New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 6 of 47 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151631 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 1387
  1. - Top - End - #151
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2020

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    A promising way to introduce stronger species would be to sacrifice ASIs. Sort of like how Variant Human has fewer racial traits in exchange for getting an earlier feat.

    For example imagine an Ogre that started out like a Goliath but their first ASI is spent representing reaching their adult height as a Large creature?
    Mmm. Maybe instead of implementing ogre strength as a +STR modifier, do something like "if you start with less than 17 STR, your STR becomes 17." That way, your ogre is equally strong with the strongest non-ogre of that level, but not stronger. (A bit like how Tortles are guaranteed a high AC just for being a Tortle, but it doesn't break bounded accuracy because it doesn't stack with armor.)

    Of course, that only works if the intention is to have average ogre strength. If the player wants to be exceptionally strong for an ogre, like how the human barbarian is exceptionally strong for a human, that's not gonna work.

  2. - Top - End - #152
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Zhorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Space Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    The underlying principle is if you;
    • are selecting a race because it gives a specific +bonus to a stat you want, or
    • are not using a race because it lacks a specific +bonus to a stat you want
    then you are using a method of power gaming to optimize your character.

    At the end of the day, the mechanics of the Tasha's floating ASI and custom lineage system are only about min/max'ing.
    Last edited by Zhorn; 2021-11-13 at 11:28 PM. Reason: typo

  3. - Top - End - #153
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunderous Mojo View Post
    This response, strikes me as eliding the question that was asked.
    A 16 in a prime stat was being held up as the line where a player becomes a powergamer?

    I wonder what is gained by setting that as the requisite 'red line'?
    (This is a question, not rhetoric)
    I don't think its helpful to call anyone who makes vaguely 'good' decisions about how to allocate their stats a power gamer. But I do think that a player who feels that a character concept is unworkable because of a missing +1 is definitionally a player who cares a lot about optimization, or, in other words, a power gamer.

    This isn't a bad thing, to be clear.

    But the truth is, for most of the major races, there weren't really any 'bad' race/class combos. Half-Orc Sorcerer? Well, they can use that intimidation better than a barbarian or fighter, they really want a durability bonus, and sorcerers are arguably better suited for buffing than anything, which makes the marginally lower Charisma irrelevant. Gnome Barbarian? Spell resistance is amazing on a barbarian, and the various cantrips you can get are great too. You can't go for a GWM build, but reckless can compensate for the slight amount of accuracy you're missing, and TWF barbarians are totally viable.

    Basically what I'm saying here is that generally "off-brand" race choices underperformed (slightly) in the core of the archetype, but also tended to have fewer weaknesses elsewhere, and even from a pure powergamer perspective there's an argument for going off brand. The only races you don't want to go off brand with are things like Dragonborn which is just flatly undertuned. Or maybe monk, which is a tad MAD.

    Either way, now if you really want to have the max possible stat at level 1, you need a custom lineage with a half-feat that boosts your primary stat. If having the max possible starting stat at level 1 was so important to you before, its still important right now, right? So then your options, mechanically, are incredibly constrained.

    I think this is bad design.

    I'm not opposed to the custom lineage rule in principle, I just think its poorly implemented, and I also don't like new races getting gutted of any features that were deemed "cultural"

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunderous Mojo View Post
    "While I'm asking critical question, I have to wonder why the definition of powergaming includes "player fulfilling a fantasy through their character in a way that impacts the game world" but not "DM fulfilling a fantasy through the game world in a way that impacts the player characters"."

    Why is the label of 'Powergamer' being applied to players, and not DMs?
    (Again, a question I am curious about, not a point of rhetoric)
    Your friend isn't making sense to me.

    DMs don't need to powergame because they control everything. A DM who's trying to manipulate the rules to effect the players can just have rocks fall and kill everyone.

    What DMs should do, is try to cultivate a specific feel that is enjoyable for everyone at the table. Happy players, happy DM (and the reverse, of course).
    Make Martials Cool Again.

  4. - Top - End - #154
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    A promising way to introduce stronger species would be to sacrifice ASIs. Sort of like how Variant Human has fewer racial traits in exchange for getting an earlier feat.

    For example imagine an Ogre that started out like a Goliath but their first ASI is spent representing reaching their adult height as a Large creature?

    Dragon probably would cost 2 ASIs.

