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

[Li Shenron]

I think the reason that penalties don't exist is that penalties aren't needed.

...

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.

Well apparently they were needed a long time ago, to differentiate the races for narrative or strategic reasons, while maintaining a basis of 0 for the humans. Thus not NEEDED in the strict sense, as pretty much nothing is strictly needed in every single RPG ruleset.

Indeed the psychological effect is there, and perhaps it is even the most important one, since increasing everyone by +1 can be effectively nullified by increasing the opponents (NPC and monsters) as well, but the feeling delivered can vary.

Ultimately, ability score penalties are unneeded just in the same way that ability score bonuses are unneeded. People want them for the feeling, and that explains the general trend slowly upwards across editions, every "new" product trying to deliver the subtle feeling that "your character will be better than before".

Narratively, there has always been the idea that races are different, so maybe elves are more agile but less robust than humans, or dwarves are more robust and less agile (or whatever, depending on the concept which might even change between editions). Core playable races are wanted to be on par, so it was easy to design them so that average human characters set the zero level, and other core races have a bonus here and a penalty there for a net zero average again. Feeling notwithstanding, that is IMHO the truly most elegant design, but eventually WotC designers value the sugar feeling more in this case. From a mechanical point of view, one way or the other doesn't matter much.

 

[the Jester]

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.

I, for one, couldn't tell you a thing about the standard array and point buy, in any edition. (I guess with the exception of 5e, since it's a current topic in several threads I'm following. But I'm sure I'll forget all about it in a few months.)

I never allow the use any method of character generation other than rolling dice in my game. Nor have I ever used such a method for a D&D character, with the sole exception of one time I played in a game that allowed only point buy.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I, for one, couldn't tell you a thing about the standard array and point buy, in any edition. (I guess with the exception of 5e, since it's a current topic in several threads I'm following. But I'm sure I'll forget all about it in a few months.)

I never allow the use any method of character generation other than rolling dice in my game. Nor have I ever used such a method for a D&D character, with the sole exception of one time I played in a game that allowed only point buy.

That's cool! I've only ever seen two Halflings and one Gnome played in actual D&D games, if we're swapping odd anecdotes!

 

[the Jester]

That's cool! I've only ever seen two Halflings and one Gnome played in actual D&D games, if we're swapping odd anecdotes!

Tell ya what- you can have all my point buy, and I'll take all your gnomes and halflings.

 

[Grazzt]

I, for one, couldn't tell you a thing about the standard array and point buy, in any edition. (I guess with the exception of 5e, since it's a current topic in several threads I'm following. But I'm sure I'll forget all about it in a few months.)

I never allow the use any method of character generation other than rolling dice in my game. Nor have I ever used such a method for a D&D character, with the sole exception of one time I played in a game that allowed only point buy.

Same here. We've never used point buy and likely never will. We actually use a few dice rolling methods that vary from time to time...just depends on what peeps are feeling at the time. (3d6 just like the old days, 4d6 drop lowest, or 3d6 and reroll any 1s).

We will likely adjust the racial bonuses lower and house rule penalties back in if we go with 5e. Just how we like it.

 

[the Jester]

Same here. We've never used point buy and likely never will. We actually use a few dice rolling methods that vary from time to time...just depends on what peeps are feeling at the time. (3d6 just like the old days, 4d6 drop lowest, or 3d6 and reroll any 1s).

We will likely adjust the racial bonuses lower and house rule penalties back in if we go with 5e. Just how we like it.

That's the most beautiful thing about this edition, to me- the extent to which the game encourages DMs and groups to own it and tweak it and reshape it to their taste.

 

[Pentegarn]

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

Why do you need to wait and see if the DMG does or doesn't provide an optional rule for racial modifiers? Just house rule it, especially if your players are of the same mind. If you're struggling with what the modifiers should be, use past editions to see what they did to help you make your own decisions.

 

[Atomo]

I houseruled it a bit different... Instead of actual penalties, I changed the cap. For example, dwarves can go at 20 cap to most attributes, EXCEPT Dexterity, which have cap on 15. Keeping cap on 15 works well with multiclass rules (at least how they were on playtests and assuming the requisites did not change), do not impeding you to multiclass on other classes. So, even at cap, a dwarf fighter/rogue is possible. It just never will be able (short of magical items) to go higher than Dex 15. Same for elves and Con, halflings and gnomes and Str, and so on... Humans, of course, are not capped under these rules.

EDIT: Humans still capped at 20, but for all abilities, I mean.

 

[Pentegarn]

I houseruled it a bit different... Instead of actual penalties, I changed the cap. For example, dwarves can go at 20 cap to most attributes, EXCEPT Dexterity, which have cap on 15. Keeping cap on 15 works well with multiclass rules (at least how they were on playtests and assuming the requisites did not change), do not impeding you to multiclass on other classes. So, even at cap, a dwarf fighter/rogue is possible. It just never will be able (short of magical items) to go higher than Dex 15. Same for elves and Con, halflings and gnomes and Str, and so on... Humans, of course, are not capped under these rules.

I did similar with the system I'm creating for my group. I have 18 as the natural cap on abilities, with racial bonus capable of exceeding 18. Sub-race bonuses cannot exceed 18. And I placed caps instead of penalties. Halfling is capped at 16 str, Elf at 16 con, etc.

 

[Lanefan]

I did similar with the system I'm creating for my group. I have 18 as the natural cap on abilities, with racial bonus capable of exceeding 18. Sub-race bonuses cannot exceed 18. And I placed caps instead of penalties. Halfling is capped at 16 str, Elf at 16 con, etc.

And if you really want to get carried away you can put the rolls on a bell curve, and adjust to suit. We've been doing this for years - it's complicated, but it works.

On 3d6 (or any number of d6 where you're taking the best 3) the bell-curve range is 3-18.

But what if you want to cap Hobbit strength at 16, say? That means anyone rolling a 17 or 18 is wasting it to put it on strength as it'll get knocked down to 16; the range is in effect 3-16. So, why not just adjust the natural roll on the 3-18 Human bell curve to the 3-16 Hobbit bell curve? Thus, a rolled 3 stays a 3, a rolled 11 becomes 10, a rolled 18 becomes 16, and so forth for each number between 3 and 18.

Again, it's complicated to explain and complicated to set up; it's surprisingly simple to use once it is set up and you've done it once or twice.

And, there are advantages: it's easy to then set your racial limits - both high and low - at whatever you want for each race and stat. Part-Orc charisma, for example, might be on a 2-14 bell curve; Hobbit dexterity on 7-19, etc. All Human stats stay as rolled, on a 3-18 curve.

Lanefan