1. Losing +1 modifier for main spell-casting stat is not "shooting yourself in a foot". You massively overstate the importance of having a +3 instead of +2. It's more visible for martials, but it's never character breaking. 16 int wizard being great and 15 int wizard sucking is just not true. In cases when it would made a massive difference you probably shouldn't rely on DC spells anyway (+1 to DC matters a lot when your chance of actually beating their save is low, meaning you probably should do something else). In 3.5e or Pathfinder the difference is a lot bigger since a lot of class features scale with your main stat, 5e is a different beast.
2. You could build Tiefling Druid that performs great (and Druid can be the least stat reliant class in the game). And the same goes probably for most classes. Some races might be tougher and some easier, but it's doable. I cannot possibly fathom all the race/class choices that one mind find massively underpowered, hence I used the example given.
3. Floating stat bonus doesn't really prevent you from feeling penalized. Why would you play a High Elf or Tiefling wizard when you could play a Shield Dwarf with the same stats and additionally use medium armor. Why would you ever play any other race than Drow as ranged character? That darkvision increase is incredible. Why would you play a frontline that is not Gold Dwarf for that toughness. Or Barbarian or Champion that is not a half-orc...
It doesn't fix a supposed problem while ruining race identity,
1. 5e uses Bound Accuracy, so a +1 is 5% and that's a lot more than you seem to think it is, especially as enemies get more AC and higher saves. There's a reason Proficiency takes so long to get up and you can't normally start with an 18 in any stat and it takes 4 entire levels for most classes to get more ASI's. It's also a difference in number of spells prepared, saving throws, and in the case of Dexterity for noncasters, AC, initiative, saves, stealth, and for some even accuracy and damage. +1 is a huge deal, that's why we love +1 weapons, +1 armor, artificers in 5e using +1 spell foci, the PHB and DMG originally left out +1 foci from the game because they were afraid they would be too strong. They added them later, but even then, most DMs will give out a +3 greatsword before giving the wizard a +2 spell focus. Cantrips cause status effects, slowing enemies with Ray of Frost, stopping healing from Chill Touch, Preventing reactions with Shocking Grasp. A lot of your most basic attack options can make a huge impact when they hit, so you want them to hit, so that 5% in the long game is a huge deal because you use that 5% almost every single action, reaction, and bonus action that is relevant which adds up very quickly. If it's important for even your cantrips to succeed, imagine having your spell slots fail you. A lot of status require multiple saving throws, like hold or charm person, so each saving throw tests that 5% chance on even a single spell, so sometimes that 5% is applied two or three times in a single round. It's a lot.
In pathfinder 2e a +1 is actually not a very big deal since you add your level to everything... so I have to VERY strongly disagree there. I don't care about about losing a +1 in favor of having a little more charisma to make a fun character in Pathfinder 2e. Having played both systems twice a week for years now, +1 is a way bigger deal in 5e than in most other systems. I say this as a player and a DM. 5% alone may not seem like a lot on a single roll. 5% 15 times in a single fight is a lot. 5% for 8 levels is definitely an absolute ton. You need to have some forward thinking to see how many times that 5% made you fail.
2. You're talking about the very thing I said. You
can make an effective one, and you'll see below, if you can float ASI you still
can, nothing is stopping you from making a Charisma Druid, but with floating ASI, you are doing it because you
want to not because you
have to. You're just using more conjecture.
Let me answer number 3 for you with something I already said.
For some people, if the option to be overpowered exists, they cannot allow themselves to take anything less. I, for example, actually really like high charisma or intelligence Barbarians, which is sub-optimal because Wisdom then falls off and I have a weak saving throw, so I am sort of hurting myself there, and when I tell people at my tables that's what I want to play and end up with a 14 in Charisma they give me a weird side eye like having the overpowered option of picking Variant Human and having 17 str 16 con 14 dex and 14 wis was possible and picking either GWM or Resilliant: Wisdom was possible, so why am I a Tiefling who can't cast spells while raging, dropping wisdom, and picking up a stat that's never used in combat? Well, because it's fun, but some people can't bring themselves to do that. I just want to play as Gorge, the Half Orc negotiator who is definitely capable of handling it if the negotiations go south, instead of Gorge, the half orc in the back that stays there until things to bad. He fight good and that all he do, that's boring.
I guess what I'm saying is it can remove the fun for some people because they will only ever create a character that has the best stats for their role and blame the possibility of min-maxing on their actual min-maxing, which isn't how it works at all, if you think min-maxing removes creativity, just... don't do it? But not everyone thinks like that. If they can, they will feel compelled to. That's why maybe when you click New Game you can just opt in, since mods will add it anyway this functionally makes it an Opt In anyway, even though it being on by default is also opt in since when you change race the game can just automatically select the default ASI... The character Elebhra is describing still exists, which is ironic because they are also saying they wouldn't do it if they could do something better, but a dexterous wizard can still be a fun thematic choice especially if they impliment GFB or other such cantrips so their weapon damage with daggers does scale up, you'd just be opting into it as opposed to being forced into it, and like I said, some people cannot bring themselves to opt into weaker choices for the sake of thematics, roleplay, or fun.
Of note, floating ability scores also opens more roleplay options like a nerdy Barbarian or such builds without being human, since you may just want a +1 to 3 stats. I would be choosing to remove optimization in favor of roleplaying options.
Race Identity is not the problem. Limiting thematics and roleplay fantasies is. Player agency for what they
want to play. If they want to powerplay? Fine. If they don't? Also fine. But as an advocate of player choice, roleplay, and thematic choices, I have to say choosing stats is important, roleplayers and min-maxers alike will mod the feature in anyway, so why not just build it into the game? If you don't want to do it, just... don't? One of my favorite 5e characters I've ever played was a Tiefling Bard and I actually
removed one point from the racial bonus of Charisma and put it into Strength. At the end of the campaign his Charisma was 16 but his strength was 20. The character I wanted to play was a buff based gish but I don't like Hexblade as much as Bard so I changed it up by making a Bard that had Smite as a racial trait and then took smites with my Magical Secrets at 10. This Valor Bard used spells that didn't consider your spell mod, such as Heroism, Aid, Enhance Ability, Enlarge/Reduce, so on and so forth. So yes you totally can make characters that have sub-optimal main stats, my greatsword wielding, smiting, and inspirational leader bard is proof of that, but the point is I was able to make the character I genuinely
wanted to play while taking away from what is technically Best in Slot. If I wanted to BiS him he would have had 1 point in hexblade, but I didn't, I wanted to have fun with a strength Bard who started adventuring because he was sick of being a theatrical gladiator. Most fun I've had. Nobody is arguing you can't make it work, but you can make suboptimal choices less punishing and more fun. At the end of the day Half Elves still make the best Warlocks, High Elves still make the best wizards, Dwarves and Half Orcs still make the best Barbarians and Fighters, but floating stats allows us to close the gap.
EDIT And back on point 2, if you have the +1 sooner at level 1 that means you cap at 20 very early which means you have more room for feats that can either A) make a character stronger or B) bolster the characters roleplaying concept, so it brings an option for people who want to min-max by substantially increasing their power, or provides creativity in a character not built for power without making the weaker, because being weak feels bad. Your logic is extremely flawed because if a +1 really isn't a big deal, why would you ever play anything besides the aforementioned Dwarf Wizard?
