D&D General Normal Distribution Ability Scores

[Xeviat]

I've done it. It works great, and like you said, totally facilitates more stat differentiation within classes.

The only real change I made other than this is that I made a lot of spells and abilities start to feature Str, Int, and Cha saves, since they're pretty rare compared to Dex, Con, and Wis.

I've been wanting to go through the whole PHB and adjust the saves to be more balanced. What would you recommend for each?

 

[ezo]

I've been wanting to go through the whole PHB and adjust the saves to be more balanced. What would you recommend for each?

Allow any CON save to use STR
Allow any DEX save to use INT
Allow any WIS save to use CHA

That is the easies way I can think of.

 

[TwoSix]

I've been wanting to go through the whole PHB and adjust the saves to be more balanced. What would you recommend for each?

Str saves: General principle was anything that impacted core physiology (like poison and disease) stayed Con; affects that were generalized energy trauma became Str. As an example, Ray of Sickness was Con, but Thunderwave became Str. A character who had higher Str than Con could also use Str for Concentration checks. I also had a house rule that any character using a shield could use Str in place of Dex for AC calculations.

Int saves: I moved a few Dex and Wis save spells into Int, generally anything where it felt like the possible impact could be calculated rather than reacted to. This impacted more monster abilities than spells, though. (Detect Thoughts and Guardian of Faith are examples I can think off from the top of my head.) I also had a feat that gave +1 to Int and allowed the use of Int for Dex saves.

Cha saves: Generally anything that impacted the soul or overall "identity" of the target I moved to Cha. Compelled Duel, Suggestion, and Hold Person were three examples. Like Int, I had a feat that gave +1 to Cha and allowed the use of Cha for Wis saves.

 

[overgeeked]

Any more I'd rather go with either 4d6, drop the lowest or a simple point swap. You get three 11s and three 10s. For every -1 you take in one stat, you gain a +1 to spend somewhere else. So if you want an 18, you're taking a 3 (or the equivalent). While the bonuses won't always average out to 0, they'll be close enough.

 

[ezo]

You get three 11s and three 10s. For every -1 you take in one stat, you gain a +1 to spend somewhere else. So if you want an 18, you're taking a 3 (or the equivalent). While the bonuses won't always average out to 0, they'll be close enough.

Since PCs don't generally want to average out to +0, I would do a -1 to X gives +2 to Y.

Start
11 - 3 = 8 (-1)
11 - 2 = 9 (-1)
11 - 1 = 10 (+0)
10 +6 (3x2)= 16 (+3)
10 +4 (2x2)= 14 (+2)
10 +2 (1x2)= 12 (+1)

Net you end up with +4 modifiers before adding any race or background or whatever you're using for any ASI.

 

[overgeeked]

Since PCs don't generally want to average out to +0, I would do a -1 to X gives +2 to Y.

Start
11 - 3 = 8 (-1)
11 - 2 = 9 (-1)
11 - 1 = 10 (+0)
10 +6 (3x2)= 16 (+3)
10 +4 (2x2)= 14 (+2)
10 +2 (1x2)= 12 (+1)

Net you end up with +4 modifiers before adding any race or background or whatever you're using for any ASI.

Right. Which is exactly why you don't do that. You end up with beefy characters with effectively zero weaknesses, stat wise, which defeats the entire purpose of the point swap. To generate characters with both substantial strengths and weaknesses. Though seeing it like that, it might be better to go with straight modifiers instead of points. Too easy to cheese.

 

[ezo]

Right. Which is exactly why you don't do that. You end up with beefy characters with effectively zero weaknesses, stat wise, which defeats the entire purpose of the point swap. To generate characters with both substantial strengths and weaknesses. Though seeing it like that, it might be better to go with straight modifiers instead of points. Too easy to cheese.

It depends on how low you want it to go?

Is having a 14 or 15 worth having a 6 or 7? Not really IMO.

Even at a 1:2 ratio like I posted, you aren't getting super characters really, especially if you limit it to only points from one score can be applied to another score.

In other words, if you want that 18 (or 19 I guess), you'll have a 6 or 7 to trade for it.
11 - 4 = 7 (-2)
11 - 4 = 7 (-2)
11 - 4 = 7 (-2)
10 + 8 = 18 (+4)
10 + 8 = 18 (+4)
10 + 8 = 18 (+4)

Nets you +6 total modifiers, still no worse than on par with RAW currently.

Even a 2:3 ratio might work well enough, but for myself 1:1 would be too limiting and I'd just have 11's and 10's personally.

 

[TwoSix]

Right. Which is exactly why you don't do that. You end up with beefy characters with effectively zero weaknesses, stat wise, which defeats the entire purpose of the point swap. To generate characters with both substantial strengths and weaknesses. Though seeing it like that, it might be better to go with straight modifiers instead of points. Too easy to cheese.

1) Roll 2d6, treating ones as twos. Record.
2) Subtract the number rolled from 21. Record.
3) Repeat two more times, recording all numbers.
4) Those are your 6 six stats, assign as desired or roll 1d6 for their assignment.

High variance but balanced across all sets of rolls.

 

[Lanefan]

yeah, I would rather ax the CON stat alltogether. give everyone +2 HP per level and move all CON saves to STR.
remove 13 from array, or 5 pts from point buy and remove +1 ASI from generation.

it's basically "the 14" stat. then give or take 2.
in what I played 5e, about 80% had 14 CON, 10% 12 CON, 10% 16 CON and rest is probability error.

might see 13 or rarely 15 if caster is planning for Resilient CON ASAP, but that is 14 in the making.

That's 5e, though, where 14 actually gives you a bonus.

In 1e bonuses don't start until 15, meaning the only difference between a 7 Con and a 14 Con is your resurrection survival scores and, later, your roll-under odds if-when relevant.

 

[Lanefan]

Even at a 1:2 ratio like I posted, you aren't getting super characters really, especially if you limit it to only points from one score can be applied to another score.

In other words, if you want that 18 (or 19 I guess), you'll have a 6 or 7 to trade for it.
11 - 4 = 7 (-2)
11 - 4 = 7 (-2)
11 - 4 = 7 (-2)
10 + 8 = 18 (+4)
10 + 8 = 18 (+4)
10 + 8 = 18 (+4)

Nets you +6 total modifiers, still no worse than on par with RAW currently.

Even a 2:3 ratio might work well enough, but for myself 1:1 would be too limiting and I'd just have 11's and 10's personally.

I'll take 7 Wisdom if I can get 18 Intelligence for it, all day long!

Gonzo mage, here I come!