D&D 5E +2 Wisdom Races and Kewl.

[ccs]

Adding variety to the game is a terrific idea.

I'd love to get rid of the racial bonuses to ability scores. Instead, I'm tempted to allow a player to decide what type of hero he or she is playing since in any population (of any type of creature), there are always variations.

Why not have an wise Elf, Halfling, Half-Elf, even a wise Half-Orc. I guess a lot of people like to make their choices based on racial bonus, but honestly, I'd much rather have players playing the types of PCs they envision rather than feel constrained by "racial" profiling.

(This post isn't as serious as it sounds. I'm not against the idea that fantasy races have different strengths and weaknesses. I just don't see a need to hold players hard and fast to those constraints in home games).

But you aren't holding them to those constraints. They're holding themselves to those constraints as they can't see past the path of mechanical optimization. Because at any time during pc creation they couldve decided to .put their highest stat in something other than where they have that racial advantage. Theyd STILL have a pwrfectly viable character, but no, the lure of maxing out that one bonus is too much to overcome.... And odds are they don't even care what race they're picking, just that they get x bonus. If the bonuses were high enough/in the right place they'd play a vegipigmy....

 

[Radaceus]

Yeah yeah yeah, lets turn this into a back and forth about optimized vs flair. And run verbal diarrhea on the argument for 500 pages.

And though I agree that it is not important what stats you put where... The question was regarding racial ability score modifiers, and the lack of any with +2 to Wisdom, and possibilities for races which would have said modifier.

 

[jayoungr]

I wonder why they didn't make any races with an out-of-the-box +2 to WIS. Considering how many classes use WIS, it seems like it had to be a conscious decision.

There aren't any feats with a +2 to WIS either, as the player of the cleric in my game was annoyed to notice.

 

[Blue]

I like how 13th Age does it. Your race gives +2 to ONE OF a selection of ability scores related to the race, and your class gives +2 to ONE of a selection appropriate for the class, and they can't be the same. So any race can play a cleric with a +2 Wis, not locking you down to only a few race selection if you don't want to be left behind.

This gives both race and the group of people who join a class weight in shaping your ability scores, and makes sure you'll also have your prime requisite. But a fighter (+2 str or con) who's a Dwarf (+2 Con or Wis) will likely be stalwart with +2 Con, while a Wood Elf (+2 Dex or Wis) will likely be agile. (Or either could be wise.)

 

[Radaceus]

Granted 4 classes use Wisdom as prime (Monk for AC, Ranger Cleric, Druid for Spellcasting), 4 classes also use Charisma(Bard, Sorceror, Paladin, Warlock. ..all for Spellcasting). Yet 2 Races provide +2 CHA (or maybe 3...I am away from books), so that cant be the logic.

The reasoning could be Wisdom saves, but most likely its to mitigate the spellcasting DC of the wisdom based characters.

 

[Illithidbix]

I wonder why they didn't make any races with an out-of-the-box +2 to WIS. Considering how many classes use WIS, it seems like it had to be a conscious decision.

There aren't any feats with a +2 to WIS either, as the player of the cleric in my game was annoyed to notice.

There aren't any feats that give +2 to any ability score, if there was it would just be better than getting a +2 Ability Score Improvement.
Observant and Resilient feats both let you gain +1 to Wisdom.

So a Variant Human could start with +2 to Wisdom.

But I concur, it might be a deliberate decision. Maybe because Humans and Dwarfs are traditional go to races for clerics?