D&D 5E Quick Thoughts: Ability Scores as defenses

[ammulder]

in an effort to make ability scores matter and not just their ability modifier...

So is the goal just to double the granularity of increases? Make Odd Numbers Great Again?

Often I feel like one's first ability increase goes to make two odd abilities even, and then the rest are doubled up so as not to forego an actual bonus for 4 levels (or whatever). Another option to lessen that, at least if not using feats, would be to give one point every two levels instead of two points every four.

The problem with making the base numbers bigger is that you can't use the proficiency bonus to make it seniority-dependent without the numbers getting out of hand. So then, like, ability-N+proficiency bonus for some workable N? Dunno about that.

 

[dave2008]

I'm tinkering around with a similar houserule:
defense = ability score + proficiency
Attack = (ability score -10) + proficiency

of course I am also tinkering around with making advantage stack and making your proficiency bonus the # of d20s you get, so it would be:

Defense = ability score + 10
attack = ability score + 2d20 (pick highest), if your proficiency bonus is +2. Having advantage would raise this to 3d20 (pick highest) and disadvantage would take this down to 1d20. The number of d20s would move up and down depending on your proficiency (+6 proficiency = 6d20 - pick highest) and sources of advantage & disadvantage. Thus having better proficiency doesn't stretch BA, but it does give you a higher probability of getting high scores (and crits I guess)

But I really haven't thought this through yet, just like the idea

 

[ccs]

So what do you do about armor?

If my defense is {score} + prof, what benefit do I gain by wearing, say, chainmail? And using a shield?

Overall I think it's
A) a bad idea,
B) as usual, a solution to a non-existant problem.

 

[Xeviat]

So what do you do about armor?

If my defense is {score} + prof, what benefit do I gain by wearing, say, chainmail? And using a shield?

Well, a shield would obviously be a bonus on top; you're giving up a two-handed weapon. Heavy armor would be instead of Dex, just like it is now; it would just have to be higher.

Overall I think it's
A) a bad idea,
B) as usual, a solution to a non-existant problem.

I'm not sure what the "as usual" part is, so I'll choose to not assume that's a personal dig.

This is called throwing ideas at the wall to see what sticks.

If 3-18 was the normal range, and not 3-20 (outside of Demi humans maybe), then ability modifier could be (score -10). That's a range up to +8. With proficiency up to +6, that's only 3 higher than the base now. I'd probably argue for full proficiency to all defenses, not just two, lest the scaling fall very far behind.

Make odds matter would be nice. I'm already frustrated by the +1 stat feats being nearly no brainers. The standard array and a +2/+1 race ends up starting most characters at my table with only one odd stat, and it's easy to justify something like a save proficiency feat or something else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TallIan]

I'm tinkering around with a similar houserule:
defense = ability score + proficiency
Attack = (ability score -10) + proficiency

of course I am also tinkering around with making advantage stack and making your proficiency bonus the # of d20s you get, so it would be:

Defense = ability score + 10
attack = ability score + 2d20 (pick highest), if your proficiency bonus is +2. Having advantage would raise this to 3d20 (pick highest) and disadvantage would take this down to 1d20. The number of d20s would move up and down depending on your proficiency (+6 proficiency = 6d20 - pick highest) and sources of advantage & disadvantage. Thus having better proficiency doesn't stretch BA, but it does give you a higher probability of getting high scores (and crits I guess)

But I really haven't thought this through yet, just like the idea

I'm kind of stealing the OP here, sorry.

But while this idea sounds nice, and I generally like systems that use this style of roll, I think is HUGELY boosts low end play and gimps higher end play. 2d20 pick the highest is a much bigger advantage that 1d20+2 compared to 6d20 pick the highest over 1d20+6.

2d20 high 1 gives roughly a +5 bonus. Each additional d20 after that gives half the previous bonus, so the 3rd one give +2.5 fourth one gives +1.25...

So your progression goes from +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 to +5 +7.5 +6.25 +7 +7.5 (I've rounded the last two) your bonus is still higher but much less so compared to low tier play.

Tall

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

AC could be Dex or Armor?

Dex is already pretty overvalued. If you are going to use that, I'd suggest some system of armour acting as damage reduction.

 

[Li Shenron]

AC could be Dex or Armor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I had the same idea.

It would favour both characters with high dex and no armor, and those with low dex and heavy armor. It would work against light & medium armor.

 

[dave2008]

I'm kind of stealing the OP here, sorry.

But while this idea sounds nice, and I generally like systems that use this style of roll, I think is HUGELY boosts low end play and gimps higher end play. 2d20 pick the highest is a much bigger advantage that 1d20+2 compared to 6d20 pick the highest over 1d20+6.

2d20 high 1 gives roughly a +5 bonus. Each additional d20 after that gives half the previous bonus, so the 3rd one give +2.5 fourth one gives +1.25...

So your progression goes from +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 to +5 +7.5 +6.25 +7 +7.5 (I've rounded the last two) your bonus is still higher but much less so compared to low tier play.

Tall

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

yes, that is as intended. There are diminishing returns from training IMO. In addition, what your missing is that at high level the PC can shrug off multiple instances of disadvantage (because they would stack now) ans still be very effective. If I were to implement this it would probably involve more changes than it is worth to get it to work properly. However, I like the concept so we may give it a trial run.

 

[TallIan]

yes, that is as intended. There are diminishing returns from training IMO. In addition, what your missing is that at high level the PC can shrug off multiple instances of disadvantage (because they would stack now) ans still be very effective. If I were to implement this it would probably involve more changes than it is worth to get it to work properly. However, I like the concept so we may give it a trial run.

If that's what's you are looking for it could work.

Also I had forgotten about your stacking adv/dis rule, in which case higher levels get quite a nice bonus

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[Xeviat]

I had the same idea.

It would favour both characters with high dex and no armor, and those with low dex and heavy armor. It would work against light & medium armor.

Not necessarily. AC could not use proficiency, so +2 from prof wouldn't be assumed. 4E gave proficiency bonuses to weapons to counter the base +2 AC of leather armor. A similar thing could be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk