• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)

Really the core of your character is in class; race and background are just adjuncts at first level. This was the case across editions, and in fact in 1e and 2e the limitations that were placed on races, making only certain classes available to each of them, are what did the real work of reinforcing racial archetype.

The ability score modifiers simply don't matter that much. In 1e, an ability of 6 gives you a -1 penalty, whereas a score of 15 gives you a +1 bonus. So a racial modifier that added or subtracted 1 point was most likely meaningless (though, because it was bell curve, if you were on the higher or lower end of that the impact of a 1 point modifier was greater). Further, ability scores overall were less important. Attack scores and saving throws were all tied to class.

The unified d20 mechanic makes ability score modifiers more impactful, because now abilities affect saving throws, attack and damage bonuses, initiative, AC, HP, and a whole host of skills (though I'd still argue not that impactful mathematically). But they also got rid of race-class restrictions, basically trying to incentive them via ASI instead of just requiring them.

I think moving toward a "racial feats" system would be good for this kind of open ended design to make race choice feel more distinctive while still giving dms and players options to determine what archetypes are important for their setting and game, not the ones prescribed by the designers. But for the classic archetypes, you may be able to just include a note or a box that says, if you want the classic archetypes, pick one of these classes. Like a little sidebar in the halfling section that points them toward being rogues.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Really the core of your character is in class; race and background are just adjuncts at first level.
You are speaking mechanically, right?
I think moving toward a "racial feats" system would be good for this kind of open ended design to make race choice feel more distinctive while still giving dms and players options to determine what archetypes are important for their setting and game, not the ones prescribed by the designers.
I am not sure how you do this, that is, separate setting which entails culture, regionalities, and presumably, some innate talents from races.
 




Scribe

Legend
I don't think it would be that hard to come up with such abilities for my table. But then, my players aren't optimizers trying to exploit every combo
I agree, it could be done, it just does add another layer (or 3+) of complexity.

I was working on it for a time but my solution wouldn't work for every.

ASI tied to race/background/class.
Feats tied to race/class/ability scores.
Culture/Regional attributes/bonus/penalty.
Racial Paragon Abilities.
Bring back -2 Cha to Tiefling....
 

I agree, it could be done, it just does add another layer (or 3+) of complexity.

I was working on it for a time but my solution wouldn't work for every.

ASI tied to race/background/class.
Feats tied to race/class/ability scores.
Culture/Regional attributes/bonus/penalty.
Racial Paragon Abilities.
Bring back -2 Cha to Tiefling....
I think any feature one can get from multiple sources (like asi) is not going to be very distinctive, imo. But if you wanted to go down that route maybe one way would be to increase the skill list like in 3e and the tool list like non weapon proficiencies in 2e. Then you could create races, cultures, and backgrounds that gave you particular skills. But you're right that adds customization but also complexity. All of this is moving design towards a pathfinder 2e style, so I'm having second thoughts about that.

honestly in my game I'd be comfortable just saying, "you're an elf. Every time you do an elf-y thing, you can add your proficiency bonus to the roll."
 

Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
honestly in my game I'd be comfortable just saying, "you're an elf. Every time you do an elf-y thing, you can add your proficiency bonus to the roll."

There are certainly some very functional and fun RPGs where you choose traits for your character, and any time you can invoke those traits you get a bonus. Whether or not one sees that approach as "abusable" depends on what you think the point of RPGing is.
 

Scribe

Legend
I think any feature one can get from multiple sources (like asi) is not going to be very distinctive, imo. But if you wanted to go down that route maybe one way would be to increase the skill list like in 3e and the tool list like non weapon proficiencies in 2e. Then you could create races, cultures, and backgrounds that gave you particular skills. But you're right that adds customization but also complexity. All of this is moving design towards a pathfinder 2e style, so I'm having second thoughts about that.

honestly in my game I'd be comfortable just saying, "you're an elf. Every time you do an elf-y thing, you can add your proficiency bonus to the roll."
Yep plenty of ways, I'm more convinced by the day that caps, negative modifiers and tweaks need to come back.

Why all +2/+1, why not have 2/1 but locked into 2 configuration?

RabbitDude - Quick thinking and Quick of foot.

ASI: Either 2 Dex and 1 Int, or 2 int, 1 dex.

Everyone complains that there are too many +2 dex races? Slap some negative modifiers on there. Easy.

1/1/1? Why not?

Anything but floating 2/1 for everyone.
 

Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
Anything but floating 2/1 for everyone.

If I'm being completely honest I think we should get rid of ASIs completely.

My thought process:
"They really belong in the class, not the race. If you pick Fighter you should get +2 Strength"
"But...why? What if somebody wants to play a Fighter with high Int? Better make them floating."
"But...in that case, why not just change Standard Array and Point Buy so that you can get a 17?"
"Oh, right, because if you roll for scores you might not get a 17."
"Except that everybody who rolls cheats anyway."
 

Remove ads

Top