    I like the idea of balanced monster classes. They are hard to fit into 5E's "we are allergic to classes, have more subclasses" design philosophy.
    I've occasionally thought if there would be a problem simply saying: This race is balanced around starting the game at level X, they have 1 fewer ASI. Where X is like 4 or something. Sure you can't play an Ogre at level 1. Fine. But with some finagling I don't think such races would break anything if they were implemented at a specific level.

  5. - Top - End - #155
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ortho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Correct. You don't need to be a Variant Human to be strong. Regular Humans do just fine. Humans are good at anything. That's kind of their defining trait.
    Let's expand on this a little further. Assuming the standard array at level 1: a High Elf wizard is powergaming, since it can get a 16 in Int and a 16 in Dex. A Wood Elf ranger is powergaming, since it can get a 16 in Dex and a 16 in Wis. Playing a human period is powergaming. A Dwarven fighter is powergaming. A Half-Orc barbarian is powergaming. A Gnome wizard - you get the point, you're essentially saying that playing any classical fantasy archetype is powergaming.

    I don't necessarily disagree with the point you're trying to make, but I do think that you've set the bar a bit low.

  6. - Top - End - #156
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    I've occasionally thought if there would be a problem simply saying: This race is balanced around starting the game at level X, they have 1 fewer ASI. Where X is like 4 or something. Sure you can't play an Ogre at level 1. Fine. But with some finagling I don't think such races would break anything if they were implemented at a specific level.
    In theory, you could probably create a balanced race that started out with +3/+2 stats but was really lacking in other areas. Something like:

    Half-Ogre Traits
    Ability Score Increase
    Your Strength score increases by 3, and another score of your choice increases by 2
    Ribbon
    tiny ribbon ability

    The DPR nerds would love it, but pure stats aren't the end-all be-all, and its arguable that something like Vhuman would still be a lot stronger here for a lot of concepts
    Make Martials Cool Again.

  7. - Top - End - #157
    Orc in the Playground
     
    NinjaGirl

    Join Date
    Feb 2015

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    The concept that “race doesn’t predetermine what you are good at” causes people to be outraged and claim that they are being “force fed politics” doesn’t have anything to do with the book. {Scrubbed}
    Last edited by Pirate ninja; 2021-11-14 at 03:59 AM.

  8. - Top - End - #158
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Somewhere
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Second Wind View Post
    Mmm. Maybe instead of implementing ogre strength as a +STR modifier, do something like "if you start with less than 17 STR, your STR becomes 17." That way, your ogre is equally strong with the strongest non-ogre of that level, but not stronger. (A bit like how Tortles are guaranteed a high AC just for being a Tortle, but it doesn't break bounded accuracy because it doesn't stack with armor.)

    Of course, that only works if the intention is to have average ogre strength. If the player wants to be exceptionally strong for an ogre, like how the human barbarian is exceptionally strong for a human, that's not gonna work.
    Except it breaks point buy values. If you're guaranteed to have 17 no matter what you do, you can dump Str, get 17 anyway, and have extra 9 points (or 1/3 of the standard PB value) to spread out between other abilities compared to other characters who also want high Str, but picked a race without such unfair advantage.
    It's Eberron, not ebberon.
    It's not high magic, it's wide magic.
    And it's definitely not steampunk. The only time steam gets involved is when the fire and water elementals break loose.

  9. - Top - End - #159
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Toadkiller View Post
    The concept that “race doesn’t predetermine what you are good at” causes people to be outraged and claim that they are being “force fed politics” doesn’t have anything to do with the book. {Scrubbing the quote of the post I scrubbed}
    OP, please see above quote for one of the reasons there is contention around this book.

    WotC made some changes to races to fix a problem that did not exist. They did this presumably for economic reasons, to appease some very vocal people online,

    {Scrubbed}

    I've got nothing against the book and I don't own it. Personally, half-orcs are my go-to race to play and if I can now choose a skill instead of being stuck with Intimidation, great! But beyond the book, I would prefer that WotC not kow-tow to online concern-mongers. Since they are a business, they probably will. So my next wish is that the fandom doesn't get so wrapped up in this that they start tearing each other apart. Also unlikely, but a guy can dream...
    Last edited by Pirate ninja; 2021-12-10 at 05:18 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #160
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp1050 View Post
    Let's expand on this a little further. Assuming the standard array at level 1: a High Elf wizard is powergaming, since it can get a 16 in Int and a 16 in Dex. A Wood Elf ranger is powergaming, since it can get a 16 in Dex and a 16 in Wis. Playing a human period is powergaming. A Dwarven fighter is powergaming. A Half-Orc barbarian is powergaming. A Gnome wizard - you get the point, you're essentially saying that playing any classical fantasy archetype is powergaming.
    Why not have a High-Elf Wizard with 14 Int, 14 Dex, and use your extra points elsewhere?

