Level Up (A5E) Do Player Characters Have Average Population Stat Distributions?

[Minigiant]

It you don't establish the rudiments of a base setting, then the game becomes a generic system like GURPS. D&D is a fantasy game. You can change anything you want (and there should be rules in the PH that encourage you to do that), but you have to have something to change it from.

I'm not saying that the game should be generic. I'm saying that game should not exclusively discourage race/classcombinations. It doesn't have equally support some combinations. The game should grant some advantages for choosing some race/class combinations.

Not every setting has tribal orcs who have no wizards, it shouldn't be baked in the system. No it doesn't have to support orcs switching their bonus from STR to Int. However it should give a wizard a noticeable benefit for having 14 STR.

Setting should subtract, not the game itself.

 

[CapnZapp]

If the assumption in the setting is, for example, that there are very few orc wizards, I don't see any value in making that also hold true among PCs.

I think this is problematic.

Not on the surface of it, but of it leads to the game losing some of the tension, the mechanical texture, that makes creating a character feel like playing D&D.

I think it is a mistake to just give everybody what they want, to make orcs just as good PC wizards as elves.

Idiosyncratic limits, limits that's "just there" for no particular reason, should be cherished. They define the experience of building a D&D character as opposed to a generic fantasy character.

 

[Phoebasss]

Random thought: What if race provided a stat floor, rather than a bonus? Just as an example, if you were playing an elf, and your Dex was less than 13, it would became a 13.

That way, you're still getting that setting building that comes from the tie between race and stat, but it doesn't benefit any particular class build, except by favoring multiclassing into classes with the related stat.

I think this solution is interesting, but it is too far in the opposite direction imo. It basically punishes you for investing at character creation in a stat your race would previously have had a bonus to. Like, halfling rogues now have less stats to play around with than halfling barbarians.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Random thought: What if race provided a stat floor, rather than a bonus? Just as an example, if you were playing an elf, and your Dex was less than 13, it would became a 13.

That way, you're still getting that setting building that comes from the tie between race and stat, but it doesn't benefit any particular class build, except by favoring multiclassing into classes with the related stat.

Weirdly, you'd have the opposite problem for those that are mechanically inclined.

The person involved (we will call them, um, Optimus Prime, or OP for short) would see a rule like that and then OP would just take their lowest ability and transmogrify it into a 13.

But since that wouldn't be great for a Dex build, you'd have the OP not using elves for Dex builds. Yeah, I know. Weird.

So I don't think that would have the desired impact. It would arguably result in the bizarre scenario where elves are rarely dex build, or, at most, are used for MAD characters.

 

[Phoebasss]

Idiosyncratic limits, limits that's "just there" for no particular reason, should be cherished. They define the experience of building a D&D character as opposed to a generic fantasy character.

I pretty much wholesale reject the idea that DnD isn't the "generic fantasy character" game already. It's the default game for any fantasy gaming group, and most people who play other games have reasons for doing so, while people usually pick DnD because... why not?

 

[Maxperson]

Quit only cherry picking the arguments you think you can distort. I'm pretty close to being done with you but I'll give this one more shot. Does 5e give more benefits to some race/class combinations than others? And if it does, is that good?

Benefits are in the eye of the beholder. Sure, if you pick a High Elf and get +2 to int, you will get a bonus to hit, DC, etc. However, if I go with a Dwarf Wizard, I get a bonus to hit points which are nice for a wizard, a +1 to con saves which are fairly common, and a +1 to concentration checks which helps with many spells. If I go with +2 dex I go first more often and have a higher AC, both nice for wizards. Charisma bonuses the social pillar. And so on.

It's pure opinion which is better. You feel that it has to be in the prime stat. I don't. I'm happy with the game giving me different bonuses to help my wizard and doing just fine with a 14.

 

[Phoebasss]

Benefits are in the eye of the beholder. Sure, if you pick a High Elf and get +2 to int, you will get a bonus to hit, DC, etc. However, if I go with a Dwarf Wizard, I get a bonus to hit points which are nice for a wizard, a +1 to con saves which are fairly common, and a +1 to concentration checks which helps with many spells. If I go with +2 dex I go first more often and have a higher AC, both nice for wizards. Charisma bonuses the social pillar. And so on.

It's pure opinion which is better. You feel that it has to be in the prime stat. I don't. I'm happy with the game giving me different bonuses to help my wizard and doing just fine with a 14.

What about Strength? You cheated by using Con as your example. It's the only stat useful to all characters in combat. Dex is pretty similarly generally useful for AC. But what do you do with Strength? Or Int? Those aren't opinion anymore. They are worse if you can't attack with them in a reasonable way.

EDIT: Not to mention that Combat is the only fully fleshed out pillar in 5e, and most situations in most games come down to combat resolution eventually.
EDIT 2: And no matter how you swing it, your primary stat is how you're going to be interacting with the world most often.

 

[TwoSix]

Weirdly, you'd have the opposite problem for those that are mechanically inclined.

The person involved (we will call them, um, Optimus Prime, or OP for short) would see a rule like that and then OP would just take their lowest ability and transmogrify it into a 13.

But since that wouldn't be great for a Dex build, you'd have the OP not using elves for Dex builds. Yeah, I know. Weird.

So I don't think that would have the desired impact. It would arguably result in the bizarre scenario where elves are rarely dex build, or, at most, are used for MAD characters.

Yea, that's certainly what I would do (and I anticipate most others would do). I'm just trying to decide if that's a bad thing. Maybe a 14 would be better. I think it would partially depend on if there were any other bonuses (say, extra feats or background bonuses) that were also in play, and the order in which they were applied.

 

[Phoebasss]

Yea, that's certainly what I would do (and I anticipate most others would do). I'm just trying to decide if that's a bad thing. Maybe a 14 would be better. I think it would partially depend on if there were any other bonuses (say, extra feats or background bonuses) that were also in play, and the order in which they were applied.

I think its the same problem as the original, just reversed.

 

[Haldrik]

I disagree that the choice is between bad and reasonable. The choice is more accurately between good(since you can play the game well with a 14) and slightly better, since +1 more is only slightly better.

So the choice is between good versus better. I can live with that characterization, from your perspective, where you perceive 14 to be good.

For me, I perceive 14 to be less than adequate, so I would characterize it differently from my perspective.