6-5 Rule of Three

[DEFCON 1]

I do, a human getting a bonus to all scores sounds good to me (like angular banjos).

Do we know if these bonuses are +1 or +2?

Would a human gain +1 to all scores, and an additional +1 to one of his/her choice?

Does a high elf get +1 or +2 to Int?

Do classes also grant a bonus?

High elf gets +1 to INT.

The pre-gen characters were all reverse engineered and it was figured out what the races/classes got for bonus ability scores. Every character started with the Elite array-- 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8... and then added:

Fighter +1 STR
Cleric +1 WIS
Rogue +1 DEX
Wizard +1 INT

Mountain Dwarf +1 STR
Hill Dwarf +1 CON
High Elf +1 INT
Lightfoot Halfling +1 DEX
Human +1 to all six scores and additional +1 to a score of their choice.

I would not be surprised if the Wood Elf gets a +1 to DEX, Half-Elf gets a +1 to CHA, and Stout Halfling gets a +1 to CON.

As far as the human bonuses... I think the extra +1s across the board in place of any actual racial abilities actually works well. It's easy, it's simple, and after application you get bonuses to some skills and saves, because some of your modifiers will go up a point as a result.

 

[I'm A Banana]

So then we have a curious question: what will paladins DO as a class?

If you look at the playtest materials now, and maybe split them in half, you might have a paladin with a lower bonus on accuracy and/or damage, with some orisons and/or a first-level spell. That's the classic Paladin = Fighter + Cleric.

But if you look at the history of the class, you have mounts, smites, lay-on-hands, disease immunity, better saves, some divine magic, marking...a bit of a grab-bag, really.

One way to split the difference might be to make the paladin something like "the at-will cleric." Fighters can use their abilities over and over again over the course of the adventure and never run out, so maybe Paladins get some at-will divine powers, so that THEY never run out.

Anyway, that's just spitballing. As for everything else: HA! I didn't think these races had penalties! And I guess I don't really care if they do or not. If they do, that's cool, it's fun. If they don't, ah well, whatever.

 

[GM Dave]

I LOVE the bad reaction to the Human bonuses here and like every other forum.

Does anyone like it?

I'm a fan.

It is nice to see human having some reason to be plentiful (and not just because of supposed birth rate); especially, in the adventuring crowd.

Let's face it is tough often being the only individual in a dungeon or sneaking at night and having to ask 'What is killing us this time?'

With the new version of races giving better dice of damage to the same weapons that the humans are holding in their hands; the humans are going to need something to make them attractive (and not just a bonus to charisma).

I mean, who wants to be a human fighter with an axe when a Dwarf with an axe uses the same weapon but gets a bump to a higher dice type? That same Dwarf is immune to poison (not just a better save but immune!). Try to compete with immune to poison Dwarf when selecting a rogue (or compare against being Lucky&Naturally Stealthy or Immune to Sleep&Charm with Keen Senses).

The bonus to attributes is also similar to 1e and 2e where Humans were the only ones to be capable of having 18s in all six attributes and were the only ones to be able to top the strength chart at 18/00.

You have a reason to choose human which is good when there are plenty of good reasons to choose other races.

 

[GM Dave]

So then we have a curious question: what will paladins DO as a class?

If you look at the playtest materials now, and maybe split them in half, you might have a paladin with a lower bonus on accuracy and/or damage, with some orisons and/or a first-level spell. That's the classic Paladin = Fighter + Cleric.

But if you look at the history of the class, you have mounts, smites, lay-on-hands, disease immunity, better saves, some divine magic, marking...a bit of a grab-bag, really.

One way to split the difference might be to make the paladin something like "the at-will cleric." Fighters can use their abilities over and over again over the course of the adventure and never run out, so maybe Paladins get some at-will divine powers, so that THEY never run out.

Anyway, that's just spitballing. As for everything else: HA! I didn't think these races had penalties! And I guess I don't really care if they do or not. If they do, that's cool, it's fun. If they don't, ah well, whatever.

They could borrow the Avenger mechanic for the Paladin.

The Paladin could name his current 'hated' foe and get advantage in combat against that person in exchange for disadvantage (or granting advantage) to anyone else attacking them.

Add a 'lay on hands' battery powered like the 'hit dice' but useable for other things (so double the hit dice per day that a Paladin can recover but allow them to spend those dice on more than health for themselves like 2 hit dice cost allows a roll inside of combat as a free action or reaction to the Paladin or at the cost of an action to heal another person with a touch).

