Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Ixal
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by Ixal
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Orc Wizard
He was cloistered and very educated.
But mechanics gives him a 13, +1. Only average~above average. Him being really smart and scholarly is already failing.
Should be a competent wizard, but a +1 is very far behind a +3 so he seems to others to be very weak, especially cause he only ever missed.

So my roleplay as a Orc Wizard, someone who isn't brutish and is supposed to be quite smart and competent in his own right, got boiled down to me failing and people noting that I was just bad at being both an Orc and a Wizard. Mechanics and character concept could not match. A competent character should only miss a few times a session, but a combination of bad luck and low stats meant I failed every kind of check related to my PRIMARY stat.

DnD is a roleplaying game. You want both roleplaying and game, and both are connected. Without one the other does not stand as well. Yes too strong or too minmaxed of a character can break RP but so can too weak of a character. I was able to roleplay initially but the game part breaking down meant the RP broke down. On another character, an aasimar celestial warlock, I was able to roleplay very effectively as a healer because mechanically I had that and

TLDR; Because DnD is a roleplaying game, both halves are important and contribute to eachother. Tasha's makes it easier to have a balance.

Your orc was very smart and educated compared to 99% of all other orcs and even to common humans.
Again, your only complaint is that you want more power because the role is perfectly playable without Tasha's and offers its unique challenges and journey.
Just own it that you want to powergame instead of playing the role of an orc wizard.

Then I recommend you try it, it feels very draining to roleplay failing again and again and again for a few hours. I have had sessions where I died, and sessions where I was useless, but the Orc Wizard, once I got past introduction roleplay (which was fun and engaging) became very very very unfun when the game parts came up. If stats did not exist at all, he would have been beyond fun, I loved the concept and plan to return to it with Tasha's in effect, but with stats it was bad. There were obviously checks where a plus one or two would have done nothing, but there were a lot where it was clear that I was missing by one or two. So I really might as well have not been there. History check, you don't know. Nature, you don't know. Firebolt, miss. Bonfire, they passed the DC 11. That was the experience where the game mechanics and the roleplay concept no longer matched for me.

That you found it no fun is on you and maybe on your DM. And when you use Tasha you are not revisiting this concept, but are playing something very different (human or elf wizard, depending on how you exchange stats).
And by the way I currently play what in D&D would probably be translated as a Goliath or Half-Orc support bard with more of a ranged focus despite having a dex penalty. So you can save your "you try it".

I just realized in writing it sounded more hostile than I intended at all.
I should have rather typed out to simulate playing a character with a true penalty in the primary stat, it creates a rough experience and in an average campaign it will typically be less fun.
I apologize for my hostile tone.

Back to topic, how is it that I am not playing an Orc if my ASIs aren't the recommended Orcs? I still have every other racial trait, the conflict of being an educated orc and both a connection and disconnect to orcish culture. Saying I wouldn't be an orc is reducing race to their ASIs when they are way more than that.

Also I don't think Goliaths get any penalty to dex? They have a neutral one and would be considered unoptimized but sounds like something I'd try to play. An inspiring loud goliath with war drums (maybe drum stick clubs for a more frontline build?) sounds like something fun to try later. They would be 'better' with a cha bonus and I'd likely be tempted to get the 16 using tasha's but a 14 is better than a 12 definitely, and pre tasha's I would have rolled with a 14.

Joined: Jul 2009
I
old hand
Offline
old hand
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
I just realized in writing it sounded more hostile than I intended at all.
I should have rather typed out to simulate playing a character with a true penalty in the primary stat, it creates a rough experience and in an average campaign it will typically be less fun.
I apologize for my hostile tone.

Back to topic, how is it that I am not playing an Orc if my ASIs aren't the recommended Orcs? I still have every other racial trait, the conflict of being an educated orc and both a connection and disconnect to orcish culture. Saying I wouldn't be an orc is reducing race to their ASIs when they are way more than that.