    But also you've explained my point arguably better than I could; Look how easy D&D is, where if you just follow what the book says, you'll come up with a good character without even trying. You don't need to tryhard to make a good character. It just happens.

    'Oh yeah, well I want to play a Half-Orc Wizard.'
    That's fine. You're not doing what the book clearly says, and now the highest you can get in Int is 14/15 (+2). That's still perfectly fine. If you look at the MM and the DMG, you'll see that a +2 in your attack/damage stat is...
    'That's unfair! As a Half-Orc I want my Int to be 16 at Level 1! I need to increase the rolls on my d20s by 5% and I need to increase my damage by 1 or my character sucks.'

    Quote Originally Posted by Toadkiller View Post
    The concept that “race doesn’t predetermine what you are good at”...
    Species however, does.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-11-13 at 11:19 PM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  11. - Top - End - #161
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    Scrub the post, scrub the quote.
    {Scrubbed}

    With all that said, even as someone who is sympathetic to the notion that DND has a lot of legacy tropes that are vaguely racist in origin and should be altered.... I don't think custom lineages and such were a particularly well-conceived of a "fix." It neither addresses the core problems (which WOTC has been slowly working on for a while with varied success) nor does it improve the game in terms of mechanics or flavor.
    Last edited by Pirate ninja; 2021-12-10 at 05:19 AM.
    Make Martials Cool Again.

  12. - Top - End - #162
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2020

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    Your friend isn't making sense to me.

    DMs don't need to powergame because they control everything. A DM who's trying to manipulate the rules to effect the players can just have rocks fall and kill everyone.
    This is my understanding of your post:

    A player that attempts effect their Will in the game world is assessed the label Powergamer, which based off this thread alone, is an appellation that has been assigned normative value by some.

    A DM, by dint of having Unlimited Power, definitionally, can't be a Powergamer.https://external-content.duckduckgo....6pid%3DApi&f=1

    If effecting one's will is the working definition of Powergamer, and DMs are always able to effect their will, shouldn't, definitionally, all DMs be classified as Powergamers?
    Last edited by Thunderous Mojo; 2021-11-13 at 11:34 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #163
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    Yes. That's literally their first and primary description. Because they're not human. Naturally graceful is what they are.
    Elves "trust in diplomacy and compromise to resolve differences before they escalate to violence." Where is that spelled out mechanically in the rules? Are they barred from being Barbarians? No? Oh, is that because those descriptions are just broad generalisations to kickstart characterization? Most Elves are slender and graceful, most live 700 years, most "love nature and magic, art and artistry, music and poetry." That doesn't mean you can't play a fat, slovenly, diabetic, crass, fool of an elf with no taste who won't live past 300 due to lifestyle choices.


    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Ogres, due to being giants with inherently bigger muscle cross sections will have greater strength as a result of nature. Total strength is a result of nature & nurture, but some of that natural advantage will be in the final result.

    Why are you assuming ability score modifiers must be and must only be used to represent nurture (cultural ability modifiers aka "what they've been doing their whole lives") instead of being able to also represent nature (ogres are giants with inherently bigger muscle cross sections)? I don't share that premise.

    Since you want to understand my example, you will want to temporarily adopt my premise that species ability score modifier can represent nature (even if there are some lots of examples of cultural ability modifiers).

    Ogres, even if they put their focus on studies, are going to grow up to be large size and have a larger muscle cross section than any high elf that grew up the same way. In fact the Ogre would be stronger than any of their high elf peers that grew up the exactly same way. So my hypothetical Ogre species gives a +2 Str modifier to represent that.

