D&D 5E Reduced standard array in exchange for a bonus feat at 1st.

[Flamestrike]

I'm thinking about reducing the Standard array to 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 8 and granting all races a bonus feat at 1st level.

That leaves room for a 16 in your main stat and a 14 in your secondary stat for all races (accounting for a half feat for Humans) and a 12 in a tertiary stat (two tertiary stats for Humans on account of the +1 to all scores).

Thoughts? Would you change any of the numbers?

 

[BluejayJunior]

Seems to work fine. Even taking a feat that gives an additional +1 to your main stat, you'd max out at a 17. I'm guessing you are trying to prevent an 18 in your highest stat with this method.

 

[Fenris-77]

A feat is equal to an ASI, which is 2 stat points. Your array is five lower than standard. What's the thinking on the 3 point difference? The idea is cool, and shouldn't be an issue, I'm just curious about the math.

 

[Flamestrike]

A feat is equal to an ASI, which is 2 stat points. Your array is five lower than standard. What's the thinking on the 3 point difference? The idea is cool, and shouldn't be an issue, I'm just curious about the math.

Not quite, seeing as a bump to a higher Stat (over 13) from a feat is technically worth more in 'points' than a 1 to 1 basis (in that a +1 to an ability score from a half feat is actually worth 1-3 points, probably at the higher end as its in all likelihood going to an ability score that is either a 13 or 15 already).

I figure as feats are valued at roughly +2 to an Ability score, the special ability that comes with that stat boost evens out the difference.

It also places a higher value on Half feats, and less value on the big 4 in GWM, Lucky, Sharpshooter and Alert.

From an eyeball if I was presented with the two options (standard array or this array + feat), I'd likely take this array + feat

 

[Fenris-77]

Putting a premium on the half feats is cool. I'm guessing you aren't using VHum in this set up?

 

[GlassJaw]

I like feats but I really dislike the 5E feat system. Way too limited and balance is totally out of whack. I also don't like that variant human is the only race to get a feat.

I've started giving a bonus feat to all characters at 1st level but I've revised human by removing the feat and granting bonus.

It's worked out great. Humans are still viable and the feats gives all characters the ability to flesh out their concepts a bit more. I do limit the feats that can be taken, however, and encourage non-combat feats.

 

[Jediking]

Whenever I run a game, I use point buy (27 points).
Any player can spend 4 points on a feat (leaving 23 points), and a character can only have one feat at 1st level.

it has worked out great and I haven’t seen any balance issues yet. Opens up a lot more options for players, and usually 1-2 players choose it.

*Remember that a feat is worth +2 to any ability score, but at character creation it is balanced as +2 to primary ability scores (scores that are 13+ that cost 2 pts to raise). So the total value is 2*2=4 pts

 

[Phazonfish]

Whenever I run a game, I use point buy (27 points).
Any player can spend 4 points on a feat (leaving 23 points), and a character can only have one feat at 1st level.

it has worked out great and I haven’t seen any balance issues yet. Opens up a lot more options for players, and usually 1-2 players choose it.

*Remember that a feat is worth +2 to any ability score, but at character creation it is balanced as +2 to primary ability scores (scores that are 13+ that cost 2 pts to raise). So the total value is 2*2=4 pts

This is a cool option. It allows one to guarantee they start with an 18, so probably not for everyone, but I am happy your table is getting good results!

 

[Flamestrike]

Putting a premium on the half feats is cool. I'm guessing you aren't using VHum in this set up?

Nah man. No to the Vuman in this set up. I still play with the Human-centric world that is the default for most DnD settings, so Humans get +1 to every ability score, and a free proficiency at 1st level, giving them a slight edge (which leads to more Humans in a party than non humans as a general rule).

Whenever I run a game, I use point buy (27 points).
Any player can spend 4 points on a feat (leaving 23 points), and a character can only have one feat at 1st level.

it has worked out great and I haven’t seen any balance issues yet. Opens up a lot more options for players, and usually 1-2 players choose it.

*Remember that a feat is worth +2 to any ability score, but at character creation it is balanced as +2 to primary ability scores (scores that are 13+ that cost 2 pts to raise). So the total value is 2*2=4 pts

I like this. I like this a lot. Consider it stolen.

I really rated the old Shadowrun 'priority' system where you would assign priorities to attributes, skills, resources (cash, for cyberware etc), magic, and race. This kind of mirrors that where you have the option of higher stats, or a feat.

I implemented something similar in a SWSE game I ran where all PCs got either a bonus feat at 1st, a bonus talent at 1st or extra ability score points for stats at 1st level.

 

[Flamestrike]

I used to grant a bonus feat for everyone at 1st level, but a feat is basically an entire levels worth of advancement (barring hit dice, hit points and 1/4 of a proficiency bump) so it did lead for much more competent PCs at 1st level (a good and a bad thing).

I really like the flexibility above of exchanging 4 points for a feat (and removing Vuman). It keeps half feats relevant for most races (it gets non Humans to an 18 at 1st level), balanced out by the Humans +1 to all Stats and the bonus proficiency I give them granting them an edge elsewhere.

The only problem I forsee is it pushes players into dump Stats more than usual to get that 18. You're spending 9 points (out of 23) on a single Stat, leaving you with only 14 points on the other 5. Even if you dumped 2 x scores to 8 you're stuck with 1 x 13 (turned into a 14 with race) 1 x 14 and 1 x 10 (meaning a lot of - 18, 14, 14, 10, 8, 8 at the table).