Also I don't think Goliaths get any penalty to dex? They have a neutral one and would be considered unoptimized but sounds like something I'd try to play. An inspiring loud goliath with war drums (maybe drum stick clubs for a more frontline build?) sounds like something fun to try later. They would be 'better' with a cha bonus and I'd likely be tempted to get the 16 using tasha's but a 14 is better than a 12 definitely, and pre tasha's I would have rolled with a 14.
The ASI are part of the race. A rather significant part as culture can change through upbringing (not to mention that even in the FR there would not be only a single culture for orcs). But your biology stays with you no matter what you do and the biology of what you play would be not orc but human or elf depending on how you change the stats.
The struggles of having a low int are part of being an orc. If you change that the role you play is no different than for example being a dwarf wizard.

And I said translated into D&D because its from a different D20 game. Goliath or Half Orc would probably the closest approximation of what I play.
Large race, big boost in strength with a dex penalty and a class which is a fragile supporter which requires charisma, intelligence and for combat dexterity.

Last edited by Ixal; 22/02/21 12:43 AM.
Joined: Oct 2017
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2017
It helps if you think of Orcs in terms of a species instead of a race as we use the word race in the real world. Lets say hypothetically elephants were a playable race and they got +6 con due to their tough hide+body but -6 int. The stats here are an abstraction of what an elephant is, these are parts of the biological makeup of the animal. If you were to Tasha's rules the -6 int away at the expense of the Con because the elephant has the Enlightened Elephant Ancestry, you are erasing what makes an elephant an elephant, because part of what makes it what it is is the fact that it has a tough hide. The stat bonuses are an abstraction of some component of the makeup of the race that defines it as what it is.

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by Scribe
I've yet to see an argument where you simply MUST get that +3 to your main stat, for RP, while a +2 is just utterly unacceptable.

Orc Wizard
He was cloistered and very educated.
But mechanics gives him a 13, +1. Only average~above average. Him being really smart and scholarly is already failing.
Should be a competent wizard, but a +1 is very far behind a +3 so he seems to others to be very weak, especially cause he only ever missed.

So my roleplay as a Orc Wizard, someone who isn't brutish and is supposed to be quite smart and competent in his own right, got boiled down to me failing and people noting that I was just bad at being both an Orc and a Wizard. Mechanics and character concept could not match. A competent character should only miss a few times a session, but a combination of bad luck and low stats meant I failed every kind of check related to my PRIMARY stat.

DnD is a roleplaying game. You want both roleplaying and game, and both are connected. Without one the other does not stand as well. Yes too strong or too minmaxed of a character can break RP but so can too weak of a character. I was able to roleplay initially but the game part breaking down meant the RP broke down. On another character, an aasimar celestial warlock, I was able to roleplay very effectively as a healer because mechanically I had that and

TLDR; Because DnD is a roleplaying game, both halves are important and contribute to eachother. Tasha's makes it easier to have a balance.

You can have a 15, I dont know where you source your information from.

Orc Features
Source: Volo's Guide to Monsters
Ability Score Increase. Your Strength score increases by 2 and your Constitution score increases by 1.

Check your Errata.

Orc Traits (p. 120). In the Ability Score Increase trait, the text
has changed to read “Your Strength score increases by 2 and
your Constitution score increases by 1.” The adjustment to Intelligence has been removed.

https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/VGtM-Errata.pdf

Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Ixal
Your orc was very smart and educated compared to 99% of all other orcs and even to common humans.
Again, your only complaint is that you want more power because the role is perfectly playable without Tasha's and offers its unique challenges and journey.
Just own it that you want to powergame instead of playing the role of an orc wizard.

It’ll go back and forth ad nausem.

Are people offended by being described as a power gamer? Is it because it’s referred negatively as munchkinism?

There’s nothing wrong with power gaming. You can roleplay and power game. It’s perfectly fine and I’d wager if we were all honest, the majority power game in their roleplay.

People seem to consider Critical Role as the pinnacle of roleplay (I see it as acting and theatrics) and it’s entertaining at times but if you look at their stats, yeah min maxed. And that’s okay.


