D&D 5E Odd-numbered ability scores

[FormerlyHemlock]

There are those who have observed that in 5E as written, there's really no point in having an odd-numbered ability score. 16 and 17 Int are exactly the same, and the same applies to every other ability score except Strength (because encumbrance and armor weights). I find that unaesthetic and have been trying to come up with a way to differentiate odd ability scores.

Here's my idea (not playtested, since I just had it):

Odd-numbered ability scores give an extra +1 to ability checks.

Strength 13 gives +1 to Strength saving throws and attack rolls but +2 to Strength checks. Dex 15 gives +2 to attack rolls and AC but +3 to Stealth and initiative. Etc.

Simple and, I hope, elegant. Players will still want even-numbered abilities as much as possible because, let's be honest, combat is the crunchiest part of the system--but you no longer have to feel like putting a 17 in Strength is a waste of a +1 that ought to be moved somewhere more optimal.

 

[scruffygrognard]

I like that a lot. Nice and simple... but effective.

 

[CapnZapp]

16 and 17 is not the same.

Just add one to each, and see what happens.

Meaning, nothing is wrong and I think you're trying to solve something that didn't need solving.

 

[Coredump]

There are those who have observed that in 5E as written, there's really no point in having an odd-numbered ability score. 16 and 17 Int are exactly the same, and the same applies to every other ability score except Strength (because encumbrance and armor weights). I find that unaesthetic and have been trying to come up with a way to differentiate odd ability scores.

Here's my idea (not playtested, since I just had it):

Odd-numbered ability scores give an extra +1 to ability checks.

Strength 13 gives +1 to Strength saving throws and attack rolls but +2 to Strength checks. Dex 15 gives +2 to attack rolls and AC but +3 to Stealth and initiative. Etc.

Simple and, I hope, elegant. Players will still want even-numbered abilities as much as possible because, let's be honest, combat is the crunchiest part of the system--but you no longer have to feel like putting a 17 in Strength is a waste of a +1 that ought to be moved somewhere more optimal.

That is my plan also, except I will only apply it to skills with proficiency.

 

[jamesjhaeck]

Eh, too complex for my blood. If your group wants the granularity, it looks pretty solid, though.

 

[Blackwarder]

I assume that you are looking on this from the POV of 1st level characters and if that is the case that I completely disagree, odd numbered ability scores are fine, if only for the fact that by 4th level you can bump two abilities up to an even numbered ability score with a bigger bonus.

My 2 cents.

Warder

 

[Celtavian]

Not a bad idea so people don't feel off about odd ability scores. There have been times in the past where I've allowed someone to shift a point from an odd ability score number to make another odd ability score even if they don't ever plan to raise it. Makes things more efficient. I don't bother any longer. Just doesn't seem necessary.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I assume that you are looking on this from the POV of 1st level characters and if that is the case that I completely disagree, odd numbered ability scores are fine, if only for the fact that by 4th level you can bump two abilities up to an even numbered ability score with a bigger bonus.

Not really, in fact the issue becomes worse at higher level because you have finer control of the granularity. How many 8th level PCs do you see with two odd ability scores? That's right, not very many, because it feels like a waste. Additionally, at high level there are magic items you can potentially find which set your ability score to 19. Why 19? Why not 18? What's the difference?

I want there to be a difference. Otherwise you might as well just divide all ability scores by 2 and let them go from 1 to 10.

 

[Minigiant]

I have secondary featured for each ability.

Basically free feats if you reach 13, 15, or 17 in a score.

 

[Lezta]

I have to admit, the disparity between odd and even scores has been a bugbear of mine since 3rd ed. I'm tempted to look into my own solution for this. Minigiants 'features' seems like a good idea, even if they're only minor things.

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

Why does everything have to have a mechanical benefit. If my fighter has 15 INT I know that he is smarter than the moron cleric with only 14 INT.

 

[Lezta]

Why does everything have to have a mechanical benefit. If my fighter has 15 INT I know that he is smarter than the moron cleric with only 14 INT.

Sure, he is. But if you were to both make an opposed intelligence check (the games way of 'testing' your intelligence) you'd be on equal footing, despite you being more intelligent. It's not an ideal situation, really. It's also not a massive deal, but if I can find a way to incentivize odd number ability scores then that's a win.

Not everything needs a mechanical benefit. But the mechanics define the logic of the world, and the way things stand at the moment the world says you are actually just as intelligent as the cleric. That... doesn't feel right to me.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Why does everything have to have a mechanical benefit. If my fighter has 15 INT I know that he is smarter than the moron cleric with only 14 INT.

To those of us who started out in AD&D, homogenizing 14 and 15 Int feels like a loss of fidelity. That's why.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

They're not the same, as Nigel Tufnel will tell you, 11 is one more than 10. I use actual ability scores to solve ties (initiative, opposed rolls, etc).

 

[houser2112]

Why does everything have to have a mechanical benefit. If my fighter has 15 INT I know that he is smarter than the moron cleric with only 14 INT.

No, he's not (at least in any meaningful way). He's not going to notice more secret doors. He's not going to recall more information. He's not getting out of a maze any sooner. If they both multiclass into wizard, they're going to have the same DC, spell attack, and prep slots. The only difference is that he's closer to a meaningful upgrade with his next ASI (being able to bump it by one while bumping another score by one), where the cleric needs to put both points into INT to get the same meaningful upgrade.

Ability checks use the modifier, not roll-under like 2E. Feats don't have ability score requirements like 3E. Other than the exceptions that are few and far between (like Strength and encumbrance), I can't think of a single instance where your raw score actually matters.

I was rather disappointed when 5E neglected to slaughter this sacred cow.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Ability checks use the modifier, not roll-under like 2E. Feats don't have ability score requirements like 3E. Other than the exceptions that are few and far between (like Strength and encumbrance), I can't think of a single instance where your raw score actually matters.

Intellect Devourers. Int 15 is harder to eat than Int 14.

 

[Hriston]

Not really, in fact the issue becomes worse at higher level because you have finer control of the granularity. How many 8th level PCs do you see with two odd ability scores? That's right, not very many, because it feels like a waste. Additionally, at high level there are magic items you can potentially find which set your ability score to 19. Why 19? Why not 18? What's the difference?

The difference is you're one point closer to that +5 bonus. It creates the situation where character concept is realized over the course of progression through multiple levels. Raising a score one point from even to odd is never a waste unless you're planning on your character dying before getting to the next bump.

I want there to be a difference. Otherwise you might as well just divide all ability scores by 2 and let them go from 1 to 10.

Which three dice would you roll that would give an average of 5.5?

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Feats don't have ability score requirements like 3E.

That's not correct. Defensive Duelist, Grappler and Inspiring Leader, Ritual Caster and Skulker all have ability score requirements.

 

[houser2112]

The difference is you're one point closer to that +5 bonus. It creates the situation where character concept is realized over the course of progression through multiple levels. Raising a score one point from even to odd is never a waste unless you're planning on your character dying before getting to the next bump.

Unless you have other odd scores that you care about, it is a waste. Otherwise, it would be better to raise one by 2, then the other by two, instead of raising each by one twice.

Additionally, at high level there are magic items you can potentially find which set your ability score to 19. Why 19? Why not 18? What's the difference?

I was equally disappointed that they resurrected this sacred cow.

 

[houser2112]

That's not correct. Defensive Duelist, Grappler and Inspiring Leader, Ritual Caster and Skulker all have ability score requirements.

Ah. That's what I get for posting from work.