    Ah but you are going to ask about "where is the nature represented?". The point buy!! This Ogre has an 8 Str from point buy, just like their high elf childhood friend. However This Ogre has a total of 10 Str and their childhood friend has only 8 Str. On the other hand they both have a 16 Int because they both drilled into their arcane lessons (15 point buy and +1 Int cultural ability modifier).

    That is why I have the hypothetical Ogre as +2 Str and +1 any. Because they keep that strength advantage as long as they keep their body (Just like an aarakocra's wings) but the +1 cultural modifier depends on how they grew up and nurture (point buy) can show when they are focusing on other areas by ending up with a 10 instead of a 16. Species that are non human enough to have species ability modifiers would keep those nature based species ability modifiers even if they grew up elsewhere.
    An Ogre is 10" tall and 1,000 lbs. An elf is 6"/145lb. Yet both have the exact same maximum STR and CON scores. The Ogre starts out stronger, but they both end up able to can carry the same amount of stuff, have the same leverage trying to move a boulder, have equal lung capacity, etc. How exactly does that make a single bit of sense? Oh, because this is a fantasy game where people shoot fire out of their fingers, live thousands of years, talk to literal Gods, travel to parallel universes, turn into a Cthulthu man by getting tentacled in the ear...

    I don't care about "muscle cross sections," because magic exists. Elves are explicitly a magical race. How is a 150lb Elf able to exert the same force and leverage as a 1000lb Ogre? *shrug* Because magic. This is a fantasy game. Strong Elves are like Superman or something, they may not look big but they're unnaturally strong.

    Even assuming your theoretical Ogre is just imbalanced for a PC, core Stoutheart Halflings and Half-Orcs have the same +1 CON mod so the exact same maximum starting and ending stats. One is 45lbs and the other 250, but they can both "quaff an entire stein of ale in one go" and presumably have the same fortitude as far as drunkenness goes. They have the same ability to shrug off damage (HP). Endurance checks like marching or holding your breath can maybe make sense due to difference in body size accounting for less demand over the same period of time, but just give it up. This stuff doesn't "make sense" when try to apply physics or physiology. Just let it go that this is all literally otherworldly.
    Last edited by Captbrannigan; 2021-11-14 at 12:24 AM.

  14. - Top - End - #164
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captbrannigan View Post
    Elves "trust in diplomacy and compromise to resolve differences before they escalate to violence." Where is that spelled out mechanically in the rules? Are they barred from being Barbarians? No? Oh, is that because those descriptions are just broad generalisations to kickstart characterization? Most Elves are slender and graceful, most live 700 years, most "love nature and magic, art and artistry, music and poetry." That doesn't mean you can't play a fat, slovenly, diabetic, crass, fool of an elf with no taste who won't live past 300 due to lifestyle choices.
    And we're back to elves are just humans with pointy ears. Which again, that's fine if that's what you want to do with them.

  15. - Top - End - #165
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunderous Mojo View Post
    This is my understanding of your post:

    A player that attempts effect their Will in the game world is assessed the label Powergamer, which based off this thread alone, is an appellation that has been assigned normative value by some.

    A DM, by dint of having Unlimited Power, definitionally, can't be a Powergamer.https://external-content.duckduckgo....6pid%3DApi&f=1

    If effecting one's will is the working definition of Powergamer, and DMs are always able to effect their will, shouldn't, definitionally, all DMs be classified as Powergamers?
    DMs create and run the game, they don't play in it. DMs aren't players, they're not 'gamers.'

    Powergaming doesn't have to be a bad thing, and doesn't have to conflict with other elements of fun like camaraderie or atmosphere. But you can't deny that from a mechanical perspective, claiming "I would never have considered playing a half-orc wizard without +1 to a stat" is a statement made by someone who cares about their character being as strong as possible.

    The statement: "I am not someone who cares about character power so I need the character concept I want to play to [be more powerful]" is completely nonsensical.
    Last edited by strangebloke; 2021-11-13 at 11:56 PM.
    Make Martials Cool Again.

  16. - Top - End - #166
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    And we're back to elves are just humans with pointy ears. Which again, that's fine if that's what you want to do with them.
    They aren't though, because Elves are immune to sleep, have proficiency in Perception, live 7x as long, etc. No matter what you do with the fluff text, they have specific traits that influence game mechanics above and beyond ability score modifiers.

