D&D 5E Ability Scores: Bonuses and Penalties! Optional in DMG?

[Knightfall]

The main thing that bothers me about 5E, so far, is that there aren't any ability score penalties to go along with the bonuses. Now, I didn't follow the playtest religiously, but I seem to remember that the option was in there at one point.

Did WotC remove the option for having both bonuses and penalties completely from D&D 5E? Or is it possible that it might end up in the DMG as an optional rule?

Enlighten me.

KF

 

[Li Shenron]

I suppose you mean racial ability score penalties?

Apparently they decided to avoid them in 5e. The rationale is known: players don't want score penalties that create a handicap for certain character concept i.e. race-class combination.

As a matter of fact, compared to humans all other races have average lesser scores in 4 of 6 abilities, but since they don't "look" like penalties, the same players don't even notice.

Personally I'd say that with the once again inflated ability scores (it happens almost every edition) together with the ability score cap of 20, it certainly won't damage your game if you decide to HR some penalties back in (although you might have problems if you use point-buy since some scores will be only 13 at 1st level).

 

[Sadras]

...I'd say that with the once again inflated ability scores (it happens almost every edition) together with the ability score cap of 20, it certainly won't damage your game if you decide to HR some penalties back in (although you might have problems if you use point-buy since some scores will be only 13 at 1st level).

I'm curious, why do you classify this edition as having inflated ability scores?

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm curious, why do you classify this edition as having inflated ability scores?

I'm referring only to starting ability scores, obviously the score cap plays a big role later.

 

[Pickles JG]

I'm referring only to starting ability scores, obviously the score cap plays a big role later.

The most important highest starting stat is down on the previous 2 editions. The aggregate is lower than 4e & about the same as 3e. Except humans who I expect will often take the bonus feat anyway asloads of +1 to secondary stats is often not exciting.

 

[Rune]

In response to the OP:

Actually, there kind of are.

If you consider the basic human (+1 to all attributes) as the baseline, every attribute that a race doesn't have a bonus to is, relatively, at a penalty.

They just baked it into the human's stats instead of making people reduce attributes.

With the other races' (mountain dwarf being the outlier here) +2 to an attribute and +1 to another this makes them better than the average human at what they're better at by exactly the same amount that they are worse in most (but not all) other attributes.

 

[Li Shenron]

The most important highest starting stat is down on the previous 2 editions. The aggregate is lower than 4e & about the same as 3e. Except humans who I expect will often take the bonus feat anyway asloads of +1 to secondary stats is often not exciting.

I have no idea about 4e, but:

- in 3e you roll 4d6-drop-lowest, PHB races grant no net bonus (0, or +2/-2, or +2/-2/-2)

- in 5e you roll 4d6-drop-lowest, PHB races grant a net bonus (+2/+1, or +2/+2, or +1/+1/+1/+1/+1/+1, or +1/+1)

Where do you see starting stats going down?

Eventually, as I said, the 20 cap changes the matter later on.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Where do you see starting stats going down?

Eventually, as I said, the 20 cap changes the matter later on.

Don't be coy, you know the standard array and point-buy (which were the de facto norm in 3E, too) are lower in 5E.

 

[Pickles JG]

I have no idea about 4e, but:

- in 3e you roll 4d6-drop-lowest, PHB races grant no net bonus (0, or +2/-2, or +2/-2/-2)

- in 5e you roll 4d6-drop-lowest, PHB races grant a net bonus (+2/+1, or +2/+2, or +1/+1/+1/+1/+1/+1, or +1/+1)

Where do you see starting stats going down?

Eventually, as I said, the 20 cap changes the matter later on.

I most played OP which in LG in 3.5 was 28 point buy to a max of 16. That's about the same - higher in your most important stat but lower overall.

4e had higher abilities - 2x +2s & a different but richer point buy allowing an 18 or 2 16s. So 5e is only inflationary if you ignore previous inflation. Humans it's true puff the overal stats if you use the basic pile of +1s noone seems to like.

At mid levels stats do go up much faster than 3e or 4e as you get a +2 for each bump but the cap will obviously limit that.

 

[Gargoyle]

I think the reason that penalties don't exist is that penalties aren't needed. We may not agree with all the numbers, or even the idea of it, but for balance and to reinforce fluff with mechanics there is clearly a certain target for ability scores for each race, based on the idea that humans are the base with few or no special abilities, and other races are more specialized. They wanted humans to be all around ok, not good in any particular area. They wanted halflings and elves to have slightly better Dexterity. Dwarves to have more Constitution, etc. Conversely they may also want elves to be less strong than humans, dwarves to have less Dexterity, etc. By giving humans +1 to all, they accomplish those goals without the need for penalties.

Not only is this more streamlined and easier to assess than a list of plusses and minuses, but I feel there is a psychological aspect as well. Penalties aren't as fun as bonuses. It doesn't really matter, I know, whether you give someone a -1 or not give them a +1, but the perception of a penalty is that it is a negative thing to be avoided. So it does matter to some.

The question in my mind isn't really why didn't they add penalties, but why should they? The only reason I can think of is nostalgia, and that's not a good reason IMO. If your reasoning is that they should do so because their targets are wrong, then that's really a different debate...given the goals they had, I think using only bonuses is pretty elegant, at least with the races we've seen so far, and with the assumption that their goals are what I believe they are.