Its usually cause Powergaming isn't exactly well defined so often has very negative connotations. A phrase like "You are not roleplaying, you are powergaming" that I have seen elsewhere creates a connotation (thought not explicitly) that the two are indeed completely separate and that by engaging with one, you are not doing the other, even if that is not the intended meaning.
In circles I frequent, a Powergamer is often someone who ONLY cares about the game aspect, usually minmaxing, and does not engage with the Roleplaying aspect at all.
I have seen other definitions, where it is just synonymous with minmaxing or the definitions others have provided in this thread.
And often I have seen "powergaming" the reason Tasha's optional rule is bad cause it detracts from roleplay somehow.
So often it has a very negative connotation and the idea that it is mutually exclusive from roleplaying, when the two can be very connected due to the structure of 5e.

Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by Scribe
I've yet to see an argument where you simply MUST get that +3 to your main stat, for RP, while a +2 is just utterly unacceptable.

Orc Wizard
He was cloistered and very educated.
But mechanics gives him a 13, +1. Only average~above average. Him being really smart and scholarly is already failing.
Should be a competent wizard, but a +1 is very far behind a +3 so he seems to others to be very weak, especially cause he only ever missed.

So my roleplay as a Orc Wizard, someone who isn't brutish and is supposed to be quite smart and competent in his own right, got boiled down to me failing and people noting that I was just bad at being both an Orc and a Wizard. Mechanics and character concept could not match. A competent character should only miss a few times a session, but a combination of bad luck and low stats meant I failed every kind of check related to my PRIMARY stat.

DnD is a roleplaying game. You want both roleplaying and game, and both are connected. Without one the other does not stand as well. Yes too strong or too minmaxed of a character can break RP but so can too weak of a character. I was able to roleplay initially but the game part breaking down meant the RP broke down. On another character, an aasimar celestial warlock, I was able to roleplay very effectively as a healer because mechanically I had that and

TLDR; Because DnD is a roleplaying game, both halves are important and contribute to eachother. Tasha's makes it easier to have a balance.

You can have a 15, I dont know where you source your information from.

Orc Features
Source: Volo's Guide to Monsters
Ability Score Increase. Your Strength score increases by 2 and your Constitution score increases by 1.

Check your Errata.

Orc Traits (p. 120). In the Ability Score Increase trait, the text
has changed to read “Your Strength score increases by 2 and
your Constitution score increases by 1.” The adjustment to Intelligence has been removed.

https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/VGtM-Errata.pdf

I was actually not aware of this, I played Orc Wizard long before the errata I think? But the negative being gone is good, really good.

Edit: Apparently this was October last year this got changed? I guess I failed to get the news on that particular change. But I like it.

Second Edit: My old copy of Volo's has the -2 to Strength for Kobolds and -2 to Int for Orcs so my source was my Volo's Guide to Monster (pre Errata). And my experience with said book before Tasha's and before the Errata.

Last edited by CJMPinger; 22/02/21 01:23 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
You can RP as effectively at Str 15 as a Halfing, as you can at Str 16.

No, you can't. That is what I am saying.

You can roleplay the personality just fine. You cannot roleplay their combat effectiveness just fine unless you happen to just roll better than an equivalent character in the group. Your stats don't reflect the reality of the character you're trying to play because no matter how well you roleplay it you'll always be missing or failing to cast 5-10% more often on average.

Over the course of a large game that starts to add up.

Originally Posted by Scribe
Fact, its simply a desire due to the mechanics of the game. Its min/max, nothing more.

You don't get to tell me what the basis of my own desires are. I know what kind of player I am and my motivations for liking Tasha's rules. You rejecting my explanation basically means you're calling me a liar and I don't appreciate that.

Originally Posted by Scribe
In a SP RPG? I couldnt care less.

And yet you seem to care quite a lot about what options are available to me in my single player RPG. Why is that?

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
No I dont, there is a Tasha's mod right now. Feel free.

Joined: Feb 2021
P
addict
Offline
addict
P
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Oh God dude, you are stepping into a quagmire of social agenda the likes you have ever seen lol. In today's environment, penalizing a character (even in a fantasy game) for racial choices is a big no no. Everyone has to be equal or else the world will explode 8P

Oh I know. I just don’t care. I don’t need to be validated by strangers or need their affirmation.