  17. - Top - End - #167
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ortho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Why not have a High-Elf Wizard with 14 Int, 14 Dex, and use your extra points elsewhere?
    For starters, the PBH recommends that "Intelligence should be your highest stat, followed by Constitution or Dexterity" for wizards. Why not do as the PHB recommends?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    But also you've explained my point arguably better than I could; Look how easy D&D is, where if you just follow what the book says, you'll come up with a good character without even trying. You don't need to tryhard to make a good character. It just happens.
    And you've proved my point too - your definition is such a low bar that it's completely trivial to pass. In fact, it's impossible for a human not to.

  18. - Top - End - #168
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp1050 View Post
    And you've proved my point too - your definition is such a low bar that it's completely trivial to pass. In fact, it's impossible for a human not to.
    Your point is literally what I'm saying. Why would I disagree with you?
    That is my point. D&D is trivial. Power-gaming is a waste of time. It's not necessary. Tasha's enables power-gaming.

    Ergo, Tasha's makes the game even more trivial than it already is, and that's why people don't like it.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-11-14 at 12:19 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  19. - Top - End - #169
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captbrannigan View Post
    Just let it go that this is all literally otherworldly.
    Honestly your post was a non sequitur. You even mentioned strong elves. That is something with 0 relevance to my posts where I talked about a weak 10 Str Ogre, a weak 8 Str Elf, a barely strong 14 Str Ogre, and a strong 16 Str Human. Whatever your point was, it was not relevant to my post. Just in case you need to hear it "yes, Elves can be stronger than a Ogre".
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2021-11-14 at 12:37 AM.

  20. - Top - End - #170
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunderous Mojo View Post
    This response, strikes me as eliding the question that was asked.
    A 16 in a prime stat was being held up as the line where a player becomes a powergamer?

    I wonder what is gained by setting that as the requisite 'red line'?
    (This is a question, not rhetoric)

    This is another question that my friend posed:

    "While I'm asking critical question, I have to wonder why the definition of powergaming includes "player fulfilling a fantasy through their character in a way that impacts the game world" but not "DM fulfilling a fantasy through the game world in a way that impacts the player characters"."

    Why is the label of 'Powergamer' being applied to players, and not DMs?
    (Again, a question I am curious about, not a point of rhetoric)
    The original statement I was replying to was along the lines of 'Tasha's opens up new options because previously if a race didn't have a bonus in a class' prime stat they were unplayable.'

    I wouldn't call someone a power gamer who put their class' primary stat as their highest one and then after racial stat boost it became 16+.

    It is being a power gamer to place a rule on themselves that they can only play a character who who has a 16+ in their main stat.
    If you are trying to abuse the game; Don't. And you're probably wrong anyway.

  21. - Top - End - #171
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Your point is literally what I'm saying. Why would I disagree with you?
    That is my point. D&D is trivial. Power-gaming is a waste of time. It's not necessary. Tasha's enables power-gaming.

    Ergo, Tasha's makes the game even more trivial than it already is, and that's why people don't like it.
    But...having a 16 in your primary stat really isn't powergaming. That's setting the bar so low that the phrase itself is literally meaningless. And while D&D is not what I'd call a difficult game, depending on the DM, you are encouraged to have some level of competency. If people cry foul because Tasha's allows you to remain highly competent while also making whatever unique builds they want, then people need to redefine what they call "powergaming".

    I know what powergaming is, I do a fair bit of Powergaming. Powergaming is making an Order of Scribes X / Tempest Cleric 2 with no real reason for Cleric outside of getting Channel Divinity to maximize Lightning and Thunder damage. Powergaming is making a Tabaxi Monk/Fighter/Elk Totem Barbarian with Mobile and Longstrider for a 90ft movement speed, and going out of your way to get Boots of Speed, a Potion of Speed, and the Eagle Whistle to increase it even further.
    Never let the fluff of a class define the personality of a character. Let Clerics be Atheist, let Barbarians be cowardly or calm, let Druids hate nature, and let Wizards know nothing about the arcane

    Fun Fact: A monk in armor loses Martial Arts, Unarmored Defense, and Unarmored Movement, but keep all of their other abilities, including subclass features, and Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks. Make a Monk in Fullplate with a Greatsword >=D


  22. - Top - End - #172
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captbrannigan View Post
    They aren't though, because Elves are immune to sleep, have proficiency in Perception, live 7x as long, etc. No matter what you do with the fluff text, they have specific traits that influence game mechanics above and beyond ability score modifiers.
    They don't actually have proficiency in Perception if you use the Tasha's rules. Their special eyes gives them proficiency in.... something.

