D&D General How should the power budget be distributed between class, dubclass, race, background (and other points)
- Thread starter Tigris
- Start date
A Gnome would have +1 to Illusion Spell DC
A Gith would deal more psychic damage
A Human can reroll and know more spells.
Each species should have both a martial and a spellcasting element, a neutral element applicable to both, or a major feature not associated with either.
Species should serve the class.
Baron Opal II
Legend
Hmm...
Class - 55%; The core of the character, and the means by which they seek to change the world to their ends.
Subclass - 25%; The specializations thereof, where the character chooses where in the main their heart lies.
Race - 15%; A foundation of the character, with nods toward biology and culture.
Background - 5%; Acknowledgement of abandoned apprenticeships or youthful trials. Glance at the past, but look to the future.
Feats - 0%; In my mind feats are not to add power but to customize. They adjust aspects of the class to show personality or barter away other abilities to gain new ones. Feats can be an alternate to multiclassing, for example, or changing of style (fire spells are now thunder based).
Class - 55%; The core of the character, and the means by which they seek to change the world to their ends.
Subclass - 25%; The specializations thereof, where the character chooses where in the main their heart lies.
Race - 15%; A foundation of the character, with nods toward biology and culture.
Background - 5%; Acknowledgement of abandoned apprenticeships or youthful trials. Glance at the past, but look to the future.
Feats - 0%; In my mind feats are not to add power but to customize. They adjust aspects of the class to show personality or barter away other abilities to gain new ones. Feats can be an alternate to multiclassing, for example, or changing of style (fire spells are now thunder based).
Kannik
Legend
Hmmm, I might break it down a bit further into distinguishing combat vs exploration/activity/other encounters percentages. So with that, I have my preferred "4P" method of defining characters in a D&D style game: Parentage, Past, Profession, and Power. Which equates to:
Ancestry (Parentage): This denotes the physiological traits of the character based on their lineage: wings, breath weapons, poison resistance, senses, stoneskin, etc. For combat power, let's call it 10%-15%, with most abilities being lateral expansion of abilities/options rather than a hard growth in power. For activity power, it might be closer to 25%.
Background (Past): The character's upbringing and culture. This will almost entirely be relevant towards skills and knacks and RP-heavy abilities. Combat power rounds down to 0%, while activity power is 25%.
Class (Power): [Doing this out of order to better describe what Profession would be about.] This is where the character draws their might from: martial, divine, arcane, primal, psionic, etc. Here is where 80% of their combat power arrives. There are also some abilities that aid outside of the combat sphere, say about 15-25% for activity power.
Profession: This is the character's job/role in the world. This is divorced from a strict tie in with their class, so you could have a band of wilderness protector warriors (ie Rangers) with abilities one would expect of a band of such merry men, such as tracking and moving without trace and reading the land and etc, but one might be a classic archer, one of druidic persuasion, one who trains animal companions, and a wizard. 10% combat power, and 25-35% activity power.
Also, Class includes the idea of sub-class (if there are different paths and specializations available within the class) and also could include a "Theme" overlay (to use 4e parlance) to allow for even more customization.
Feats: I prefer these to mostly broaden abilities rather than to add pure raw "power" numbers. So it's 0%-ish, though for sure broadening abilities will make certain situations easier to deal with, and so there will be a power boost in those situations.
Magic Equipment: Likewise, I prefer adding new abilities being added with magic items rather than more heavily focus on a pure numbers boost. Not that some won't add to pure power, and also like feats above these extra abilities will make certain situations easier to deal with. As an overlay to the power levels for the 4Ps, I would say magic items should add up to an additional 20% more power in both the combat and activity spheres.
Ancestry (Parentage): This denotes the physiological traits of the character based on their lineage: wings, breath weapons, poison resistance, senses, stoneskin, etc. For combat power, let's call it 10%-15%, with most abilities being lateral expansion of abilities/options rather than a hard growth in power. For activity power, it might be closer to 25%.
Background (Past): The character's upbringing and culture. This will almost entirely be relevant towards skills and knacks and RP-heavy abilities. Combat power rounds down to 0%, while activity power is 25%.
Class (Power): [Doing this out of order to better describe what Profession would be about.] This is where the character draws their might from: martial, divine, arcane, primal, psionic, etc. Here is where 80% of their combat power arrives. There are also some abilities that aid outside of the combat sphere, say about 15-25% for activity power.
Profession: This is the character's job/role in the world. This is divorced from a strict tie in with their class, so you could have a band of wilderness protector warriors (ie Rangers) with abilities one would expect of a band of such merry men, such as tracking and moving without trace and reading the land and etc, but one might be a classic archer, one of druidic persuasion, one who trains animal companions, and a wizard. 10% combat power, and 25-35% activity power.