I am so glad I quit D&D when I did before they made all of these crazy changes to racial bonuses etc. There was a real purpose to choosing your race back then, their backstory and accepting the negative limitations to said race. Nowadays, I just see the new rules as a bland state of meh. Be any race you want, be any class you want with any ability. I mean I know why they did it, to make the game more accepted with the younger generation, but in the end I think it just lost something. Either way, glad they are not going to include them personally.

It was also great to play in the day without die hard min/maxing etc.

Last edited by Pandemonica; 22/02/21 03:27 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Oh God dude, you are stepping into a quagmire of social agenda the likes you have ever seen lol. In today's environment, penalizing a character (even in a fantasy game) for racial choices is a big no no. Everyone has to be equal or else the world will explode 8P

Oh I know. I just don’t care. I don’t need to be validated by strangers or need their affirmation.

I am so glad I quit D&D when I did before they made all of these crazy changes to racial bonuses etc. There was a real purpose to choosing your race back then, their backstory and accepting the negative limitations to said race. Nowadays, I just see the new rules as a bland state of meh. Be any race you want, be any class you want with any ability. I mean I know why they did it, to make the game more accepted with the younger generation, but in the end I think it just lost something. Either way, glad they are not going to include them personally.

It was also great to play in the day without die hard min/maxing etc.

100% agreed.

I just play it how I want at my table, which is with the ASI and all that being how it should be.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Oh God dude, you are stepping into a quagmire of social agenda the likes you have ever seen lol. In today's environment, penalizing a character (even in a fantasy game) for racial choices is a big no no. Everyone has to be equal or else the world will explode 8P

Oh I know. I just don’t care. I don’t need to be validated by strangers or need their affirmation.

I am so glad I quit D&D when I did before they made all of these crazy changes to racial bonuses etc. There was a real purpose to choosing your race back then, their backstory and accepting the negative limitations to said race. Nowadays, I just see the new rules as a bland state of meh. Be any race you want, be any class you want with any ability. I mean I know why they did it, to make the game more accepted with the younger generation, but in the end I think it just lost something. Either way, glad they are not going to include them personally.

It was also great to play in the day without die hard min/maxing etc.

Yeah. I don't necessary want to bash anyone how they roleplay but the style has definitely changed. Even character death is rare. Now, it's not like my characters died all the time in the past but there was always a big fear that the next dungeon would be the last. The rules now are so in favor of the player characters, you really have to try to die.

Heh, if LotR was written today, Sam and Frodo would have dropped kicked their way to Mt. Doom. :P

Last edited by spectralhunter; 22/02/21 04:00 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
@Dexai, I'm getting lost in that discussion. I can see how I said something about a certain character concept being roleplaying. Then I can see you said I should use the word power-gaming instead of roleplaying. In my understanding, that means that there is something, which to me is both roleplay and power-gaming but to you is power-gaming only. So I said that perhaps you simply have different definitions, which imply that not all roleplaying is compatible with all power-gaming. And I said "that's fine" because I didn't want to argue definitions. I don't see where you see a strawman there. But nevermind, let me ask a different question.

@RagnarokCzD, spectralhunter : thanks for your answers.


Ok, now, it seems that most people here agree that one can be roleplaying and power-gaming simultaneously. But not everyone agrees on what is encompassed by roleplaying and what is encompassed by power-gaming. So let me consider 4 characters. They are all level 1. And Orcs have +2 Strength, +1 Constitution and -2 Intelligence, as per VGtM.

  • Awnka is an Orc Barbarian who has 16 Strength. (She is strong, proud, ambitious and will crush the skull of anyone who would think of telling her "no, you can't".)
  • Bolg is an Orc Fighter who has 14 Strength. (He was always left out of the prestigious missions for the tribe, so he left to purse what he wants and to prove his worth to the world.)
  • Ceega is an Orc Wizard who has 14 Intelligence. (She was was trained by an Arcane Brother who kicker her for being not useful good enough. She now wanders and hope to continue with magic.)
  • Dench is an Orc Wizard who has 16 Intelligence. (He was raised in Silverymoon during the peace, but felt it would be much safer to leave when war with the Orcs broke out.)

