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

[Crimson Longinus]

The immediate risk there is that, given as Humans are the default baseline, every other playable creature can only be the same intelligence or smarter than a Human; never dumber. Extrapolate this across the other five stats and Humans get left behind.

So what mechanism goes in to balance this out so people will still play Humans?

You don't need to extrapolate it to other stats though. It makes perfect sense for halflings to be less strong than humans for example. Furthermore, there are other things than ASIs, variant humans are probably the most popular species currently, and that's due their free feat.

 

[Lanefan]

You don't need to extrapolate it to other stats though. It makes perfect sense for halflings to be less strong than humans for example.

But that wasn't the idea presented, though.

What was presented was that you could always have a race or species be better at something than most but never one worse at something. As Humans are the baseline and thus will always be tied for the worst at anything, this leaves Humans behind.

Furthermore, there are other things than ASIs, variant humans are probably the most popular species currently, and that's due their free feat.

Assuming, of course, that one uses feats in one's game.

They are, after all, optional.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But that wasn't the idea presented, though.

What was presented was that you could always have a race or species be better at something than most but never one worse at something. As Humans are the baseline and thus will always be tied for the worst at anything, this leaves Humans behind.

That was not the idea I presented. I merely said that 'dumb species' is something that might best be avoided. It has too many apparent negative connotations.

Assuming, of course, that one uses feats in one's game.

They are, after all, optional.

This is a thread about more crunchy version of the game. Feats can be assumed.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That and the other +1s mean very little. If you point buy or array, the other +1s won't give you much and if they do give you something, it's in your 3rd-6th stat. Only two of the +1s will have high worth and since most campaigns die before 10th level, the two ASIs you will get will go to feats or your primary two stats.

If you use feats, the alternative human is the way to go and you don't get the extra +s. If you don't use feats, 4 of the 6 +s don't really mean anything.

Actually, with the extra +1's, you save points in those scores with point-buy and can use the extra "point-buy" points for a pretty good third score. For example:

Human with point-buy:
16
16
14
11
10
10

Human variant with point-buy:
16
16
11 (maybe 12 with +1 from half-feat?)
10
10
10

The difference between a 14 and 11 is pretty significant, and at the very least will probably help DEX OR CON. Ranged warriors (archers, rogues, etc.) are the only ones I can think of who possibly won't benefit from a 3rd good score.

You also have the minor bump of 11 over 10, which with a half-feat later on could bump the 11 to 12. shrug

Now, if your variant human's feat is a half-feat, you could add another +1 for the half-feat, but you would still be 2 points of total attributes short of the base human.

If you roll scores, however, odds are many of those extra +1's won't be much good. Also, with standard array the base human is pretty weak.

 

[Campbell]

Personally I do favor ability score increases for races/ancestries/heritages because these build choices to have an impact and I like to encourage on theme builds. I do not mind a certain level of flexibility (some floating bonuses), but I do not think every race/ancestry/heritage needs to be structured in the same way.

I just think that taking mechanics meant for creating player characters and like generalizing that to the rest of the setting is like actively harmful.

 

[aco175]

The pressing need for DMs to be able to use shortcuts means that both WotCs and Paizos game now actively supports NPCs that only approximates PC power. That is, PCs and NPCs don't play by the same (creation) rules. A "NPC Bard" is a monster, not a PC, so they can - and do - have abilities no PC class offers all the time.

This is why I try to not have NPCs with class levels or names. My NPC 'bard' is called a scald, or singer, or music-man. This way I can tell the players that bards get their cool abilities and music-men (people) get theirs. Some of the powers may come from the PC class, but I am free to add other cool abilities.

For example; I made a NPC warrior with the fighters 2nd wind ability and brit on 19-20 ability. I skipped the extra action power and 2 attacks at 5th level to give him a 1/rest ability to attack everyone in 5ft of him.

 

[aco175]

Some recent stuff on this thread talks about humans getting +1 to all 6 abilities and the variant human getting a feat being better. There was some earlier talk on doing away with the racial ASI and making it a feat to take at 1st level or PCs can take another feat, like variant humans. Is the feat that good compared to the +1 to all stats that the +2 to one stat needs to be changed to make it a worthy feat. Does it need to be more of +3, or +2 with some other kick?

 

[Maxperson]

Actually, with the extra +1's, you save points in those scores with point-buy and can use the extra "point-buy" points for a pretty good third score. For example:

Human with point-buy:
16
16
14
11
10
10

Human variant with point-buy:
16
16
11 (maybe 12 with +1 from half-feat?)
10
10
10

The difference between a 14 and 11 is pretty significant, and at the very least will probably help DEX OR CON. Ranged warriors (archers, rogues, etc.) are the only ones I can think of who possibly won't benefit from a 3rd good score.

You also have the minor bump of 11 over 10, which with a half-feat later on could bump the 11 to 12. shrug

Now, if your variant human's feat is a half-feat, you could add another +1 for the half-feat, but you would still be 2 points of total attributes short of the base human.

If you roll scores, however, odds are many of those extra +1's won't be much good. Also, with standard array the base human is pretty weak.

If you push for two 16's. My friends and I feel that the array given is probably the best one to go for if you point buy. 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 turns into 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8 and a feat. Bonuses in 4 stats instead of three and a feat. I think bonuses of +3, +2, +2, +1, -1 are better than +3, +3, +2. The -1 will be in the 6th stat, which is fine.

 

[Maxperson]

That was not the idea I presented. I merely said that 'dumb species' is something that might best be avoided. It has too many apparent negative connotations.

But so do murder, assault, theft, robbery and coercion, yet D&D players are just fine with those on a daily basis.

 

[Phoebasss]

But so do murder, assault, theft, robbery and coercion, yet D&D players are just fine with those on a daily basis.

But if you put in the orc stat block that they commit more theft and assault you'd really have an issue.