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

If humans got +1 to all ability scores, but other races got +2 to one, I'd be cooler with that. It represents the human versatility that has been part of the game for ages while keeping the idea that some races are naturally smarter or stronger than humans. As it currently sits, though, humans have the best ability score generation across the board.

 

[Jinete]

I LOVE the bad reaction to the Human bonuses here and like every other forum.

Does anyone like it?

Dear God no. In a game which will apparently focus heavily on ability scores, getting +1 to every score as opposed to +1 to just one is a bit much.

I hope they balance this out somehow, I don't want any more parties with all human PC-s.

 

[Ellington]

I like paladins as a base class.

I like the guideline they give us for advantage/disadvantage.

I don't like the human +1 to all ability scores. So every human on average is as intelligent as a high elf and as stout as a dwarf? No sir. It sort of makes me feel as if all other races are inherently inferior when it comes to abilities.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm a fan.

It is nice to see human having some reason to be plentiful (and not just because of supposed birth rate); especially, in the adventuring crowd.

Let's face it is tough often being the only individual in a dungeon or sneaking at night and having to ask 'What is killing us this time?'

With the new version of races giving better dice of damage to the same weapons that the humans are holding in their hands; the humans are going to need something to make them attractive (and not just a bonus to charisma).

I mean, who wants to be a human fighter with an axe when a Dwarf with an axe uses the same weapon but gets a bump to a higher dice type? That same Dwarf is immune to poison (not just a better save but immune!). Try to compete with immune to poison Dwarf when selecting a rogue (or compare against being Lucky&Naturally Stealthy or Immune to Sleep&Charm with Keen Senses).

The bonus to attributes is also similar to 1e and 2e where Humans were the only ones to be capable of having 18s in all six attributes and were the only ones to be able to top the strength chart at 18/00.

You have a reason to choose human which is good when there are plenty of good reasons to choose other races.

Yes there has to be a reason to be a human but 5E is based on ability scores and mods. +1 to all of the too powerful in this setup. Unless the other races get +2 or +3, it male human the top tier choice.

And after playtestimg the dwarf, immunity to poison is weak. The Cave of Chaos has only 2 poisonous monsters and 1 poison trap. And the poison damage is very low. Unless your DM is doing a drow hunting Underestimate game or a Swarm of Vermin, immunity to poison barely is factored it and saves you some a little damage.

But +1 to all is Always Helpful.

 

[Steely_Dan]

So, do Ability Scores every increase in 5th Ed?

 

[GM Dave]

Yes there has to be a reason to be a human but 5E is based on ability scores and mods. +1 to all of the too powerful in this setup. Unless the other races get +2 or +3, it male human the top tier choice.

And after play testimg the dwarf, immunity to poison is weak. The Cave of Chaos has only 2 poisonous monsters and 1 poison trap. And the poison damage is very low. Unless your DM is doing a drow hunting Underestimate game or a Swarm of Vermin, immunity to poison barely is factored it and saves you some a little damage.

But +1 to all is Always Helpful.

+1 is not always helpful unless you are doing min-max point buy generation. Random roll it is likely a 50-50 benefit.

The base system still runs on ( Attribute -10 ) /2 for bonus generation with round down for any fractions.

That means that on an odd number the +1 is useful but on an even number the +1 does nothing.

Even if you get the +1 helping on every single attribute then the second +1 that would mean that the human is 5% better at rolling the die. It might even be simpler for generation purposes to say humans are +1 to every die roll but that would technically be more powerful then +1 to every attribute (Ah, the illusion that six +1 bonuses is superior to a single +1 bonus).

You also have to remember that Elves, Dwarves, and Halflings are getting a larger damage die on certain weapons which helps in every single combat (the play test characters don't spell out all the advantages that were provided).

To be most effective the +1 provided needs to be paired with a class bonus which brings it in line with the other races. Humans might be a bit better at multi-class (though it looks like they'll likely use themes and backgrounds to replace multi-class for the most part) because they could use their extra +1 to possibly increase another attribute (I bet they specify that the bonus from class can not be the same attribute that the humans can choose for their extra +1 which would mean no race has more than +1 ~ 5% bonus to their key attribute but humans have an off attribute that they are 'versatile' in using).