I think that some, if not most, people would agree that playing Awnka or Dench qualifies as power-gaming.

But which ones qualify as role-playing ?

To me, all four characters are acceptable. But a player who wants to roleplay and power-game at the same time will probably choose Awnka or Dench.

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
The whole issue is in declaring 15 not good enough.

It is. If one feels it isn't there is no argument, that's a minmax point of view.

Joined: Feb 2021
P
addict
Offline
addict
P
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Oh God dude, you are stepping into a quagmire of social agenda the likes you have ever seen lol. In today's environment, penalizing a character (even in a fantasy game) for racial choices is a big no no. Everyone has to be equal or else the world will explode 8P

Oh I know. I just don’t care. I don’t need to be validated by strangers or need their affirmation.

I am so glad I quit D&D when I did before they made all of these crazy changes to racial bonuses etc. There was a real purpose to choosing your race back then, their backstory and accepting the negative limitations to said race. Nowadays, I just see the new rules as a bland state of meh. Be any race you want, be any class you want with any ability. I mean I know why they did it, to make the game more accepted with the younger generation, but in the end I think it just lost something. Either way, glad they are not going to include them personally.

It was also great to play in the day without die hard min/maxing etc.

Yeah. I don't necessary want to bash anyone how they roleplay but the style has definitely changed. Even character death is rare. Now, it's not like my characters died all the time in the past but there was always a big fear that the next dungeon would be the last. The rules now are so in favor of the player characters, you really have to try to die.

Heh, if LotR was written today, Sam and Frodo would have dropped kicked their way to Mt. Doom. :P

I remember when I played (I mentioned these characters in another thread about my first characters) I have a twin sibling character set. A chaotic/neutral Wizard female and her brother a good warrior. The ONLY thing she cared about and would protect was her brother. Besides that, anything was game. We were in this dungeon deep. The brother had this incredible magic sword. He got mortally wounded, we were about to all die so the team decided to run. The hardest decision I ever had to make, and really think about the character as a chaotic/neutral human female (because I couldn't make her a strong female wizard because...well I thought it would be a cool backstory...she had to come to the decision to leave her brother to die and take his magic sword. Her brother was a big guy, so no way she could carry him. My point is, it had consequences. My warrior died. My Wizard lived. But man that was tough to know I couldn't play him again. It is a shame to not have death as a possibility at any moment if that is the way it is. The risk of permadeath is what makes things the most memorable.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
I remember when I played (I mentioned these characters in another thread about my first characters) I have a twin sibling character set. A chaotic/neutral Wizard female and her brother a good warrior. The ONLY thing she cared about and would protect was her brother. Besides that, anything was game. We were in this dungeon deep. The brother had this incredible magic sword. He got mortally wounded, we were about to all die so the team decided to run. The hardest decision I ever had to make, and really think about the character as a chaotic/neutral human female (because I couldn't make her a strong female wizard because...well I thought it would be a cool backstory...she had to come to the decision to leave her brother to die and take his magic sword. Her brother was a big guy, so no way she could carry him. My point is, it had consequences. My warrior died. My Wizard lived. But man that was tough to know I couldn't play him again. It is a shame to not have death as a possibility at any moment if that is the way it is. The risk of permadeath is what makes things the most memorable.

That’s a cool story. I almost always play LG or NG to avoid moral dilemmas like that. My characters are basically, “we all go or we all die” unless someone is volunteering to make the ultimate sacrifice and hold the line so others can escape.

I’ve even retired characters after a punishing dungeon run where a couple of party members died. After that, he decided it just wasn’t worth it and hung up his sword.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
Originally Posted by Scribe
The whole issue is in declaring 15 not good enough.

It is. If one feels it isn't there is no argument, that's a minmax point of view.

