D&D 5E Discriminating Against Sameness: A Case for Readjusting Racial Bonuses and Ability Score Increases

Mephista · Jun 21, 2017

......

If you're going to do a stat difference between men and women drow, why are the female drow not Wisdom? They're primarily clerics!

And why the Charisma boop to Elves? High Elves are heavily focused on wizard stuff - arcane tricksters, eldritch knights wizards, and they're known for their psionics as well.

Why are you ditching Charisma for lightfoot halflings? They can't be chaos sorcerers anymore? Or bards?

I feel like there's prejudice against dragonborn, tieflings and half-orcs here. The "goodly races" get to shine brighter, but the "monster" races can't?

Hillsy7 · Jun 21, 2017

Yaarel said:
To remedy real diversity, what if the only choices for Ability Score Improvements are:

• Three (!) ability scores improve by 1, namely your primary ability score and two others of your choice.
• A feat that grants a minor feature plus one ability score improves by 1.
• A feat that grants a major feature.

That way, the prime ability score improves steadily, while two other ability scores that are more freely chosen also improve.

To be fair to the OP: His issue with sameness was that every race could essentially (Through ASI and point buy) have any stat combination, rendering all races the same in the long term. His solution therefore was to do the opposite of what you are suggesting and accentuate the racial stat boost and prevent other races competing.

Basically, he was saying "GAH! All races can have Max 20 Strength! They are all the same!!!" not "GAH! All Half-Orcs focus on Strength! All Half-Orcs are the same!!!"

That's not saying your solution isn't a good one (though personally I'm not a fan of handing out feats like candy - they are bonkers powerful some of them), just that it's not a solution to the OPs initial problem

Yaarel · Jun 21, 2017

Hillsy7 said:
To be fair to the OP: His issue with sameness was that every race could essentially (Through ASI and point buy) have any stat combination, rendering all races the same in the long term. His solution therefore was to do the opposite of what you are suggesting and accentuate the racial stat boost and prevent other races competing.

Basically, he was saying "GAH! All races can have Max 20 Strength! They are all the same!!!" not "GAH! All Half-Orcs focus on Strength! All Half-Orcs are the same!!!"

That's not saying your solution isn't a good one (though personally I'm not a fan of handing out feats like candy - they are bonkers powerful some of them), just that it's not a solution to the OPs initial problem

The suggestion is part of a balanced approach.

Minimum ability score prerequisites for each race, plus the racial improvements above that to ability scores, establishes salient mechanical diversity between the races from the start at level 1.

Meanwhile, while leveling, the slowdown that can only improve ability scores by 1, ensures that the racial advantage to a particular ability score endures for more levels, before it can finally reach 20.

Nevertheless, the additional improvements by 1 to two other ability scores, ensures more diversity within the race, and more freedom of choice of class for players.

Meanwhile, have three scores improve by 1, makes it likelier that at least one of these scores will flip from an odd number to an even number, helping make the ability improvement meaningful each time.

Hillsy7 · Jun 21, 2017

Yaarel said:
The suggestion is part of a balanced approach.

Minimum ability score prerequisites for each race, plus the racial improvements above that to ability scores, establishes salient mechanical diversity between the races from the start at level 1.

Meanwhile, while leveling, the slowdown that can only improve ability scores by 1, ensures that the racial advantage to a particular ability score endures for more levels, before it can finally reach 20.

Nevertheless, the additional improvements by 1 to two other ability scores, ensures more diversity within the race, and more freedom of choice of class for players.

Meanwhile, have three scores improve by 1, makes it likelier that at least one of these scores will flip from an odd number to an even number, helping make the ability improvement meaningful each time.

Ah I stand corrected - though you were talking about the initial stats configuration - didn't realise you had posted other ideas further up the thread. Then yes the ASI = 3x +1 is definitely interesting. It benefits traditionally MAD builds benefiting greatly and saving throws in general going up. Not major, but something to consider.

It's a balanced solution though, rewards with Mod upticks most of the time, and keeps the Primary stat chugging along to Maximum. (Though I suspect I'd be taking every "boost to my primary stat and minor feature" feat going - feats being awesome n all)

The minimum stat for a race theory in this instance I believe is unnecessary as the OP is already basing stat point allocation around primary stats (i.e. you ain't playing a sorceror Half-Orc with a pointless +4 STR boost anyway). The entire purpose of the initial racial boosts is to funnel races into specific stat builds, I think minimum stats would just kill of any chance of having an unusual but functional race/class combo.....

Just my opinion anyway

Yaarel · Jun 21, 2017

Race prereqs can still be useful. Min-maxers using a standard array often use a racial improvement to ‘mitigate’ a dump ability score. Meaning. The character is mediocre where the salient race flavor is supposed to be extraordinary.

The prereqs, for campaign settings that want this, assure that a race known for a prominent ability will actually exhibit that prominent ability.

Hillsy7 · Jun 21, 2017

Yaarel said:
Race prereqs can still be useful. Min-maxers using a standard array often use a racial improvement to ‘mitigate’ a dump ability score. Meaning. The character is mediocre where the salient race flavor is supposed to be extraordinary.

