D&D (2024) (+)One Big Thing I Would Change

[Horwath]

I could see half-feats to make uneven scores even. Other than that, having a higher array would be possible. I think however that an 18 at level 1 is too much.

But then we should dissociate attributes from everything besides skills (as you suggested otherwise) and few othere things (which I would suggest).

At least we should not expect stats to increase at all.

Maybe Str as requirements for high damaging weapons, dex for light armor cl (you can circumvent the requirement with heavy armor), con for hp, int for bonus proficiencies in tools and languages, wis... maybe Initiative (as initiative nowadays is more awareness in the first round of combat) and cha for attracting followers...

if abilities do not increase then 18 STR will only be a problem at levels 1-3. that you go through within 2-4 sessions.

and having no ASI's across levels and all abilities being even, or even better, just use modifiers and point buy modifiers, will remove problem of meta-gaming with planing your abilities in advance.

Just pick your abilities at 1st level and that is it.
And hope for some magic items.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I’d love if classes were less of the overall design space ratio of a character, make species and background actually matter beyond once in a blue-moon occurrences, and for them to develop new traits over multiple tiers.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

if abilities do not increase then 18 STR will only be a problem at levels 1-3. that you go through within 2-4 sessions.

and having no ASI's across levels and all abilities being even, or even better, just use modifiers and point buy modifiers, will remove problem of meta-gaming with planing your abilities in advance.

Just pick your abilities at 1st level and that is it.
And hope for some magic items.

Somehow I have to concur, on the other hand, I think your point buy is way too high for my tastes. I think, the game can be balanced around main stat 16, not 18.
I also like the possibility of a negative modifier. I'd probably also like modifier = stat - 10 for skills and don't add it to attack or damage.

Edit: I know my 16 is then better than your 18. But I think the game would be better if 14 is the new 18.

 

[Ath-kethin]

Change 'Charisma' to 'Presence', that way we can write out all six ability scores with a single letter, rather than always having five single letters and a 'Ch'.

I think fiddling with the six abilities would cause more uproar than most other changes.

But for the record, DCC ditched both Charisma and Wisdom and replaced them with Personality.

 

[Ath-kethin]

It's not?!

It can be anything you want it to be, my friend.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I think fiddling with the six abilities would cause more uproar than most other changes.

But for the record, DCC ditched both Charisma and Wisdom and replaced them with Personality.

That's why I only changed the name. Everything else remains the same.

But you're right... anything in older books that mention Charisma would need players to remember that Charisma was now Presence. But I don't care... still would rather be able to write the ability scores as S / D / C / I / W / P. Heh heh.

 

[vagabundo]

I think stat capped at 18 + half-level as proficiency bonus + no ASI would be somewhat close mathematically speaking. So if you are lucky and have a 18 (+4) in your main stat, you'll eventually be at +14 on a d20 roll. So I guess AC should be a little higher to accommodate.

Stat capped at 18 for that b/x vibe.. I like it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I like the clarity of half your level... it's certainly better than proficiency and rage bonus and half your level references all progressing at different rates that are still close to each other in the commonly-played level range.

I’d rather slow everything down to the same rate as proficiency bonus than speed up PB, myself, but I can see the appeal of having one progression for everything.

But in keeping with actually playing 5e, the big change I would like is ditching damage-dealing cantrips. Magicians being able to do magical stuff without using spell slots is fine with me - it addresses a major gripe my friends and I had about TSR-era wizards. But I don't like damage-dealing cantrips. It feels videogamey to me, and more than almost anything else makes D&D feel like a (barely) glorified combat game.

Would you accept a compromise where all casters have the ability to make simple attacks with thier magic as a basic rule and/or class feature, and Cantrips as such are purely for utility?

Ie, the staff as a focus has attack and damage, the wand has different damage, etc, and the basic spell attack has different range and maybe other things depending on what you use to make the attack. Then, some classes have an “implement” replacement feature where you don’t need a focus you can just attack with these values because you are the focus or whatever.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

My big change would be to go back to having mechanically interesting additions to the game. 5e design is so stagnant that the game today is so similar to when it released that floating ASI is considered a major change.

 

[Gorck]

Would you accept a compromise where all casters have the ability to make simple attacks with thier magic as a basic rule and/or class feature, and Cantrips as such are purely for utility?

They've already done that in the monster stat blocks, so why not for PCs. In Monsters of the Multiverse, every monster that had at least one damage dealing cantrip in their spellcasting list, had it/them removed in favor of a "Deathly Ray" or "Grave Bolt" type of attack in the "Actions" section.