First, to be clear, when I described 4 Orc characters with 14 or 16 Strength or Intelligence, I only used the values 14 and 16 because 15 is essentially the same as 14 (unless you have two odd numbers you want to increase by 1 at level 4, yes, just assume everybody dies from falling rocks when they reach level 4).

Second, whether 15 is good enough is not the whole issue. Personally I generally wouldn't choose to play a character with less than 16, especially in BG3 (I would not call this min-maxing, but only power-gaming, as min-maxing involves taking this to the extreme). But if everybody on the table wants to try a suboptimal character, why not. However, part of the issue is also whether a roleplayer should be allowed to play with, say, Dench the 16 Intelligence Wizard. Which of the four above characters would you consider allow for roleplaying to take place ?

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
For RP, I do not see any difference between 14 and 16, aka 2 or 3.

It's a mechanical/crunch consideration only.

Minmax/Powergame/optimization, these are not bad words to me. These are all saying the same thing.

'I am doing this for how it interacts with the rules.'

A +1 difference in your primary attribute is not worth any RP concern.

I'm a smart Orc, is as true at 14, as it is 16.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Drath Malorn
Ok, now, it seems that most people here agree that one can be roleplaying and power-gaming simultaneously. But not everyone agrees on what is encompassed by roleplaying and what is encompassed by power-gaming. So let me consider 4 characters. They are all level 1. And Orcs have +2 Strength, +1 Constitution and -2 Intelligence, as per VGtM.

  • Awnka is an Orc Barbarian who has 16 Strength. (She is strong, proud, ambitious and will crush the skull of anyone who would think of telling her "no, you can't".)
  • Bolg is an Orc Fighter who has 14 Strength. (He was always left out of the prestigious missions for the tribe, so he left to purse what he wants and to prove his worth to the world.)
  • Ceega is an Orc Wizard who has 14 Intelligence. (She was was trained by an Arcane Brother who kicker her for being not useful good enough. She now wanders and hope to continue with magic.)
  • Dench is an Orc Wizard who has 16 Intelligence. (He was raised in Silverymoon during the peace, but felt it would be much safer to leave when war with the Orcs broke out.)

I think that some, if not most, people would agree that playing Awnka or Dench qualifies as power-gaming.

But which ones qualify as role-playing ?

To me, all four characters are acceptable. But a player who wants to roleplay and power-game at the same time will probably choose Awnka or Dench.
It seem like unasnwerable question ... we dont have enough data to decide. :-/
Not like it seem actualy important since we are talking about single player game here ... and in co-op multiplayers its more important what that particular bunch of people agree on ...
On the other hand, why not speculate for a while. :P

If Ceega, or Dench are super Intelligent, but dumped wisdom to the ground ... it seem a bit odd and therefore i would concider them to be more power-playing than role-playing.
I know those stats are not complementary conected, but it seem odd that one mental stat is sky high and other one completely forgoten. :-/

But to only concider their main stat ...
I dont see any reason to not concider any of them potentialy good characters, in measures of role-play ... after all, every character, no matter how effective or noneffective builded could be played both well, and horrible. laugh
Personaly i also use right stats for right characters ...
After all, no Wizzard would choose as his novice the dumest child he found. :-/ As well as no Barbarian would teach the weakest child with missing both limbs. :-/ And if that makes me powergamer in eyes of some uknown guy on other side of the planet? Well, so be it. laugh


If my comments bother you, there is nothing easier than telling me to stop.
I mean ... I won't ... but it's easy to say. wink
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
For RP, I do not see any difference between 14 and 16, aka 2 or 3.

It's a mechanical/crunch consideration only.

Minmax/Powergame/optimization, these are not bad words to me. These are all saying the same thing.

'I am doing this for how it interacts with the rules.'

A +1 difference in your primary attribute is not worth any RP concern.

I'm a smart Orc, is as true at 14, as it is 16.

The mechanics and crunch are part of the roleplay experience, though. A fighter with 16 strength is objectively a better fighter in-universe than one with 14 strength because we're roleplaying by using the game of Dungeons and Dragons as a medium. There is no way within the rules of the game to not use the game statistics to resolve combat, which is why your attributes are a roleplay consideration.

