DMG: Ability Score Mod Guidelines

[Sir Brennen]

Can someone tell me what the guidelines are for races with a bonus to the mental abilities (INT, WIS or CHA) according to the DMG? I'm re-examining some of my homebrew races and want to see if I'm conflicting with those suggestions.

For my second campaign I've noticed that players are playing spellcasters with favorable attribute mods, and want to make sure I haven't made "obvious choices" with these races (for example, an elf subrace gets +2 Int, -2 Con and I've had two players choose them for a wizard character.)

 

[Wolfwood2]

Can someone tell me what the guidelines are for races with a bonus to the mental abilities (INT, WIS or CHA) according to the DMG? I'm re-examining some of my homebrew races and want to see if I'm conflicting with those suggestions.

The guidelines are that a race shouldn't get a bonus to a mental ability unless it has a LA of at least +1. You have already foudn out for yourself why. Spellcasting stats are everything to a caster, and a bonus to one makes a race far too attractive for playing a caster. A level adjustment is very unattractive to a caster, though, removing the problem.

Of course this "rule" is violated even in the SRD by one of the elven subraces, so that gives you an idea how seriously WotC takes it.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Umm... I did the original post without a DMG handy, but after looking it over last night, I don't see anything which indicates a bonus to a mental stat is worth an LA adjustment. In fact, it looks like a bonus to one mental stat is balanced by a penalty to another (as if a penalty to a physical one is excessive.)

Where did you see this LA+1 suggestions for a racial bonus to Int, Wis or Cha?

 

[starwed]

Where did you see this LA+1 suggestions for a racial bonus to Int, Wis or Cha?

It's not in the DMG. But it is the accumulated wisdom of a whole bunch of DMs: mental stat increase==too good for spell caster's to pass up. As wolfwood mentioned, you've now seen this in action for yourself.

In general, when balancing a race, you have to assume that the most optimal character class is chosen. That's why whisper gnomes, for instance, are considered too good: almost all their abilities are really awesome for rogues, and their penalties don't make much difference.

If you give a race a +2 intelligence, it simply isn't balanced by a -2 Str; when does a wizard ever need a high strength? But a 20 intelligence is invaluable. The "tradeoff" isn't really a tradeoff for the wizard.

 

[ValhallaGH]

when does a wizard ever need a high strength?

When he's a victim of the black tentacles.

 

[Artoomis]

Back to the original question: The DMG lists Ability Score equvalencies on page 173. CON is considered equivalent to INT (or some others, but I'll not recreate the whole table here).

Whether or not the table is correct is really besides the point as Sir Brennen really only asked for the DMG guidlelines.

 

[javcs]

The guidlines of the table pretty much assume that the physical stats are roughly equal, with Con bonuses perhaps being slightly better, and the mental stats equivalent to each other and not worth as much as a physical score bonus.
For the record, I don't have my books available right now, so I might have messed up on a couple of the equivalencies.

Why is -2 Con +2 Int balanced (according to the table)?
Concentration checks - that 20 Int isn't helping the wizard when he's failing his Concentration checks. And HP - the wizard's 20 Int won't help him much when he gets dropped before he can act. (At lower levels, at higher ones, it doesn't matter as much what with stat boosting items).

 

[airwalkrr]

Ah yes, the grey chelf (cheesy elf). I am particularly conflicted on this one myself as I like the grey elf for flavor, especially in the World of Greyhawk which I usualy run, but I dislike the fact that every player of a wizard always wants to be a grey elf. I have come up with a way to somewhat balance it, although it is not perfect. I give my PCs action points. They can permanently spend action points to play a race not in the PH. I cost races not so much based on balance but according to how rare they are in the world. Grey elves are insular in the WoG so consequently, they cost 3 permanent action points. Valley elves are even more so and they cost 5 permanent action points. This is explained by the fact that "heroic" races are more adventurous. "But that's ridiculous! Grey elves shouldn't be that unheroic! You just hate your players and want everyone to play core races! Why not just limit them to core races?! Blah, blah, blah." Yea, I realize balance-wise grey elves are not THAT much more powerful than high elves. But the whole point is to encourage play of the core races that are prominent in the world while still allowing a player willing to sacrifice a little effectiveness to play something a bit different.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Why is -2 Con +2 Int balanced (according to the table)?
Concentration checks - that 20 Int isn't helping the wizard when he's failing his Concentration checks. And HP - the wizard's 20 Int won't help him much when he gets dropped before he can act. (At lower levels, at higher ones, it doesn't matter as much what with stat boosting items).

And don't forget Fort Saves. Yeah, that was my thinking; CON has more of an impact than STR does across all class choices. Yes, the players are finding the Int bonus attractive, but the Con penalty will come into play. Also, I've probably slanted the choice abit by making the Gray Elf favored class Wizard, and changing core elves to Ranger.

airwalkrr, that is a very unique and interesting approach for powerful-but-not-quite-worth-an-LA-adjustment races. Very nice. I'd steal it if I was using action points

 

[Stalker0]

Con is not necessarily the most powerful stat bonus, but imo it is the strongest stat penalty. All classes need con, noone wants a low con, and it ALWAYS comes up in a fight (HP).

So I think a +2 int, -2 con is perfectly balanced for a wizard