D&D 5E Racial Ability Scores: Default Low Ability Score

[Knightfall]

So, I'm a bit of a grognard when it comes to how ability scores are generated for PCs. I've always liked that each race (besides humans) had a negative ability score adjustment. I realize that sort of concept has fallen out of favor and the D&D community is not likely to want to go back to it (if there is ever a new edition, which I doubt).

I've toyed with the idea of adding negative scores to the existing D&D 5E races (based mainly on 2E and 3E), but I don't think players would be willing to accept it.

However, late last night, I had an idea for an optional house rule.

What about the idea of specifying for each race a Default Low Ability Score? You'd roll as normal for your scores but when assigning the values (assuming you do it that way), you have to put the lowest score rolled in the Default Low Ability Score for the race you choose. For example, say you roll a 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8. You decide you're going to pick Elf as your race. Assuming you choose, say, high elf instead of one of the other subraces, you'd have to put the lowest rolled score (8) into Constitution (as per the Elf in 3E). There's no penalty to the roll, but you have to put the lowest score into Con.

Each race (or subrace) would have its own Default Low Ability Score (DLAB). Each DM would decide based on the campaign being played. Your high elf might not be the same as mine. You might prefer the elf to have its DLAB be Strength instead of Constitution. And for races that used to have more than one negative score (as per the Half-Orc in 3E), the player can choose either one or the other as the DLAB.

Now, I know a lot of people prefer to assign ability scores based on point buy, so it might be that when you use points for the DLAB, you pay more to increase it. 1 point becomes 2 and 2 becomes 3. I don't use point buy very often in my games, so it isn't something I am passionate about. Maybe this idea doesn't work with point buy or maybe you have to use fractions to make it fair (but complicated).

I just wanted to run it by the people here on EN World and get everyone's opinion. And I'm all for suggestions for how to make the idea better or if you have your own house rules about making 5E feel more like the older editions when generating ability scores.

Knightfall

 

[Li Shenron]

I like the idea.

I think it would work also, or even better, for the highest ability score "DHAB". So if you play an Elf Wizard you have to have Dex as highest ability score. It'll probably make people play more iconic race-class combinations.

I don't think you need to change the point-buy cost however, just say that at the end of the point-buy process you still need to have DLAB and DHAB of the chosen race.

 

[mortwatcher]

Wouldn't it be better to just ask your players to play the more iconic races? Imagine rolling a 7. Now that player is not playing elf (or any race that has to put their lowest to CON), since they will be behind on the expected HP curve and likely dying. I mean if your players dig that, sure go for it. As a default idea, I don't see the point of it that could not be resolved by just talking to your players.

e: this is also likely to make the difference between good rolls and bad rolls even worse, which is not a problem that needs more compounding

 

[ccs]

I like it.
I think I'll steal both the idea of DLAB & DHAB.

 

[Coroc]

I am also a fan of the bonus malus scores, but with 5e that does not work well because of the bound accuracy.

E.g. you say elf gets a quasi -2 for a constitution of 8. That is fine for 3.x e, because the elfs con saving throw will progress with his class but it will definitely progress.
With 5e it might be that it won't . Like never. If the elf does play a wizard he got prof in int and wis saves. So at level 20 assuming he never put a stat increase into his 8 con he will be stuck with a -1 on con saves. A lowly poisonous or whatever critte could finish him off.
Unless of course your player puts his next 3 attribute increases not in feats but to get his con from 8 to 14, which is practically a must, if he wants to survive the average challenges of adventuring which include con saves. Exhaustion is deadly for this one. Poison. Swimming / running / climbing long distances. This dude is snowflaked by design

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Unless of course your player puts his next 3 attribute increases not in feats but to get his con from 8 to 14, which is practically a must, if he wants to survive the average challenges of adventuring which include con saves.

The Resilient (Constitution) feat probably accomplishes this better than ASIs.

 

[Coroc]

The Resilient (Constitution) feat probably accomplishes this better than ASIs.

Of course, still it is only for saving throws, not for checks plus it requires the use of feats which his optional on some tables.