Heck, you even acknowledge it as a roleplay consideration because you accept the racial ASIs as a part of your character.

But you're also arguing that our desire to alter our racial ASIs is NOT a roleplay consideration for reasons that seem pretty arbitrary to my eyes.

At the end of the day Dungeons and Dragons, all the mechanics and stats that make the game, are the medium we're roleplaying in. You can't really separate your character's roleplay from the statistics of the game. If you did you'd not be playing Dungeons and Dragons anymore, you'd be doing a narrative roleplay set in Forgotten Realms.

Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
If Ceega, or Dench are super Intelligent, but dumped wisdom to the ground ... it seem a bit odd and therefore i would concider them to be more power-playing than role-playing.
I know those stats are not complementary conected, but it seem odd that one mental stat is sky high and other one completely forgoten. :-/

In my experience having your racial ASIs in the right spots actually adds a lot of flexibility to the other ASIs because of how the stats work. A +1 at 13 to reach 14 saves you 2 points in total, which can be placed in a tertiary or dump stat to round out your character's personality better.

Which is another reason I favor Tasha's as a roleplayer. It makes it easier to play a decently educated dragonborn druid or a halfling bard that didn't skip leg day and is decently fit. These small +1s don't matter as much mechanically but add nice flavor to the character that might be situationally useful down the road.

Last edited by SaurianDruid; 22/02/21 11:18 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by SaurianDruid
Originally Posted by Scribe
For RP, I do not see any difference between 14 and 16, aka 2 or 3.

It's a mechanical/crunch consideration only.

Minmax/Powergame/optimization, these are not bad words to me. These are all saying the same thing.

'I am doing this for how it interacts with the rules.'

A +1 difference in your primary attribute is not worth any RP concern.

I'm a smart Orc, is as true at 14, as it is 16.

The mechanics and crunch are part of the roleplay experience, though. A fighter with 16 strength is objectively a better fighter in-universe than one with 14 strength because we're roleplaying by using the game of Dungeons and Dragons as a medium. There is no way within the rules of the game to not use the game statistics to resolve combat, which is why your attributes are a roleplay consideration.

Heck, you even acknowledge it as a roleplay consideration because you accept the racial ASIs as a part of your character.

But you're also arguing that our desire to alter our racial ASIs is NOT a roleplay consideration for reasons that seem pretty arbitrary to my eyes.

At the end of the day Dungeons and Dragons, all the mechanics and stats that make the game, are the medium we're roleplaying in. You can't really separate your character's roleplay from the statistics of the game. If you did you'd not be playing Dungeons and Dragons anymore, you'd be doing a narrative roleplay set in Forgotten Realms.

Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
If Ceega, or Dench are super Intelligent, but dumped wisdom to the ground ... it seem a bit odd and therefore i would concider them to be more power-playing than role-playing.
I know those stats are not complementary conected, but it seem odd that one mental stat is sky high and other one completely forgoten. :-/

In my experience having your racial ASIs in the right spots actually adds a lot of flexibility to the other ASIs because of how the stats work. A +1 at 13 to reach 14 saves you 2 points in total, which can be placed in a tertiary or dump stat to round out your character's personality better.

Which is another reason I favor Tasha's as a roleplayer. It makes it easier to play a decently educated dragonborn druid or a halfling bard that didn't skip leg day and is decently fit. These small +1s don't matter as much mechanically but add nice flavor to the character that might be situationally useful down the road.

I'm sorry, I just disagree. Your RP, your story, is not tied explicitly to one value or another.

An orc with 14 int, is smart.
An orc with 16 int, is smart.

That +1 on your spell's DC, is not game breaking. Its just optimization. It has nothing to do with RP.

If you want to argue about what it does to the flexability of your OTHER ASI, then you are simply proving my point further. It is about the mechanical crunch. The optimization. It is not an RP concern.

Again, go nuts and have fun. There is a Tasha's mod right now, but if they make it into the 'official' version of BG3, I'll just have 1 more thing to mod out of the game.

Page 8 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5