    And living 7x longer is also, not actually demonstrated in the mechanics, for the record. It actually has less mechanical influence than +2 dex. So we're left with, can't sleep, and a bonus against charm. Woo. Real interesting and divergent species ya got there.
    Last edited by Dienekes; 2021-11-14 at 12:40 AM.

  23. - Top - End - #173
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    They don't actually have proficiency in Perception if you use the Tasha's rules. Their special eyes gives them proficiency in.... something.

    And living 7x longer is also, not actually demonstrated in the mechanics, for the record. It actually has less mechanical influence than +2 dex. So we're left with, can't sleep, and a bonus against charm. Woo. Real interesting and divergent species ya got there.
    Yeah, I'd say that's a divergent species from Humans. They also have Darkvision as well, which does count for a thing. Humans are unable to Trance, do not have Fey Ancestry, do not live 7x longer, and do not have Darkvision. If you give a Human those traits, they are no longer Human.
    Never let the fluff of a class define the personality of a character. Let Clerics be Atheist, let Barbarians be cowardly or calm, let Druids hate nature, and let Wizards know nothing about the arcane

    Fun Fact: A monk in armor loses Martial Arts, Unarmored Defense, and Unarmored Movement, but keep all of their other abilities, including subclass features, and Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks. Make a Monk in Fullplate with a Greatsword >=D


  24. - Top - End - #174
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by sithlordnergal View Post
    But...having a 16 in your primary stat really isn't powergaming.
    Well that's because D&D is easy.
    The baseline for 'most' characters is already above what people actually need to play the game. You can have a 16 in your primary stat so easily, that people don't even realise they don't even need a 16 in their primary stat. Who told you that a 16 was necessary to have a good character?

    That's setting the bar so low that the phrase itself is literally meaningless.
    The bar is low. I don't know why I have to keep repeating this.

    you are encouraged to have some level of competency.
    Define competence. Because my baseline is 14 in your primary stat, as per maths taken from the DMG and the MM, and the word from the designers which basically says that D&D wasn't designed to be hard, and character building is not supposed to be difficult. You should be able to play anything you want, and outside of making obvious mistakes (such as a Barbarian with 8 CON), you should be okay for the majority of your adventures.

    Having a 16+, in your main stat, at Level 1, is more than competent, more than what-is-necessary.

    If you have something over and above what is necessary, you're power-gaming...And yes, the bar for what-is-necessary, actually is very low by design. That's why Deadly encounters, aren't.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-11-14 at 12:57 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  25. - Top - End - #175
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by sithlordnergal View Post
    Yeah, I'd say that's a divergent species from Humans. They also have Darkvision as well, which does count for a thing. Humans are unable to Trance, do not have Fey Ancestry, do not live 7x longer, and do not have Darkvision. If you give a Human those traits, they are no longer Human.
    Sanity Check: You do realize some consider that a small difference? Some expect or desire more divergence?

    Now I realize I am a bit of an outlier with wanting things like Warforged, Undead, Myconoids, etc, however I can tell that Dienekes recongizes Elfs are still technically different from Humans. I can also tell Dienekes was using sarcasm to point out they were not satisfied with how little divergence there was between Elves and Humans.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2021-11-14 at 12:57 AM.

  26. - Top - End - #176
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by sithlordnergal View Post
    Yeah, I'd say that's a divergent species from Humans. They also have Darkvision as well, which does count for a thing. Humans are unable to Trance, do not have Fey Ancestry, do not live 7x longer, and do not have Darkvision. If you give a Human those traits, they are no longer Human.
    And here we go back to the earlier point I was discussing with OldTrees. I don't think, even ignoring the Tasha rules Elves are different enough from humans. Most of the time the Elf Wizard will play the same as the Human Wizard. Those traits, are all pretty boring. This is a human with pointy ears and some minor oddities that are barely relevant for anything. Perfect world, I want the races to play way more different. I want an elf to actually mechanically feel like someone touched with the grace of Seldarine. I want mechanics to show what living 700 years does to a mortal mind. I want races to go way the other direction where an Elven Barbarian plays mechanically different than a Dwarven Barbarian or a Human Barbarian or an Orc Barbarian. Wildly beautifully different.

