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

[turnip_farmer]

To me this means that a Goliath should have a potential maximum strength of 22 instead of 20, but they'd still need to work at it. A Goliath Wizard could have less strength than a Gnome or Halfling who trained their STR.

I like this idea. Make every ASI also imply an increase to the max. If you have a racial +2 Dex, then your maximum Dexertiy is 22. SImilarly, orcs have a max Intelligence of 18, and kobolds a max Strength of 18.

Following this logic through means a human would have maximums of 21, but who would care?

 

[Yaarel]

I have mixed feelings about what I am about to explore, but want to hear what you guys think.

Each race description lists "Prominent Abilities" to replace the "Ability Score Improvement".

For example:

Dark Elf (Drow)
...
Prominent Abilities. Many drow exhibit high Dexterity and Charisma.
Superior Darkvision. ....


A benefit of mentioning the Prominent Abilities is, they do avoid essentialism. Saying "many", makes it clear that it is not all, maybe not even the majority.

An other benefit is, perhaps this makes a mid-5e transition away from Ability Score Improvements, more palatable for traditionalist gamers who expect race essentialism to undergird the flavor of the race.

A cost of mentioning the Prominent Abilities is, they nevertheless perpetuate whatever racist memes the transition is trying to correct in the first place. For example, if high elves are intelligent, then wood elves are not. As if the members of one culture are more intelligent than the members of an other culture.

Also, changing race score improvements into floating score improvements, is liberating for the player who wants to build their own character concept. Even pressuring certain choices unnecessarily can souring. For example, my favorite D&D elves (4e Cha-Int eladrin, 3e Int-only sun elf) and my favorite mythologically accurate elves, have nothing to do with Dexterity. I would rather not run into it, unless I am intentionally exploring an agility gish.



So, which is the more helpful approach to remove unintentional racism?

• It is the way it is now. Players Handbook says one thing, but Tashas says something.
• The Players Handbook updates to clearly offer what Tashas says, but leaves the current race descriptions as is.
• As this post examples, the Players Handbook updates to make Tashas clear, and softens the race descriptions.
• The Players Handbook updates to make Tashas clear, and removes references to abilities from the race descriptions.

 

[clearstream]

Again, if the argument is that if the game doesn't model the thing accurately it shouldn't model the thing at all we can just throw away all the rules. D&D models practically nothing accurately.

That isn't the argument, though.

 

[the Jester]

That form of objectification is not an unmitigated positive. It is worrying that you believe it is.

It is better we discontinue this line of discussion.

I don't believe it's an unmitigated positive- as I hoped my post made clear by putting "ostensibly" in there.

The person who says, "Asian girls are hot," often does believe it's an unmitigated positive.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

That isn't the argument, though.

Then I don't know what the argument is...

 

[clearstream]

I don't believe it's an unmitigated positive- as I hoped my post made clear by putting "ostensibly" in there.

The person who says, "Asian girls are hot," often does believe it's an unmitigated positive.

So when I asked for an example that was positive, I did indeed mean positive. Not ostensibly positive, and given the topic at hand, not obviously problematic beliefs about what may be positive.

 

[Undrave]

I like this idea. Make every ASI also imply an increase to the max. If you have a racial +2 Dex, then your maximum Dexertiy is 22. SImilarly, orcs have a max Intelligence of 18, and kobolds a max Strength of 18.

Following this logic through means a human would have maximums of 21, but who would care?

I wouldn't keep the level 1 ASI though. And I would never put a character below the 20 maximum, nor would I make it something ALL races have.

I would just put a few of the 'big guy' races as having the ability to go beyond the usual 20 maximum, and maybe some of the faster flexible races with a max DEX, but that's about it.

It'd be a SPECIAL feature of the Goliath, but just a minor one since it only matters in the long run.

 

[the Jester]

Leveling improvements show that these ability improvements are strictly because of training and experience.

With regard to the pre-existing abilities, before level 1, the same can also be true.

In my setting, a level 1 character is an adult, roughly 20 years old, roughly equivalent to a college level student, during the "apprentice tier", levels 1 to 4.

As a teenager, this character has already been training before reaching level 1. There is a kind of "level zero" sotospeak, when the proficiency bonus was presumably +1, not +2 at level 1. Likewise, a time when the Wizard in training could only cast one slot-1 spell per long rest, rather than two at level 1.

The point is, an unusually high ability score can have resulted during this "level zero" training so to speak, while a teen.

Similarly a human spends their feat at level 1, to gain a +1 improvement to an ability score. Depending on character concept, this ability improvement might result from previous training.

Similarly again, player characters can use an array with high-ish scores in the Players Handbook for their characters. Depending on which settings, typical members of the same race might use an array whose scores are much lower. If the player characters are significantly higher than is typical, then the improvements of the player characters might be the result of training.

I'll ask again, and I'll even add a clarifier. Where is the evidence in the game, from any edition, that your starting ability scores are the result of anything but natural ability?

Your approach is fine. But unless I am mistaken- and I could very well be- no edition has ever laid out the claim that your starting stats are strictly the result of training and experience.

 

[the Jester]

You know, one way to bake in abilities into race AND not make any race-class combination disfavored if classes don't have a preferred stat. Have class features that leverage Int for fighters or Str for wizards.

Or- and call me crazy- maybe it's okay if not every race is equally good at everything. Maybe it's all right if elves make better rangers than dwarves, if dwarves make better fighters than gnomes, and if gnomes make better wizards than dragonborn.

Because the things that make one race better at being a given class never ever stop another race from being good at that class.

 

[Yaarel]

I think it should be feasible to have all classes with at least 3 different stats as possible main stats without the need for multiclassing or feats.

If I understand what you are saying, I agree.

If and when there is a 5e Psion class, I want the player to choose which casting ability they want, from any of the three mental abilities. There can be Intelligence Psions, Wisdom Psions, and Charisma Psions. Players choice.

These are different kinds of concepts. Intelligence has to do with understanding the nature of thought and reality. Charisma has to do with manifesting self-identity. Wisdom could relate to Willpower. All are legit.