Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Please consider removing racial Ability Score Increases!

I support the idea of giving players a choice between current racial attribute bonuses and +2 / +1 to selected attributes, for example via toggle. That would allow players to pick the suitable option and would also match the tabletop implementation.

Nah, they seems to be intact.
(I have seen some icon with Cloverleaf only on Halflings, so i dare to presume they still have Lucky.)

I would say calling races to be pure RP/Cosmetic choice to be a little extreme ...
Most races it will not affect at all ...
Some it even make weaker ... wich is kinda funny when you think about that ...
I cant really think about any that would get stronger by this ...

The only real effect is, that people will be able to pick really weird classes for their races ... that and that weaker part. :-/

Anyway, i agree with Maximuuus on that its really weird and imho pretty bad decision.

I asked in Queens thread again to make sure. I think halfelves will suffer the most, since they were able to get 4 extra points before.

Respectfully, I don't think that's true at all. As of now, picking a race for our class is trivial. Ability bonuses are an overwhelmingly strong factor and there is no racial feature that could even come close to compensating for not having at least a +1 to Intelligence on a Wizard. To me that's not the trait of a good character building system. When we get rid of racial bonuses, we'll have to look at the race's actual features. Some race-class combinations will end up on top, as they always do, but to tell the good options from the bad will require some degree of familiarity with the system and not just looking at a number.

It's true that some races or subraces may now become less attractive. Others may become more so. Combinations we wouldn't consider before become viable. I dare say if a race's usefulness hinges on having the correct number for a particular class, that race is poorly designed and the ability bonus was merely band-aid all along.

I am actually excited for new ways to play different races. After reflecting on the change for a few days I am slightly starting to find this whole change not that bad, considering I've already experimented with the old system for 1000+ hours.

Zero new ways to play races with the Tasha rules. Zero.

No.

Give me wrong example that the Tasha rule of 'put your stat bonuses where you want) fundamentally changes how you can play your character. As of now, I can play a dwarven sorcerer, a halfing warrior, an orcish bard, etc. Nothing about stats is stopping me from doing so.

I can't give you a perfect example from the top of my head actually. I am sure there are some still. But what I can recall immediately is that it lets you bump both of your non-combat stats. +2 INT, +1 WIS for example. It can open up some paths for multiclassing that were never as strong before.

Oh hey, maybe a generalized version of this is an option. Either

1.) You get the default ASIs for your race (e.g., +2/+2 for Mtn Dwarf or +2/+1 for Hill Dwarf - in the specific ability scores)
or
2.) You get strictly worse but free-floating ASIs (e.g., +2/+1 or Mtn Dwarf or +1/+1 for Hill Dwarf - in any ability scores)

People who don't want racial ASIs can still reach 16 in any two ability scores. But their character has spent so much effort overcoming their racial trait that they've suffered in properly developing other ability scores, as represented by the 1 less point.

Humans were already the worst race in EA. This change makes them even worse. I think dumping all racial attribute modifiers and giving all races a floating +2 and +1 is a very lazy design decision. There are certainly still very meaningful differences among the race choices but the fixed attribute bonuses were part of the balance and that is now tossed out the window.

A +1 difference in a d20 system is extremely important and it's full impact is easy to underestimate. If you begin as a dwarf sorcerer with 15 Charisma, you will remain behind every other spellcaster in your party for the rest of the game and that feels horrible. It's technically not stopping you from playing that character, true, but you'll be shooting yourself in the foot and I personally think that's discouragement enough.

Fully agree, humans were underwhelming and will continue to be even more so, but the way I see it the ASI on them was duct tape barely holding them together. Now that they fell apart, perhaps Larian will have some incentive to build them up again.

Wolfheartfps just released a video where he stated that we get to pick where the bonus's are so OP's wish has been granted.

Hopefully it will remain the same, and humans will be improved, and we all will win the lottery, but the version Wolf played was still a test version. It could have been a simplified sistem for the press as far as we know.

Until larian officially confirms anything, we know nothing for sure. (This is me hoping for a conversations improvement that will never happen)

I don't want to come off as unhinged, so please read this as if I'm calm and collected and not prone to hyperbole.

But respectfully, the goldfish and the great white shark are not equal. And when you create a system where the goldfish can be just as much of an alpha predator that uses strength and toughness to eat everything else as great white sharks, it really isn't easy to see the racial difference between the goldfish and the great white as anything other than a largely cosmetic difference.

Haflings are small and nimble. There's no rhyme or reason to them having just as much strength potential as someone who is half Orc. Meanwhile, someone who is half Orc is many things but elegant of foot and slight of frame is generally not one of them. Having a half Orc be as elegant as an Elf is just weird.

Yes, this change does open up a lot of new ways of playing characters. It does so by making the race of your character much less important and much more of a style choice. There are still racial features that might be relevant, such as movement speed or darkvision. But mostly we're ending up in a world where a human and a grizzly bear are totally the same, it's just that they have different proficiencies. And that is absolutely ridiculous. A level 1 grizzly will pwn a level 20 human in hand to hand combat. It won't even be tired afterwards. Similarly, a level 20 goldfish monk can kung fu punch a level 1 great white shark peasant all day and the great white probably wouldn't notice.

Different people are different. Different species are different. And that's entirely as it should be, in my opinion. But this change forces everybody and everything into the same box. And I don't think I like that at all.

True, the hypothetical 15 cha dwarf sorc will never catch up, but catch up with what exactly? When did D&D become a competition like that? And why does it make any kind of sense that every species has to have exactly the same potential for every possible profession?

Exactly my initial point.


The main counter-argument I've seen here was something among the lines of "but my halfling has been pumping iron for 10 years before the story even started".

ugghh terrible decision.

a halfling with equal strength to a half orc. Terrible.

My view would be if you are against removing racial ability scores they main point of concern should be more NPCs and less character creation. How other people choose to create their characters doesn't really affect anyone else but how Larian builds NPCs does. So as long as Larian uses the racial AS then there shouldn't be an issue.

My view is while I will usually pick the racial "canon" options I may occasionally decide to make an orc who is physically weaker than normal but more magically inclined or a halfling that is super strong and not as nimble. While atypical are still valid choices

Totally agree with you! Here's hoping Larian gives us the option to use the old racial ASI system.

D&D is a co-operative, party-based game though, so you can't just ignore PCs. While the other party members' characters don't directly affect my character, they still do so indirectly via comparison. If my 17-strength orc obtained that maximum strength possible to level 1 characters by having dedicated years to enhance his inherent physical strength through a training regimen that only the strongest and hardiest of races could endure, and then you roll up with your 17 strength gnome, owlkin, or fairy...that directly affects immersion and world consistency.

You can already do everything in that last paragraph with racial ASIs though. An Orc with 10 strength and 12 to 15 Int is "an orc who is physically weaker than normal but more magically inclined." A halfling with 12 to 15 strength and 10 Dex is a "halfling that is super strong and not as nimble."

Again, I'd be okay with one of many different solutions as long as they preserve sufficient & unique physical and mental differences that characterize the various fantasy races. Orcs getting no strength ASI in exchange for (the laughably useless) Powerful Build and the easily-obtainable-by-anyone Athletics Proficiency is not anywhere near sufficient imo.