    And your side celebrates in blurring what few distinctions we have.

    Now, as I've admitted above, are these distinctions the most interesting mechanical differentiation that WotC could have created?

    No. They're barely above where they are with Tashas. But they are above.

    But again, 5e is terrible at this. So I'm not actually a Tasha hater, but if you're removing a feature that is a mechanical representation of the description of the elves it's not nothing. It might be inconvenient. It might be more fun for you personally to do it. And it's your game, do whatever you want. But this "the mechanics that are put in to directly represent the races own description aren't actually real racial mechanics" is pretty silly. That's exactly what they are. You just don't like them. Which is fine.

  27. - Top - End - #177
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    The original statement I was replying to was along the lines of 'Tasha's opens up new options because previously if a race didn't have a bonus in a class' prime stat they were unplayable.'

    I wouldn't call someone a power gamer who put their class' primary stat as their highest one and then after racial stat boost it became 16+.

    It is being a power gamer to place a rule on themselves that they can only play a character who who has a 16+ in their main stat.
    A distinct difference. (No judgment intended.) I would add there is nothing wrong with being a power gamer. However, there is that line where power gaming becomes cheesy which is another way of saying being a munchkin. The Tasha ability score rules facilitates munchkinism, and that is what ticks some people off. That is where you get mountain dwarf wizards. It is certainly possible a non-munchkin player really wants to play a mountain dwarf wizard for generic gaming community socially acceptable reasons, but because of the game mechanics involved the "reek" of munchkinism taints the idea. This is also where Custom Lineage comes in. A character's race is just flavor text. All that matters is getting the pluses in the right place. Optimization/Power gaming is not in itself a bad thing. People get angst about it when it's too easy to get anything/everything you want.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  28. - Top - End - #178
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ortho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    The bar is low. I don't know why I have to keep repeating this.
    Your bar is low, but powergaming is relative to the game being played. If D&D is trivial, than trivially making a character is not powergaming - it's the default mode of character creation. Powergaming - by definition - can only occur if you go out of your way to make it happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Define competence. Because my baseline is 14 in your primary stat, as per maths taken from the DMG and the MM, and the word from the designers which basically says that D&D wasn't designed to be hard, and character building is not supposed to be difficult. You should be able to play anything you want, and outside of making obvious mistakes (such as a Barbarian with 8 CON), you should be okay for the majority of your adventures.
    We're in agreement in that regard, but....

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Having a 16+, in your main stat, at Level 1, is more than competent, more than what-is-necessary.
    We've already established that it's literally impossible for the weakest race in the game to not meet that definition. Your definition just plain doesn't work, my friend.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    If you have something over and above what is necessary, you're power-gaming...And yes, the bar for what-is-necessary, actually is very low by design. That's why Deadly encounters, aren't.
    By that logic, using an ASI is powergaming.

  29. - Top - End - #179
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Why do people hate Tasha’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp1050 View Post
    We've already established that it's literally impossible for the weakest race in the game to not meet that definition. Your definition just plain doesn't work, my friend.
    Remember my post a page ago?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    However I think repetition is causing the posters to stop being as precise as they were previously. They were initially talking about "If you can't consider a species unless it gives you a 16, then you are letting your preferences for power (the 16) trump your choice of species.

    So if someone wanted to play a Goliath Wizard but played a default Human Wizard instead because Goliath can't reach 16 Int at 1st level, they might have been powergaming.

    This is particularly true since the 5E design team made it so you could have a 14 in your primary at 20th. (although others in the thread are more pessimistic and evaluated it as 14 at 1st and 18th at 20th) uh oh typo
    I think their original point about 16, in full, does pass your default human test.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2021-11-14 at 01:43 AM.

  30. - Top - End - #180
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Default Re: Why do people hate TashaÂ’s?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Well that's because D&D is easy.
    The baseline for 'most' characters is already above what people actually need to play the game. You can have a 16 in your primary stat so easily, that people don't even realise they don't even need a 16 in their primary stat. Who told you that a 16 was necessary to have a good character?
    Experience. A 14 in your primary stat ONLY works if you are a character that makes attack rolls. A 14 will fail you if you're playing someone who uses saving throws, especially once you reach level 5. At level 5, a PC with a 16 to their casting stat will have a save DC of 14, and it will remain a 14 until level 8. Tanarii actually put it really well in a previous post. I have tried out playing spell casters with a 14 in their casting stat, I have had players do the same thing, and my experience has been that monsters tended to succeed on their saving throws on average. Which again, makes sense. If your Spell DC is a 14, and the average roll on a d20 is 10.5, rounded up to 11 because DnD doesn't use decimals, then monsters will start succeeding on their saving throws pretty often.

