log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E Racial Min/Maxes on Ability Scores?

Which method do you like best if implementing racial minimum/maximum for ability scores?

  • Make the max 18, no minimums required.

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • Make the max 18, with minimums for races.

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • Make the max 18, but allow races to have certain higher max of 20.

    Votes: 9 12.5%
  • Make the max 18, but allow races to have certain higher max of 20, with minimums as well.

    Votes: 11 15.3%
  • Keep the max at 20, with minimums for races.

    Votes: 5 6.9%
  • Make the max 20, no minimums required.

    Votes: 21 29.2%
  • Make the max 20, racial modifiers can make it 22.

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • Make the max 20, racial modifiers can make it 22, with minimums.

    Votes: 2 2.8%
  • Other. Please explain.

    Votes: 13 18.1%

  • Total voters
    72

dnd4vr

The Smurfiest Wizard Ever!
Do you think having racial minimum and/or maximums on ability scores would be a good thing?

You can see the options in the poll, ONE vote only--make it count!

And thanks for participating! :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Do you think having racial minimum and/or maximums on ability scores would be a good thing?

You can see the options in the poll, ONE vote only--make it count!

And thanks for participating! :)
Races (as in fantasy "races") should be differentiated from humans, including minimum and maximum scores and bonuses (and subtractions) to the default scores.

Otherwise, just play a human with a pithy T-Shirt that sums up your philosophy.
 


CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
I voted "Other," because I think the maximum should be adjusted by racial modifiers but there shouldn't be a particular minimum. A lot of the options were close to what I had in mind, so I decided to just offer an explanation instead:

Max = X + racial mods, where X is any number between 15 and 18. The DM should adjust the value of X to fit the style of campaign they are running.
 

dnd4vr

The Smurfiest Wizard Ever!
I voted "Other," because I think the maximum should be adjusted by racial modifiers but there shouldn't be a particular minimum. A lot of the options were close to what I had in mind, so I decided to just offer an explanation instead:

Max = X + racial mods, where X is any number between 15 and 18. The DM should adjust the value of X to fit the style of campaign they are running.
No problem. I suppose I would have considered that the 4th option, and offered clarification, but no worries.

Thanks for sharing! :)
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I find the idea of racial maximums vastly more problematic than the current set up, so I vote for differing minimums with the same max.

My actual preference, though, would be to decouple primary class competence from ability scores or find some other way to not have a dwarf necessarily be a better Barbarian than a Tiefling just because they have better con.
 

Minigiant

Legend
I am for a base max of 18, racial max of 20, and class max of 22.

But it really would be Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary scores.

Your Primary score would have a maximum of 22. Your class usually gives you 1 Primary score.
Your Secondary score would have a maximum of 20. Your race usually gives you 2 Secondary scores.
Your Tertiary score would have a maximum of 18. A;;you other scores are tertiary.

Some classes (monk, paladin, ranger) would get 2 Secondary scores.
Some races (orc, halfling) might would give you 1 Primary scores.
Some classes (fighter) and races (Human, Halfelf, Halforc) would let you choose a primary or secondary score respectively.

2 Secondary on the same ability score upgrades to Primary
2 Primary on the same ability score upgrades to Ultimate with a maximum of 24.

A wood elf wizard has Primary Intelligence, Secondary Dexterity, Secondary Wisdom
A wood elf rogue has Primary Dexterity, Secondary Wisdom
A half orc fighter would have a higher maximum Strength but lower maximum Dexterity than a halfling fighter.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I voted Max 20, no minimums... which I think is what what we have currently (I was voting for the 'no change' option, which I think this was it.)

So long as attacks are connected to any of the six ability scores, I don't believe any ancestry should be shut out of maxing out. If it's imperative that halflings not be as strong as goliaths, then our weapon and spell attack / damage bonuses should be their own scores with no ability score modifiers adding to them. That way you can put a 'max 14' on halfling strength or whatever, but they won't be hamstrung playing fighters or paladins. Their skill with a blade can be just as good as any others.

So long as our attacks are modified by our ability scores, all ancestries should be able to max out-- "realistic body physics" be damned.
 

dnd4vr

The Smurfiest Wizard Ever!
I find the idea of racial maximums vastly more problematic than the current set up, so I vote for differing minimums with the same max.

My actual preference, though, would be to decouple primary class competence from ability scores or find some other way to not have a dwarf necessarily be a better Barbarian than a Tiefling just because they have better con.
I don't see a vote there though... did you select "Keep the max at 20, with minimums for races."?
 



cbwjm

Hero
I'm a little torn, I think how it is now is fine but sometimes I think I'd also like to allow races that have a +2 to an ability be able to boost it to 22. This will require changing some races so that each race has a +2 though.
 

I find the idea of racial maximums vastly more problematic than the current set up, so I vote for differing minimums with the same max.

My actual preference, though, would be to decouple primary class competence from ability scores or find some other way to not have a dwarf necessarily be a better Barbarian than a Tiefling just because they have better con.
Not possible without re-building the game from the ground up.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Not possible without re-building the game from the ground up.
Bit of an exaggeration. I’d hardly call the option of changing which attribute score your attacks and AC and DCs are calculated with “re-building the game from the ground up”, for instance.
 

I chose other. I would prefer racial minimums and maximums because I like the idea of a system similar to AD&D but I just dont know enough about the math behind 5E to have an opinion about what those min/max should be.
 


Bit of an exaggeration. I’d hardly call the option of changing which attribute score your attacks and AC and DCs are calculated with “re-building the game from the ground up”, for instance.
You said you wanted to decouple primary class competence from ability scores. That's a very major change.
 

Ath-kethin

Elder Thing
I'm not a fan of racial ability score modifiers or mins/maxes in any event. I have no problem keeping the max mortal ability score as 20, removing the racial adjustments, and just providing guidelines (i.e., 'most halflings have Strength scores below 16 due to their small stature').

This approach establishes an expectation for the world and also allows maximum flexibility in character building. A player may choose to follow the halfling norm, for example, but may choose to have an exceptional halfling sporting a Strength of 18 or wherever.
 

ZeshinX

Adventurer
I favour max 18 with racial ability adjustments allowing it to max at 20. No minimums.

I find myself missing the ability scores of 1e/2e and their collective attached "things". Sure, some were ridiculous or eye-rolling, but they were better than just a +X next to them. Rose-coloured glasses likely at work....but...ah, sometimes I do miss the weirdness of AD&D.
 

NOW LIVE! 5 Plug-In Settlements for your 5E Game

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top