D&D 5E Balancing the ability scores and their contribution to different classes

[Helpful NPC Thom]

First of all, you can't get rid of the Big Six. I don't care how sensible it is to fold Strength and Constitution together, or how you remove Charisma from the game. It doesn't matter what you want because we're talking D&D here, not your fantasy heartbreaker. If you dump the Big Six, you've lost D&D. Sorry. They are present in the roots of the game. Don't like 'em? Plenty of games have alternatives.

The way those ability scores work nowadays is awful, yes. Dexterity, Wisdom, and Constitution are certainly the most powerful ability scores due to their mechanical interactions. Back in the day, where ability scores influenced XP gain only, they mattered considerably less. Naturally, as people wanted more crunch to the game, they became more important in different ways. Glossing over their functions--opening doors, bonus languages, reaction rolls, etc.--the ability scores have become central to characters, yet they simultaneously don't matter except in a few specific cases. Wizards need high Intelligence, but nobody else cares about it. Sorcerers and warlocks need their Charisma, and that's about it. Unless you want to participate in social encounters, then you'd better have a decent Charisma or you're SOL if the GM calls for a skill test. But if you just want to stab, nuke, pulverize, annihilate, and obliviate things, you can safely dump it.

Better not dump Constitution, though, or you'll wind up dead with your paltry hit points in a system that measures character power by hit point growth and damage. You'll want it for saving throws, too, just like Wisdom and Dexterity, oh, and Dexterity does most of what Strength does, but better because you get Armor Class from it.

You want to fix ability scores? Then force diversification. Originally, I hate 3e's Weapon Finesse feat. Why should I have to take a feat to be decent with a light weapon? Turns out there's an opportunity cost because Dexterity is GOAT. Provide definite trade-offs for the ability scores. Stop making Charisma "the social stat," which is abysmal design. Stop making Intelligence "the wizard stat," because that's also abysmal design. De-emphasize the over-represented ability scores and add value to the weak ability scores.

There is an unbelievable amount of sense in the old game design that has been discarded in favor of streamlining. It's absurd to give Hit Dice with full Constitution bonus at every level for 20 levels...which is why that didn't happen in older editions. It's absurd to make Dexterity affect Armor Class, missile attacks/damage, initiative, and a common saving throw...which is why that didn't happen in older editions.

All the tweaks and fixes won't matter until the actual interaction of ability scores and mechanics is brought to heel.

 

[Jmarso]

It would be interesting see 5E ability score bonuses go to something like this, with only one point of ASI instead of 2 every 4 levels, and no human/demi-human character ability score able to go above a 19, period:

3 -3
4 -2
5 -2
6 -1
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 +1
16 +2
17 +2
18 +3

This gives you a large middle scale of 'average', and the ability to build some scores into the bonus ranges over the life of a character but not boost them all to ridiculousness with 2 points of increases every 4 levels.

 

[CubicsRube]

Shadow of the Demon Lorf uses 4 attributes and it works really well.

Strength folds constitution in to it (although the system does not give HP bonuses for this stat).

Agility is pretty much Dex

Intelligence is perception, saving against illusions, convincing people, insight, etc

Will is resisting many mental effects, fear and insanity (which is quite debilitating in this game).

The schools of magic are also divided between intelligence and will.

In addition to the PCs defense, enemies can (an often do) target each of these attributes (by fear, grappling, tripping, taunting, etc).

Every character gets a benefit out of every attribute as each of them cover something that is important to every character.

 

[CubicsRube]

If I was working with the D&D 6 attributes again I would:

Tie all WIS skills into INT, except Insight, which goes to CHA. I would also move initiative to INT. If you want to be skilled, hard to surprise, or quick off the drop, you need to be a quick witted PC.

Move all casting to WIS and make it the spellcasting stat.

CHA becomes a solely social focused ability.

CON mod does not add to HP on level. Instead the PC gets max hp ler level.

 

[ph0rk]

And if Dex is not as much a god class (honestly, using Int for Initiative would not be stupid, for example), for once, and if Dex is not one of your class core skills, then you will have even harder choices to make.

In retrospect its somewhat laughable they didn't do this from the get-go in 5e.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

If you dump the Big Six, you've lost D&D. Sorry. They are present in the roots of the game. Don't like 'em? Plenty of games have alternatives.

