D&D 5E Do you miss attribute minimums/maximums?

Carlsen Chris · Jul 13, 2017

Do you miss the time when a 4 Intelligence character couldn't be an Elf, or when a female human couldn't have 18/00 strength? Would the re introduction of racial and gender minimums and maximums add anyting to 5E, or would it be pointless? Would it detract?

jaelis · Jul 13, 2017

I do not miss them.

MarkB · Jul 13, 2017

Beyond pointless. I wouldn't even have bought it if it included such nonsense.

MechaPilot · Jul 13, 2017

Carlsen Chris said:
Do you miss the time when a 4 Intelligence character couldn't be an Elf, or when a female human couldn't have 18/00 strength?

Only in the sense that there were other things about the game than the things you just mentioned that appealed to me but are no longer present.

Carlsen Chris said:
Would the re introduction of racial and gender minimums and maximums add anyting to 5E, or would it be pointless? Would it detract?

Gender based minimums & maximums would definitely detract from the game's appeal to me.

Racial minimums would likewise detract from the game's appeal to me. Race choices should be restricted for reasons entirely stemming from the nature of whatever setting is being played in, not because someone didn't roll high enough.

Racial maximums I can't say I'd have a problem with. A lower Str cap for smaller creatures might even be a better way to handle small-sized characters than the way 5e currently deals with their size.

cbwjm · Jul 13, 2017

Racial minimums I'd be fine with but on the whole I don't think are necessary.

I started with becmi and 2e so didn't have gender restrictions back when I was playing. When I looked at some 1e stuff a friend had ack then I thought they were a pretty dumb idea.

The Crimson Binome · Jul 13, 2017

It's beyond ridiculous that the strongest halfling is as strong as the strongest half-orc or strongest dwarf. The type of musculature required to fit that much power into a three-foot frame would render them incapable of fine manipulation.

Gender variance is not worth modeling. The vast majority of humans are between five and seven feet tall, regardless of gender.

Xeviat · Jul 13, 2017

If I were to use anything like this, it would be for NPCs only. PCs are the exception.

What I might do, though, is have racial adjustments increase the 20 ability cap.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Waterbizkit · Jul 13, 2017

Racial minimums and maximums would be pointless to me, I have no need of them. Gender maximums or minimums would detract from the game, I'd like to think we're beyond the point where we need to draw line in the sand based on gender.

So thanks, but no thanks.

Illithidbix · Jul 13, 2017

Nope, not at all.

Saelorn said:
It's beyond ridiculous that the strongest halfling is as strong as the strongest half-orc or strongest dwarf. The type of musculature required to fit that much power into a three-foot frame would render them incapable of fine manipulation.

I think if you want to consider the beyond ridiculousness of biomechanics in D&D, the Halfling is a curious starting point.

Although I now want to run a game that includes

"You see a dragon fly overhead, then it crashes..."

Shiroiken · Jul 13, 2017

It is a relic of a different era, where ability scores didn't matter as much. The idea could be an interesting variant, but doesn't make any sense as part of the standard game. I actually considered something like this during the playtest, where instead of capping at 20, each race had a different cap for each ability. I would have suggested 18 as the cap for everything for humans and modified from there (Dwarf 20 Str & Con, 16 Dex & Cha, for example).