    The people at WotC did a fine job at balancing the game so that martial characters can get through to level 20 just fine with a 14. I actually find that a 16 in Strength is more than enough to carry you all the way to level 16. But they did a terrible job balancing spell save DCs in the same way, unless spells are supposed to fail more on average than they

    Spoiler: Tanarii's Quote
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Otoh it's worth keeping in mind that a save is the equivalent of AC 14+mod in terms of odds vs a casters attack mod, because DCs start at 8+prof+mod ties go to the defender not the attacker. At lower levels, casters often do need a higher modifier to get the same chance of hitting with a save spell that they would if they used an attack roll spell. OTOH if you can pick your save and have a good idea of what to target, that disadvantage goes away. For example a AC 15 Goblin has equivalent of DexTN 16, but ConTN 14 and WisTN 13, if you rolled attack+Prof+stat against those TNs instead of a save vs 8+Prof+stat DC. Orcs are AC15, DexTN 15, ConTN 17, and WisTN 14. And low AC targets like beasts or bruisers (Ogres) in particular have much higher TN equivalent saves than AC.



    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    The bar is low. I don't know why I have to keep repeating this.

    Define competence. Because my baseline is 14 in your primary stat, as per maths taken from the DMG and the MM, and the word from the designers which basically says that D&D wasn't designed to be hard, and character building is not supposed to be difficult. You should be able to play anything you want, and outside of making obvious mistakes (such as a Barbarian with 8 CON), you should be okay for the majority of your adventures.

    Having a 16+, in your main stat, at Level 1, is more than competent, more than what-is-necessary.

    If you have something over and above what is necessary, you're power-gaming...And yes, the bar for what-is-necessary, actually is very low by design. That's why Deadly encounters, aren't.
    The bar may be low, but its not that low.

    As for competence, it fully depends on what you're playing. If you're playing a martial character, then a 14 in your primary stat is perfectly fine. AC scales slowly while attack bonuses scale quickly. The highest AC in the game is a 25, on a CR 30 creature, but by the time you face that you'd have a base attack bonus of +8 with a 14 in your primary attack stat. And that +8 can be increased via spells and abilities like Bless and the Magic Weapon spell. You can boost that +8 to a +11, lowering the number you need to roll from a 17 to a 14, and add in the d4 from bless, and you end up needing to roll about an 11.5 on a d20. That is very slightly above average, but well within the range of possibility.

    Now compare that to a saving throw. With a 14 in your primary stat, your save is going to be a DC 17. Same creature with the 25 AC has a +9 to Wisdom and Charisma saves, a +10 to Con and Str saves, and a +0 for the rest. In order to succeed on that Wisdom save, which most spells use a Wisdom save, they need to roll a 9 or higher. That is well below the average roll of a d20, which means this creature is going to succeed on a majority of those saves. Now you can make the argument of just target a different ability, but here's the issue. Most of the really, really good spells in the game target Dexterity or Wisdom. And Wisdom is used for nearly all of the spells that have a major, debilitating effect.

    Now obviously that is the most extreme example, but things really don't change, no matter which way you look at it. If you're primarily playing a caster without a 16 in your casting stat, you're going to find your spells work a little less than half the time all the way until you hit level 8. And by then, most campaigns are finished. Tell me, about how many players do you think will find that experience to be fun? When a little over half the time their spells simply fail?
    Last edited by sithlordnergal; 2021-11-14 at 02:02 AM.
    Never let the fluff of a class define the personality of a character. Let Clerics be Atheist, let Barbarians be cowardly or calm, let Druids hate nature, and let Wizards know nothing about the arcane

    Fun Fact: A monk in armor loses Martial Arts, Unarmored Defense, and Unarmored Movement, but keep all of their other abilities, including subclass features, and Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks. Make a Monk in Fullplate with a Greatsword >=D


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •