Making ability scores more about the character concept.

[BookBarbarian]

The stats are the most palpable way of describing a creature.

And the most bland. I invite you to explain to me how a half-orc's +2 to strength and +1 to con is palpably more Orcish than a Goliath's +2 to strength and +1 to con.

 

[mellored]

I can't remember the last session I ran where the Strength of an NPC didn't come up. There was one session that I remember where there wasn't any combat at all, but even that one had an NPC kick down a door.

The how can you say strength doesn't have any meaning if it isn't attached to damage?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The how can you say strength doesn't have any meaning if it isn't attached to damage?

You would normally expect the ability to hit a door very hard to correlate with the ability to hit an ogre very hard, especially in a game where "how hard you hit" is its own stat.

It's not that Strength is mechanically meaningless if you remove its contribution to damage. It's that, if you remove that effect, then the stat doesn't actually resemble "strength" any more. Instead, it resembles a plot hole where your ability to exert force is contingent upon what you're exerting force at.

 

[mellored]

You would normally expect the ability to hit a door very hard to correlate with the ability to hit an ogre very hard, especially in a game where "how hard you hit" is its own stat.

It's not that Strength is mechanically meaningless if you remove its contribution to damage. It's that, if you remove that effect, then the stat doesn't actually resemble "strength" any more. Instead, it resembles a plot hole where your ability to exert force is contingent upon what you're exerting force at.

except it still does. You need Str to shove.

And "damage as it's own stat" is the part that I'm changing.

(And actually, I'd make mage hand and thunder wave's push Str as well).

 

[The Crimson Binome]

except it still does. You need Str to shove.

And "it's own stat" is the part that I'm changing.

If you're just getting rid of the stats, then that's something else entirely, and I didn't get that message at all from the opening post. I thought you wanted to keep Strength as a stat, but then not have it affect how hard you swing somehow.

To get rid of basic stats entirely, an easier solution would be to just paste over every reference to a stat with your +4 bonus. If you go one step further than the original suggestion, then you can also substitute +4 as the basis for saving throws, to which you would also add your proficiency bonus (if relevant). That way, the only thing ability scores would modify is skill checks, and you'd be free to overhaul skill checks entirely without fear of messing up the combat math.

For example, maybe you get twenty-two points to spend on skill ranks, and you can spend between -1 and +5 on any individual skill. That way, it would also solve the disparity between certain ability scores being tied to more skill checks than others.

 

[Krachek]

We are now addict to big number.
In first edition 16 strength = +1 damage.
For 50% of fighter 18 strength was +1/+3.
Today with bonus below +3/+3 we feel helpless.

 

[5ekyu]

Hmmm... Skipped about 5 pgs but...

If you took the point buy chart and extended to 20 zame pattern of escalation ***and*** made ASI not +2 ability but say +5 point buy points, the trade offs of "going to 20" vs "developing other stats" changes drastically.

Going from 18 to 20 is 9, almost two full ASI where taking two stats from 14 to 16 costs 10... Exactly 2 ASI.

 

[mellored]

an easier solution would be to just paste over every reference to a stat with your +4 bonus. If you go one step further than the original suggestion, then you can also substitute +4 as the basis for saving throws, to which you would also add your proficiency bonus (if relevant). That way, the only thing ability scores would modify is skill checks, and you'd be free to overhaul skill checks entirely without fear of messing up the combat math.

That could work. Not sure about the skill/save point buy though. That didn't seem to work well in 3e, as everyone just picked a few key skills and maxed them. Not much different than the maxing ability scores. I actually kind of liked 4e's skill method of just a flat bonus.

So...


Remove ability scores.
Any non-skill and non-save reference to an ability score is now +3 (to-hit, damage, DC's, paladin aura's, ect...)

Skills and Saves are replaced with...
Base = +1/2 proficeny bonus (1 - 3)
Proficiency = +4 (5-7)
Expertise = +8 (9-11)

Jack-of-all-trades = +2 on non-proficent skills.

New Feat:
MOAR POWER:
Choose one of the following. You can take this feat more than once, but unless noted, you must choose a different option each time.
*+1 to-hit, damage, and DC's, You can take this twice.
*+2 to your base AC, upto a maximum of 20. (Not including shield, magic, or other buffs).
*+2 to paladin's aura (Prerequisite, paladin 6)
*+2 to bardic inspiration dice. (Prerequisite, bard)
*+2 to casting modifier.
*+3 to spells known or memorized.
*+3 to inititive.
(And similar for whatever else).

 

[The Crimson Binome]

That could work. Not sure about the skill/save point buy though. That didn't seem to work well in 3e, as everyone just picked a few key skills and maxed them. Not much different than the maxing ability scores. I actually kind of liked 4e's skill method of just a flat bonus.

The 4E skill system was pretty solid. You could easily replicate it in 5E by letting proficiency apply to all skills, and letting the ability score be the sole difference... if you were still using ability scores. It also doesn't work terribly well under Bounded Accuracy, unless you're okay with high-level characters mostly succeeding at everything (which I am).

The big issue with using pseudo- ability scores that only governed skill checks and saving throws is that players might feel compelled to choose certain skills in order to get the good defenses. You still wouldn't get any Fighters with high Intelligence, because Intelligence saves are too rare; instead, everyone would end up with good Dexterity and Wisdom, because they are the most important saves. (Con saves are also important, but it's less appealing since it doesn't have any skills associated with it.)

In the game I'm currently working on, I don't have anything like ability scores. I have combat stats that cover big skills like melee, ranged, and magic; and I have general skills, which cover things like Athletics and Perception and Social. There is no Strength stat that governs both melee and Athletics, or Intelligence that covers both magic and Knowledge skills, so you aren't tied to any particular combat role just because you want a particular skill set.

 

[Yaarel]

It occurs to me.

• Eliminate race from character creation.
• Level 1 allows choice of a feat.
• Some feats have flavor saying that the ability results from ‘Sun Elf heritage’, and so on.
• The feat might well have a minimum ability score prerequisite.