Also, Class includes the idea of sub-class (if there are different paths and specializations available within the class) and also could include a "Theme" overlay (to use 4e parlance) to allow for even more customization.
Feats: I prefer these to mostly broaden abilities rather than to add pure raw "power" numbers. So it's 0%-ish, though for sure broadening abilities will make certain situations easier to deal with, and so there will be a power boost in those situations.
Magic Equipment: Likewise, I prefer adding new abilities being added with magic items rather than more heavily focus on a pure numbers boost. Not that some won't add to pure power, and also like feats above these extra abilities will make certain situations easier to deal with. As an overlay to the power levels for the 4Ps, I would say magic items should add up to an additional 20% more power in both the combat and activity spheres.
aco175
Legend
I would be interested in a feat or advanced power for races around the 8-12th level. Making the race you choose better at something but more likely picking from a list of a few options. It could also just be an optional feat to choose from. I think I seen this with Unearthed Arcane or A5e in the last year.
payn
Glory to Marik
I could toss out percentage numbers but id rather provide some context on the breakdowns.
Looking over the responses so far, im likely an outlier where I want class to be taken down a bit in the rankings and things like ancestry and background to be expanded. I think we can get back to a place where being X race is unique without it meaning you are superior/inferior in Y class. I also want to avoid things like 3E X per level skill points where every wizard is a skill master, while every sorcerer is a putz. Im trying to expand variety not homogeneity.
Ancestry would provide the physiological aspects of the character. Like darkvision, or Keen sense, etc.. Though it would also have some cultural choices as well that could lead to certain skill and or weapon proficiency. Background is going to be the bulk of skill development. An emphasis on exploration and social aspect, with perhaps a few minor combat perks. Class is mostly your combat power, but leads into other aspects too. All three will roughly be split into thirds making up a whole of a character.
Class will make up the bulk of the combat ability and style while providing some flavorful skill application.
Using the combat/exploration social pillar as a guide id break them down as such;
Ancestry 33.33
Background 33.33
Class 33.33
Looking over the responses so far, im likely an outlier where I want class to be taken down a bit in the rankings and things like ancestry and background to be expanded. I think we can get back to a place where being X race is unique without it meaning you are superior/inferior in Y class. I also want to avoid things like 3E X per level skill points where every wizard is a skill master, while every sorcerer is a putz. Im trying to expand variety not homogeneity.
Ancestry would provide the physiological aspects of the character. Like darkvision, or Keen sense, etc.. Though it would also have some cultural choices as well that could lead to certain skill and or weapon proficiency. Background is going to be the bulk of skill development. An emphasis on exploration and social aspect, with perhaps a few minor combat perks. Class is mostly your combat power, but leads into other aspects too. All three will roughly be split into thirds making up a whole of a character.
Class will make up the bulk of the combat ability and style while providing some flavorful skill application.
Using the combat/exploration social pillar as a guide id break them down as such;
- Ancestry: Social/combat/exploration
- Background: Exploration/Social/Combat
- Class: Combat/exploration/social
Ancestry 33.33
Background 33.33
Class 33.33
CreamCloud0
Legend
i know people like to be able to decide where they assign their resources, if they're gonna direct their feat towards their class or species but personally i don't like it when i have to choose between which competing areas a resource has to go to, similar to the old 'numerically optimal ASI vs flavourful Feat' battle.
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
You put this in D&D, so I'm responding strictly in that context. Also, this breakup of class and subclass (as opposed to rangers being a subclass of fighter back in AD&D times) is only for 5e, so I will again restrict to just that.
First, different classes can have class & subclass at different amounts, as long as they add up roughly the same at whatever level. If class A has more in base class and class B has more in subclasses, but they are both balanced against each other, that's fine. Again, if we were talking about things like Prestige Classes that every class could take then it would be different.
Second, D&D has suffered under not having a large enough power budget for races/species. That's why there are NO CENTAURS, just little medium-sized pony people, and the like. This has gotten in the way too many time, it has definitively proven to be insufficient by the limitations of what they can't do. There is no reasoned answer where species doesn't get a generous increase.
Which brings us to Zeroth: power budget AT WHAT LEVEL? Because there's no way to pretend that a species and a 1st level class have the same ratio of power as a species and a 20th level class.
And a lot of this is sensibilities. At 1st level, are you an apprentice, where your species and life-upto-now (background) are the majority of what you know, and you grow into class? Or at 1st level are you a newly minted adventurer, expected to be able to go out on your own, take risks that the common man could not, and not die.