See, if it were me they need not have to changed the three save system of 3e for 5e but they have now, but still those three saves are the most used.

 

[Knightfall]

I like the idea.

I think it would work also, or even better, for the highest ability score "DHAB". So if you play an Elf Wizard you have to have Dex as highest ability score. It'll probably make people play more iconic race-class combinations.

I hadn't thought of that. It's an interesting idea I'm now going to think about.

I don't think you need to change the point-buy cost however, just say that at the end of the point-buy process you still need to have DLAB and DHAB of the chosen race.

Yes, it depends a great deal on DM implementation. I think some players would go for it while others might object to the concept. And I would rather not mess with the point buy system.

I like it.
I think I'll steal both the idea of DLAB & DHAB.

Steal away.

 

[Knightfall]

Wouldn't it be better to just ask your players to play the more iconic races? Imagine rolling a 7. Now that player is not playing elf (or any race that has to put their lowest to CON), since they will be behind on the expected HP curve and likely dying. I mean if your players dig that, sure go for it. As a default idea, I don't see the point of it that could not be resolved by just talking to your players.

e: this is also likely to make the difference between good rolls and bad rolls even worse, which is not a problem that needs more compounding

As a DM, I try not to limit which races my players want to play. Yes, you can always ask players to play the iconic archetypes, but I've rarely had that issue in my games. It has been harder to get some players to go off the map and play something different.

And I would say each of the elven subraces could/would have a different DLAB. High Elf would be CON (or something else if you don't want the PC behind the HP curve). Wood Elf would most likely be CHA, if you want to make them isolationists. Or you give the player the option of either CON or CHA for the DLAB for both the High and Wood Elf subraces. For drow, CHA doesn't work so you'd have to pick something else in addition to CON as an option. Maybe WIS.

And I realize not every group would want to use this house rule, which is why I'd consider an option thing to try. If it doesn't work for your group, that's okay. I might try to get a gaming group to try it and they might not like the idea at all. It all depends on how well each DM knows his players and if they want to try to create a classic feel to a 5E game.

I should also mention that I almost always let my players roll 4d6 (drop lowest) nine times, pick the best six, and arrange to taste.

 

[clearstream]

So, I'm a bit of a grognard when it comes to how ability scores are generated for PCs. I've always liked that each race (besides humans) had a negative ability score adjustment. I realize that sort of concept has fallen out of favor and the D&D community is not likely to want to go back to it (if there is ever a new edition, which I doubt).

I've toyed with the idea of adding negative scores to the existing D&D 5E races (based mainly on 2E and 3E), but I don't think players would be willing to accept it.

However, late last night, I had an idea for an optional house rule.

What about the idea of specifying for each race a Default Low Ability Score? You'd roll as normal for your scores but when assigning the values (assuming you do it that way), you have to put the lowest score rolled in the Default Low Ability Score for the race you choose. For example, say you roll a 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8. You decide you're going to pick Elf as your race. Assuming you choose, say, high elf instead of one of the other subraces, you'd have to put the lowest rolled score (8) into Constitution (as per the Elf in 3E). There's no penalty to the roll, but you have to put the lowest score into Con.

Each race (or subrace) would have its own Default Low Ability Score (DLAB). Each DM would decide based on the campaign being played. Your high elf might not be the same as mine. You might prefer the elf to have its DLAB be Strength instead of Constitution. And for races that used to have more than one negative score (as per the Half-Orc in 3E), the player can choose either one or the other as the DLAB.

Now, I know a lot of people prefer to assign ability scores based on point buy, so it might be that when you use points for the DLAB, you pay more to increase it. 1 point becomes 2 and 2 becomes 3. I don't use point buy very often in my games, so it isn't something I am passionate about. Maybe this idea doesn't work with point buy or maybe you have to use fractions to make it fair (but complicated).

I just wanted to run it by the people here on EN World and get everyone's opinion. And I'm all for suggestions for how to make the idea better or if you have your own house rules about making 5E feel more like the older editions when generating ability scores.

Knightfall

It would create yet stronger valency between class and race, and my feeling is that would be a bad thing. Class dictates race too heavily already in all likelihood.