaws you can express with them is "is smart/dumb strong/weak", more or less. Anything more complex will rely on you actually like, roleplaying. There is no stat for daddy issues, or dead friends. I don't know, it's really fun to get into a debate and do it all wrong just to piss off the wizard
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:20
|
|
|
Glagha posted:There's the issue though. You just accept that Wilbur is a worse wizard than Tieneval. Why should Wilbur be a worse wizard? Because Wilbur isn't an elf? We're just going to go ahead and do the racial determinism bit and say elves are better than halflings at being wizards? And is the fact that Wilbur fails more often at wizarding make Wilbur more interesting? Or is Wilbur more interesting in spite of the game penalizing them for being the wrong race? I don't even know what you're arguing because you told me that you like uncoupling ability scores from races. This would mean you're no longer being punished for playing Wilbur instead of Tieneval. Erasing all mechanical differences between races seems pretty bland to me, but it seems like the end state of this line of thinking. Race can be the new hair color or age.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:25
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Erasing all mechanical differences between races seems pretty bland to me, but it seems like the end state of this line of thinking. Race can be the new hair color or age. Nobody said anything about erasing all mechanical differences. Races still have unique features (which are the interesting part) even if their attribute bonuses (the uninteresting yet limiting part) are removed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
I think generally the stats should be untethered from race. I'm fine with Races having different traits, although that could just mean that we get to the point where not picking VHuman would be a mistake, or An Elf if you are in a crit fishing build.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
Glagha posted:There's the issue though. You just accept that Wilbur is a worse wizard than Tieneval. Why should Wilbur be a worse wizard? Because Wilbur isn't an elf? We're just going to go ahead and do the racial determinism bit and say elves are better than halflings at being wizards? And is the fact that Wilbur fails more often at wizarding make Wilbur more interesting? Or is Wilbur more interesting in spite of the game penalizing them for being the wrong race? I don't even know what you're arguing because you told me that you like uncoupling ability scores from races. This would mean you're no longer being punished for playing Wilbur instead of Tieneval. I literally said, in the exact same post you replied to: "I have no problem with the proposed change to uncouple attributes from race." Yes, it would be nice to play a Halfling where I could pick +2 INT. Wilbur not getting +2 INT does not make him more interesting, what makes Wilbur more interesting to me is the specifics of his character, and I'm loving sorry that I misspoke. One of the specifics of Wilbur's character is that he's a Halfling, and at this moment the rules as written say Halflings do not get +1 or 2 INT. If that makes him 5% worse, that's something I'll have to accept until or unless the rules change (or the DM gives me an exception and says I can change it).
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Erasing all mechanical differences between races seems pretty bland to me, but it seems like the end state of this line of thinking. Race can be the new hair color or age.  Get this Brad Bird poo poo outta here. So early reviews of Mystic Odyssey of There's sounds like they did absolutely nothing interesting or original with the setting. Instead of leaning on the interesting or unique aspects of the MTG setting they just made it a super generic reskin of Greek mythology. The heroic systems seem poorly balanced and gently caress irrevocably with CR math. The new Satyr race is the only race worth playing now with Fey immunities, +Dex/+Cha and Magic Resistance. There are 3 new Mythic Difficulty bosses that have mechanics for a two phase boss fight but really just reinvent Bloodied. Sounds just absolutely disappointing all around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
Politically there's no difference between race-based stats and race-based traits. Maybe that's the compromise they'll land on, but it's exactly the same conceit that races have fundamental differences.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:40
|
|
|
You can couple some abilities to species that make sense; for instance vision, movement speed, magical resistances and so on. Tieflings can keep their fire resistance and their hellish rebuke and such. Proposal: if you can't go full DTAS just couple the +2 stat to class rather than race. Or let the player just pick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:43
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Politically there's no difference between race-based stats and race-based traits. Maybe that's the compromise they'll land on, but it's exactly the same conceit that races have fundamental differences. Who the gently caress cares about politically? We’re talking primary attribute scores. If I want a half-orc wizard I’m okay knowing I’ll never use Savage Attacks. I’m not okay with being 4 levels behind in my chance to land spells on targets for most of my adventuring career.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
