Level Up (A5E) Where to put ability bonuses during character creation

[Tales and Chronicles]

Apparently, from what I've read on teh Interwebz, if races don't have ability modifiers then they are "just humans with halloween masks" or something like that. Derp.

Exactly. God forbid a character is actually defined by its way of interacting with the setting and the way he's seen by the inhabitants of the setting and the choices it made at level 1 having more than a passing effect on a ''build''. A race is only meaningful as long as it has an influence in the numbers on a sheet.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I may try that. Thank you!

I am partial to 3d6(drop lowest)+4. It gives you a score between 6 and 16, with the lower end being rarer. I never ran the numbers, but I seem to notice higher average starting scores (I dont have racial ASI in my game, by the way).

 

[jmucchiello]

Point 1: I kind of like the PF2 (or StarFinder) where everything give a stat bonus. But again, there should be choice. For example, if classes give a bonus they should give a choice among 2 bonuses: Fighter +2 Str or +2 Dex, Barbarian +2 Str or +2 Con, Cleric +2 Wis or +2 Cha, etc. Race should have the thing. Choice. Elf could be +2 Dex or +2 Int, etc.

Point 2: The problem with lowering stats overall is it breaks compatibility with existing 5E material.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I may try that. Thank you!

Cool. I hope it works out for you.

Actually, I will probably stick with the normal stuff "as is" and remove racial bonuses anyway, but I know I want a lower-keyed game. If the rest of my groups rebel, I will suggest this as well.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I am partial to 3d6(drop lowest)+4. It gives you a score between 6 and 16, with the lower end being rarer. I never ran the numbers, but I seem to notice higher average starting scores (I dont have racial ASI in my game, by the way).

Here you go: AnyDice

Average is 12.46, so close to the 12.5 I think is pretty good.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Point 2: The problem with lowering stats overall is it breaks compatibility with existing 5E material.

Not one iota.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Here you go: AnyDice

View attachment 124755

Average is 12.46, so close to the 12.5 I think is pretty good.

Thank you for that!

 

[jmucchiello]

Not one iota.

Monsters in the existing books and adventures assume the existing point buy average. If the game lowers that average, it affects the playability of those monsters and adventures. This is more than one iota, at least.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Monsters in the existing books and adventures assume the existing point buy average. If the game lowers that average, it affects the playability of those monsters and adventures. This is more than one iota, at least.

Still have to disagree.

You could play a character with all 10's. Would it be harder, sure! But the game is playable.
On the other end of the spectrum, you could have a PC with all 18s at level 1, and the game plays fine that way too. (Way to easy IMO, but you can still play it.)

Finally, we're talking, on average, what? I difference of -1 to maybe two modifiers...? If you think 5E is so fragile that makes it incompatible, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Point 2: The problem with lowering stats overall is it breaks compatibility with existing 5E material.

There's way to have no bonuses and yet the same stat average starting stats.

We are talking about removing the bonuses from race/background/culture and lower stats and increase the point buy/standard array/ rolling method.

But I dont believe that having 1 less on a d20 roll means that much that it breaks compatibility. I have hope that 5e, as a system, is a little more robust than that. I personally played a bunch of characters with high stat being 14 at level 1 (16 at level 10 ish), and I cant say I noticed I failed my action by 1 that often. When I miss, I miss royally, I miss by at least -6 or -7, never barely .