I like the big six. And I would definitely try and work with it. But I really, really disagree in your confident statement that somehow D&D isn't D&D anymore if you had five ability scores instead of six. That's a very limited view of what the game is. And I do play alternatives for what they are; and I have similar thoughts on how they work well or not and how they could be improved.

 

[billd91]

In retrospect its somewhat laughable they didn't do this from the get-go in 5e.

Personally, I don't think Int works well for initiative. PF2's take is a bit better - it's usually a skill and it depends on what you're doing. For most default times, it's Perception because that measures how well you can perceive a threat.

Alternatively, and I've posted about this on the boards before, if I were redoing the stats for D&D, I'd pair them up like 4e but throw out the idea of players picking one or the other to use for their primary saves/defenses. 4e bunged that up by having some class variations that could use the 3 efficiently while others tried to juggle 4 (with Str and Con usually being the ones in competition). What I'd do is define one as the offensive stat and the other as defensive - the offensive stat is the only one contributing to offensive abilities, the defensive one is the only one contributing to defense making all 6 have some value. My pairings would be Str (offense)/Con (defense), Cha (offense)/Wis (defense), and Int (offense)/Dex (defense). Then I'd define initiative as defensive (since perceiving and reacting is fundamentally about defending yourself) and have it based on Dex.
The only part that I have any conceptual issues with is the Int/Dex pairing - but it kind of works if you redefine Int as something more like Acuity - the keenness of mind and body. It works even better as a pair if we redefine Dex as Agility or somesuch and remove the idea of skilled hands implied by the term dexterity.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I recently watched that video in its entirety and found it to be very thought-provoking and informative. I suggest anyone that wants to know more about actual game design for RPGs (digital or otherwise) to watch this and take notes. (The channel also has other videos from different designers and developers on other game-topics like this one; I found this one to be of particular interest as it relates specifically to D&D in general, and the evolution of game system that is derived from it.)

The first thing to note is that the Pillars of Eternity rules is NOT the same as D&D in any edition. Yet we are prone to find equivalencies because there are similarities that are easily recognized. So in order to make this work in D&D terms, we need to get more imaginative with our perceptions and get away from the same old tropes. For example, MIGHT is not the same as STRENGTH in either function or flavor. Strength is most commonly associated with physical prowess, muscle, and brute power. Might, on the other hand, is more of a general measure of a character's strength that is not measured solely on physical muscle, mass, or force. This explains how spell damage can be affected through sheer will or power that has nothing to do with physical attributes.

I plan to rewatch the video at some point. Josh Sawyer made a lot of interesting points and important distinctions between the video game and tabletop rules. It would be nigh-impossible to accomplish what he did with any version of D&D that did not change some of the fundamental elements that many consider to be "sacred cows" of the system, and that is often what holds the game back from evolving into something even better IMO.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

What's worst, I think, is that those more heavily abstracted abilities feel disjointed from human characteristics

He says that it's part of the price to pay. I think there might be an elegant middle ground somewhere.

I think they really whiffed some things in Pillars of Eternity

I agree. I couldn't get too far in the game, I have other issues with it. But I wholly agree with the challenges he took on as a designer, whether he succeeded or not.

It would be nigh-impossible to accomplish what he did with any version of D&D that did not change some of the fundamental elements that many consider to be "sacred cows" of the system, and that is often what holds the game back from evolving into something even better IMO.

I agree. But I've seen similar issues in other games that don't have the issue of tradition, so I've put this in the D&D section, but it could have well been in the TTRPG general.

 

[TwoSix]

It would be interesting see 5E ability score bonuses go to something like this, with only one point of ASI instead of 2 every 4 levels, and no human/demi-human character ability score able to go above a 19, period:

3 -3
4 -2
5 -2
6 -1
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 +1
16 +2
17 +2
18 +3

This gives you a large middle scale of 'average', and the ability to build some scores into the bonus ranges over the life of a character but not boost them all to ridiculousness with 2 points of increases every 4 levels.

One of my favorite OSR games, Worlds Without Number, has a similar progression.

3: -2
4-7: -1
8-13: 0
14-17: +1
18: +2

Rolling a character with straight 0s is pretty common (although the rules allow you to set one score of your choice to 14 after rolling 3d6 in order).