Stabbey_the_Clown posted:I literally said, in the exact same post you replied to: "I have no problem with the proposed change to uncouple attributes from race." Yes, it would be nice to play a Halfling where I could pick +2 INT. Wilbur not getting +2 INT does not make him more interesting, what makes Wilbur more interesting to me is the specifics of his character, and I'm loving sorry that I misspoke. I literally said that you literally said that! I was saying it feels like we entirely agree on this and I'm not sure what exactly we're arguing about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:48
|
|
|
I'm reading a nice bit off of someone's gmbinder that splits the ability score increases from races and puts them on class / background selection instead (+2 / +1). It has certain stats associated with the class as what you can choose from, taking either +2 str on a barb or maybe +1 str, +1 con for example. Then choosing a criminal background can net you another +1 str if you desire (or dex or charisma). Seems like a good jumping off point and I'll probably steal this for my next game in a few months. The monstrous classes from Volo's also drop their -stats if they had them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
If I start another game before whenever the gently caress Wizards deigns to release their book I plan to use this https://gabejamesgames.itch.io/cmm
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Politically there's no difference between race-based stats and race-based traits. Maybe that's the compromise they'll land on, but it's exactly the same conceit that races have fundamental differences. What exactly is the issue with saying some fantasy species of fundamental differences. Like, saying "devilkin have fire resistance, orcs have great senses of smell" is fine. The problem comes from making assumptions about psychology and culture because it starts simple and then gets real ugly the more you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
EDIT: missed there was another page, and besides I don't want to get involved in this argument again
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
Is Int the main or only problematic stat? Like I see a minotaur being stronger than a human, and I get it. Or a cat person being more dextrous than a human, and same thing. But as soon as a race has more or less int than another, I start raising eyebrows. Either way I'd be happy scrapping them or moving them to backgrounds. I like playing non typical things but I also don't like being worse than the others in the group at it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:05
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:What exactly is the issue with saying some fantasy species of fundamental differences. quote:Tolkien began developing Khuzdul before the publication in 1936 of The Hobbit, with some names appearing in the early versions of The Silmarillion. Tolkien based Khuzdul on Semitic languages, primarily Hebrew, featuring triconsonantal roots and similarities to Hebrew's phonology and morphology. [1][2] Tolkien noted some similarities between Dwarves and Jews: both were "at once natives and aliens in their habitations, speaking the languages of the country, but with an accent due to their own private tongue…". [3] Tolkien also commented of the Dwarves that "their words are Semitic obviously, constructed to be Semitic." [4] Keep in mind that Tolkien was if anything philosemitic in *intent*, but he still ended up perpetuating negative stereotypes (loves gold, etc). Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Jun 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:Is Int the main or only problematic stat? Like I see a minotaur being stronger than a human, and I get it. Or a cat person being more dextrous than a human, and same thing. But as soon as a race has more or less int than another, I start raising eyebrows. Typically it's the "mental" stats (Int/Wis/Cha) more than the "physical" stats (Str/Dex/Con), but you may as well just hit them all at once.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:10
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:Is Int the main or only problematic stat? Like I see a minotaur being stronger than a human, and I get it. Or a cat person being more dextrous than a human, and same thing. But as soon as a race has more or less int than another, I start raising eyebrows. personally i think wisdom is way worse to have a racial penalty to but all racial bonuses are  as gently caress for a setting where there are beings made of literal pure evil that somehow sire offsprings which then are resistant to fire