Since people have been doing zero level rules, we can surmise that for some, even weaker than current 1st level could see play. We also know that it's possible to start at a higher level, which will satisfy all of the people who want their character to start off at adventurer level. So one way to satisfy both parties is to have class be a small part of their level 1 power budget, while being a reasonable amount of their level 3 power budget and the majority by their level 5 power budget, increasing from there.
To lay out a framework of how this could look:
1st level
Species: Needs to be able to satisfy large and tiny, flyers, and those innately magical.
Attributes: Part of who you've becomes.
Background: What you've done up to now.
I'm not laying out Species vs. Attributes vs. Background, they can be various amount to match what you want, as long as Species contains enough power. But together they would be significantly more than 1st level of a
class.
3rd level
S: Either unchanged or growing, but should be the same across them all.
A: Unchanged (but will get better soon)
B: Unchanged
C: Grown
At 3rd level, Class is now at least pulled even with the least of S, A or B, and is in the neighborhood with the others.
5th (?) level
C: Grown
A: Grown (minor)
S: Either unchanged or growing, but should be the same across them all.
B: Unchanged
At 5th Class could be around the same as the others put together.
First, different classes can have class & subclass at different amounts, as long as they add up roughly the same at whatever level. If class A has more in base class and class B has more in subclasses, but they are both balanced against each other, that's fine. Again, if we were talking about things like Prestige Classes that every class could take then it would be different.
Second, D&D has suffered under not having a large enough power budget for races/species. That's why there are NO CENTAURS, just little medium-sized pony people, and the like. This has gotten in the way too many time, it has definitively proven to be insufficient by the limitations of what they can't do. There is no reasoned answer where species doesn't get a generous increase.
Which brings us to Zeroth: power budget AT WHAT LEVEL? Because there's no way to pretend that a species and a 1st level class have the same ratio of power as a species and a 20th level class.
And a lot of this is sensibilities. At 1st level, are you an apprentice, where your species and life-upto-now (background) are the majority of what you know, and you grow into class? Or at 1st level are you a newly minted adventurer, expected to be able to go out on your own, take risks that the common man could not, and not die.
Since people have been doing zero level rules, we can surmise that for some, even weaker than current 1st level could see play. We also know that it's possible to start at a higher level, which will satisfy all of the people who want their character to start off at adventurer level. So one way to satisfy both parties is to have class be a small part of their level 1 power budget, while being a reasonable amount of their level 3 power budget and the majority by their level 5 power budget, increasing from there.
To lay out a framework of how this could look:
1st level
Species: Needs to be able to satisfy large and tiny, flyers, and those innately magical.
Attributes: Part of who you've becomes.
Background: What you've done up to now.
Class: apprentice or lower
I'm not laying out Species vs. Attributes vs. Background, they can be various amount to match what you want, as long as Species contains enough power. But together they would be significantly more than 1st level of a
class.
3rd level
S: Either unchanged or growing, but should be the same across them all.
A: Unchanged (but will get better soon)
B: Unchanged
C: Grown
At 3rd level, Class is now at least pulled even with the least of S, A or B, and is in the neighborhood with the others.
5th (?) level
C: Grown
A: Grown (minor)
S: Either unchanged or growing, but should be the same across them all.
B: Unchanged
At 5th Class could be around the same as the others put together.
TwoSix
The Year of the TwoSix
I agree with this, but I would also say there's nothing that precludes D&D from allowing species powers, or background powers, or any other power grant from non-class sources to scale directly with character level.
Power scaling predominantly from class is an inherited legacy from the class design of TSR D&D.
Frozen_Heart
Hero
I feel I'd want it to be:
Class: 30%
Subclass: 30%
Species: 10%
Background: 10%
Feats: 15%
One of my main gripes with 5e is that the class eats almost all of the power budget, which leaves very little for customisation outside the core class. Some classes have really impactful subclasses which I love. While other seem to play exactly the same no matter what you pick.
I also like the idea of feat trees which act almost as their own subclass. But I know they're extremely controversial.
Class: 30%
Subclass: 30%
Species: 10%
Background: 10%
Feats: 15%
One of my main gripes with 5e is that the class eats almost all of the power budget, which leaves very little for customisation outside the core class. Some classes have really impactful subclasses which I love. While other seem to play exactly the same no matter what you pick.
I also like the idea of feat trees which act almost as their own subclass. But I know they're extremely controversial.
Similar Threads
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
September 16 2026 
Arcana Unleashed(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.
Replies (250) -
September 16 2026 -
October 1 2026 -
November 16 2026 -
January 1 2027 -
January 1 2027 -
March 6 2027
