Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6347406" data-attributes="member: 2067">I mean, they're CALLED the same thing, and they still basically represent the same things, but my limited experience with 5e so far tells me they're being used in a very different way.Mostly, that it feels like they don't have to be very high any more to be effective.In 4e, not maxing out your High Stat at first level was basically operating at a penalty since almost everything you would do flowed through that stat. In 3e, you not only needed an 18+ in your main stat to start with, you needed to KEEP increasing it, using ability-score boosting items to continue to meet the rising DC's and AC's and saving throws. In 2e or 1e, I still remember the "If you're not getting an XP bonus from your Prime Requisite, just roll again" house rule. I'm sure there's varying degrees of emphasis placed on other ability scores at various tables at any given e, but 5e seems to emphasize a breadth in ability scores that is a little new for D&D.Like, the hard cap at 20! It feels like there's a LOT less drive to start off with as high a score as possible if you're going to max out by your first ability score bump. And the standard array is so low and the bumps are only +1 so I feel like a 15 or even a 14 or a 13 in my "main stat" might be acceptable, at least for the first few levels, especially if it means shoring up one of my nonproficient saving throws or I've got some weird multiclass shenanigans in store. This might just be all in my head, though. What do you think? Does 5e look like it's generally cooler with lower numbers? How far could it go? Could I be "Captain 3e Commoner" and have 10's accross the board and do fine?</blockquote>

Verification