Ah yes, but that would crush my dreams of playing a Dwarf Sorcerer with such a low Constitution he can't handle his drink, and he's been shunned from dwarven society for being a lightweight.....Poor Therom, ye might have lived but a glorious day, but at least ye will have tasted breath sweetened by dawn..... :lol:

Yaarel · Jun 21, 2017

Heh. Yet the anti-trope of a frail Dwarf only makes sense when the trope of a tough Dwarf is enforced.

Maybe handle something like this separately with the DM. More like a Flaw. An inherited genetic disorder. ... Or better yet, his parents were cursed at his birth, resulting in his frailty. The DM may be interested in granting some kind of boon for the sake of the narrative.

Fleetwood C. DeVille · Jun 21, 2017

Yaarel said:
Granting bonuses disrupts the 5e gaming system balance (namely bounded accuracy). The d20 only has so much room, and a +10 including various bonuses can mean infinite auto-win.

Instead of granting bonuses, treat races like classes that need minimum ability score prerequisites.

So, before making any racial ability score adjustments, if you want to play ...
• a Dwarf, you must assign at least Constitution 13.
• a Half-Orc, you must assign at least Strength 15.
• an Orc, you must assign at least Strength 17.

According to how the setting understands each race.

Bonuses tend to encourage high ability score assignments anyway because of min-maxing. But it is possible to enforce prerequisites for flavorful distinctiveness. Placing high points in one ability means there is less to spend on an other ability.

I'm flashing back to 1st ed. Just add racial maximums and you've got it.

snickersnax · Jun 21, 2017

Hillsy7 said:
Firstly, More power to you - the Rules are stated as being just a guide, and so adjusting them to your preference is using the rulebook to it's maximum. Bonus points for already implementing then too. Seems like your group is enjoying them as well....tripleplus good!!

Thanks for the encouragement and to all the others who have posted similarly. This is my first real thread.

Hillsy7 said:
Fifthly, it is slightly anti-scientific (HAHAHA - D&D scientific....oh I slay myself!). Basically, practice outweighs "natural talent" over time - Natural accumen gives only the initial boost, and direction of travel ("Hey I'm good at this!"), but it is quickly dwarfed by practice and training. I'll out benchpress a naturally strong guy if I do 10000 practicing benchpressing. If you consider level 1 to be a reflection of training up to the start of the hero's journey, this means years of training can never close the gap on Racial benefits. I know that's built in the current system, but your +4 and a maximum of +5 from ASIs compounds this even more. Petty i know, but I'm a science nazi....

Your right, a lot of things can be overcome by practice and training. But if the naturally strong guy works out just as much as you, you're still not going to be stronger than him, in fact probably not even close. World class athletes have training plus natural talent/genetics. I'm making a guess here, but I suspect that there is no amount of training that you personally can do to be a respected competitor in a world's strongest man competition, even if you took steroids. Sorry to make it personal

So when I consider "training up until the start of the hero's journey", I would include the 27 point buy as part of this. If you consider 15, 14, 13, 10, 10 ,10 compared to 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10 (average for 3d6), you'll see that hero's training gets a +4, +3 and +2 added to the average commoner stats and that would easily close the gap on any racial talent that goes untrained.

Hillsy7 said:
"the 13,13,13,13,13,13 array can work brilliantly"

I assume you meant 13, 13, 13, 12, 12, 12

Hillsy7 said:
Personally, I don't like this because it hampers me as a player. I lean much more towards Diversity than aptitude (I like to deliberately try suboptimal builds because I want to play the Dragonborn wizard who's jealous of his sorceror friends who don't have to study like mad to cast spells effectively), but that's how I want to play. It may not be how you and your friends enjoy your game, and that's cool (there's no badwrongfunning here).

Thanks for helping me your understand playstyle

The Crimson Binome · Jun 21, 2017

Fleetwood C. DeVille said:
I'm flashing back to 1st ed. Just add racial maximums and you've got it.

You could also just use racial base stats. As a hill dwarf, you start with 14/8/16/11/13/9. As a stout halfling, you start with 8/16/14/9/13/11. As a high elf, you start with 11/14/8/16/13/9. It would certainly solve the sameness problem.

More reasonably, you could change the rolling method to reduce randomness and play up the racial bonuses. Instead of rolling 3d6 and modifying each stat up or down by 1 or 2 points, you could roll 1d6 for each stat and add a bonus between 4 and 12, such that (for example) high elves start with 6/12/4/12/10/8 and have six d6 rolls (or 21 points, or one of each value 1-6) to spread among those.

There are lots of ways that you could do it.

D&D 5E Discriminating Against Sameness: A Case for Readjusting Racial Bonuses and Ability Score Increases

Mephista

Adventurer

Hillsy7

First Post

Yaarel

He Mage

Hillsy7

First Post

Yaarel

He Mage

Hillsy7

First Post

Yaarel

He Mage

Fleetwood C. DeVille

Explorer

snickersnax

Explorer

The Crimson Binome

Hero

Similar Threads