D&D (2024) Suggestion: higher Standardarray instead of the additional +2/+1

[Baumi]

What I found strange is that they moved the +2/+1 to the Backgrounds instead of eliminating it altogether and instead increase the Standardarray/Points instead.

This would eliminate one Step and is much less confusing (especially for newcomers). Especially since you could easily fall into the trap of increasing your lower Stats with the +2/+1 instead of the higher ones, which will loose you quite a few points since the increasing cost of higher Attributes. And of course the whole thing about turning odd into even attributes with this..

It's not a big thing if it stays the same. But I think itwould be a nice streamlining of Attributegeneration and I don't know any downsides to this. But maybe I overlooked something? What do you think and maybee convince me that this might be a problem.

 

[Nikosandros]

One issue is that in many games attributes are generated by rolling the dice.

 

[payn]

One issue is that in many games attributes are generated by rolling the dice.

Pretty much this. Even groups that do point buys and arrays want there to at least be the appearance of choice and/or difference in stat generation.

 

[delericho]

The only issue with it comes if you allow rolling for stats.

That said, it turns out that changing from 4d6-keep-3 to 5d6-keep-3 isn't far off a +1 bonus, and 6d6-keep-3 is reasonably close to a +2 bonus. So they could fix that that way. (That also has the advantage that Nd6-keep-3 caps at 18.)

 

[Yaarel]

For the sake of backwards compatibility, the improvements are not so strange.

If everyone at the table is using arrays, the DM can easily do a variant that has no low level improvements. Meanwhile the choice of background must relate narratively to the highest and lowest assigned array scores.

 

[Nikosandros]

The only issue with it comes if you allow rolling for stats.

That said, it turns out that changing from 4d6-keep-3 to 5d6-keep-3 isn't far off a +1 bonus, and 6d6-keep-3 is reasonably close to a +2 bonus. So they could fix that that way. (That also has the advantage that Nd6-keep-3 caps at 18.)

So, it would be roll four times 4d6, one time 5d6 and one time 6d6? (of course always keeping the best three)

 

[Baumi]

If you do roll Attributes, then why do you need the +2/+1? I mean you lost already all hopes of balance
All joking aside, that is certainly a good point. With the +2/+1 you can bring a little bit of order into the randomness. But you could just add the +2/+1 to the rolling method instead to every method.

But I really don't see the problem with backward compability. The higher Array should be in the same Attributerange as the old Charakcters with the old Array with the Race Attributepoints.

 

[CleverNickName]

The only issue with it comes if you allow rolling for stats.

"Allow"? Rolling 4d6 is the default method of character generation. All other methods are optional rules (or house rules).

 

[Baumi]

Try play with it in Adventure League

I would actually love a mix of one or two fixed Attributes (that you need to play that class or Idea) and the rest full random. This would certainly mix things up and you would still have a working Character.

 

[delericho]

So, it would be roll four times 4d6, one time 5d6 and one time 6d6? (of course always keeping the best three)

Yes. Or 5d6 three times and 4d6 three times, for +1/+1/+1.

"Allow"? Rolling 4d6 is the default method of character generation. All other methods are optional rules (or house rules).

It's the default now. When the new version comes out, who knows.

And, incidentally, the use of the standard array is not an optional, variant, or house rule - it's right there beside random rolling in the PHB.