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Politically there's no difference between race-based stats and race-based traits. Maybe that's the compromise they'll land on, but it's exactly the same conceit that races have fundamental differences. There is a material difference in saying "this race has an innate kinship with stone and this other race can breathe water" vs "this race is stupid and brutish but this other race is smart and graceful." The ribbon bonuses are either conceits to the magical history of a race or a nod to the flavor of their culture. There's a difference between that and suggesting race science biotruths about innate capability. There's no real world racial value judgements being applied when you're comparing a person who can nightcrawler teleport and a person who can make a darkness orb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:Is Int the main or only problematic stat? You don’t think wisdom matters? Anyway from a purely political standpoint maybe only int/wis/cha matter. But from a better game standpoint they all matter. nelson fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Jun 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Keep in mind that Tolkien was if anything philosemitic in *intent*, but he still ended up perpetuating negative stereotypes (loves gold, etc). I'm not sure what part of my post you're responding to, nor what your stance is but I... think I agree? Like the problem isn't that dwarves are short (obvious physical difference) it's that they are intrinsically greedy. That they are meant to be read as Jewish adds an extra dimension to the awfulness. Edit: not to mention dwarf also describes real world marginalized people with a genetic condition but that's probably a bridge too far for most fantasy enjoyed. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Jun 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:22
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I'm not sure what part of my post you're responding to, nor what your stance is but I... think I agree? Like the problem isn't that dwarves are short (obvious physical difference) it's that they are intrinsically greedy. That they are meant to be read as Jewish adds an extra dimension to the awfulness. Right. Its not just stat bonuses or penalties; it's that all the other stuff can play into stereotypes in bad ways. I'm not sure how they fix this problem really, its in the d&d bedrock. But good that they're trying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
Orcs and Ostriches posted:Is Int the main or only problematic stat? Like I see a minotaur being stronger than a human, and I get it. Or a cat person being more dextrous than a human, and same thing. But as soon as a race has more or less int than another, I start raising eyebrows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
Different species with different capabilities is a very common conceit of science fiction and I don't actually think it's an inherently racist one. To take a very obvious example, (and echo Infinite Karma immediately above me) I don't think it would be legitimate to criticize a game for being racist if its rules allowed ogres to lift and carry more weight than gnomes. Where D&D gets into really thorny territory is to assume the existence of "intelligence" as a single measurable trait (or even as two traits split into INT and WIS) and then start assigning bonuses or penalties in that arena. Even a species of super-smart aliens or fantasy creatures isn't necessarily one that reproduces the modern hegemonic concept of race if the way that manifests is that they can instantly compute things as though with a built-in calculator, or could divide the time required to make plans by a factor of ten because of their ability to rapidly explore decision trees, or something, rather than by postulating and modifying the same general intelligence g that forms the backbone of The Bell Curve. A D&D whose stats were Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Perception, and Magic would read very differently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
On an even more idiosyncratic level the convolution of class competence, class stereotypes and culture is deeply complicated. Like you're right in saying there's really nothing intrinsically problematic about suggesting an ogre can lift more than a gnome. But what about a halfling and a gnome? An elf and a human? Similarly sized species are less obvious and making snap judgements about their physiology feels worse. And let's take rogues. If gnomes are inherently better at roughish activities than dwarves, does that mean there are more roguish gnomes? Does that mean dwarvish criminals are somehow less competent? Does that mean dwarves are, for some reason, worse with locks? Really tying class success to race, and culture to race, is a mistake. It quickly turns into racial essentialism. When some of your species read as real world races and ethnicities it becomes ew.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:It's not that hard to make innate racial bonuses into non-stat-based bonuses instead of +2 to this and that. Minotaurs and Goliaths can have Powerful Build that gives them advantage on Strength-based ability rolls and gives them five times the lifting and carrying capacity. Even an 8 Str minotaur wizard will do these things as well as the 18 Str human barbarian with those bonuses, but won't be a mechanically superior choice. If High Elves are supposed to be fantastic spellcasters, don't give them intelligence bonuses, give them racial spells, or bonuses to Arcana (or a choice of Arcana, History, Religion, Nature) checks, or something that makes an Elven Fighters and Paladins seem vaguely magical alongside the iconic Wizards. This makes sense, and I think would be more interesting in game rather than just having +2 in a stat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
Stats are the absolute dumbest and blandest way to flavor different races. Bring back Large size. Give races actual racial abilities. More poo poo like lizardfolk’s cunning artisan and less poo poo like typecasting a race as the melee race by giving them +2 str
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2020 19:21
|
|
