I just don’t understand why people are so fixated on your stats being tied to your race. This change gives you more role playing options. I’m ecstatic that i can play my dwarf arcane trickster without feeling like I’m shooting myself in the foot. The choice between do I want my character to be good or do I want to play what I think is a fun idea is not an interesting decision. Races still have unique traits. The game is reportedly highly reactive to your race with lots of special roleplay options. And there is apparently even race specific equipment and gear.
Everybody is entitled to their opinions, but this objection completely eludes me. Wedding race to attributes is dumb, was always dumb, just like restricting classes to specific races back in the day. I’ve been playing D&D so long, I need to play weird characters just to keep it interesting. How is have each class possess a few mathematically superior race options an interesting choice? How many half-orc barbarians and gnome wizards do we need?
And the best part is, if you really feel that your half-orc wizard should have +2 to STR, you are free to make that choice. But if when given that choice, if you would always obviously always pick not to, why would you want that forced on everyone who wants to play this combination? A half-orc wizard isn’t benefiting from Savage Attacks and is missing out on the option to get a more useful racial trait, so there is still a strategic cost being payed. But at least you don’t need also lose out on a feet because you start with a defect in your primary stat.
Thanks for coming to my TEDTalk.
What I think those people (us, I guess?) are fixated on is having actual distinction between different species of creatures. And floating ASI is one less difference between them. It used to be that lizardmen and orcs had higher strength potential than smaller creatures, like haflings and gnomes. Then 5E changed it so they simply had a faster path to max strength and thus a feat advantage. And now, with floating ASI, your dragonborn has no higher strength potential than a halfling. How much do you have to suspend disbelief to make that work?
Wedding stats to races is in fact the only thing that actually does make sense, though of course it isn't political these days, nor is it newbie friendly. But if you step out of D&D for a moment and consider, say, Star Trek, then please don't tell me that you think Klingons and Humans should have the same base stats. Please don't tell me Klingons and Ferengi should have the same base stats.
Lastly, doesn't it strike you as the least bit funny that you start out talking about RP options, and then immediately switch to talking about meta considerations, like whether you're wasting a feat, whether you have the main stat at the right value, and so on? What in the flying fart of Zeus does that have to do with role playing? What I take from that is that you really want the "weird characters" but only if it doesn't have a cost to power gaming potential.
From my perspective, such an argument ignores that part of the weird character's charm is that you leave the meta behind in order to get more character flavor. Yes, you will fall behind a little bit. But you're in a party, are you not? Can they really not pick up that tiny bit of slack?
Or are we really going to accept the conclusion that characters that don't start with 16 main stat and beeline to max are hot garbage and totally unplayable? And if so, why exactly do you think the solution is to change racial bonuses to floating bonuses rather than creating more utility value for 15 main stat characters? By the way, if a 15 wisdom cleric is completely unplayable then why is it even legal in the first place?
