D&D 5E Racial Min/Maxes on Ability Scores?

[Haldrik]

So without proficiency you are just rolling the flat d20 without any modifier at all? Hmm...

I'd have to work some numbers, but that might be approaching the realm of being too limited or too small.

Also, considering how few PCs ever end up with expertise in any fashion, it means proficiency bonus will hardly ever get used. Not saying that is a bad thing necessarily, but it certainly changes the mind set!

Class would automatically grant "expertise". So a Fighter is an "expert" with swords. A Wizard is an "expert" with spells. Etcetera.

 

[Blue]

Just to see if I am following this, I'll use an example of Dragonborn (STR +2).

So, the STR score is not modified. If the point-buy is a 13, the score is still 13. BUT... when this PC makes a STR ability check or STR save, they add a +2 bonus for race.

In combat, they are still STR 13, just as any other STR 13 PC, so +1 to attack rolls and +1 to damage. But the dragonborn is not any more likely to hit or do more damage due to their racial STR +2.

Is that it? Am I missing anything?

That is it. It was an attempt to keep all races viable for all classes, but still give them differences. Not sure if it really succeeds or not - I will not be offended if anyone shoots holes in it.

(Well, with the extra bit that it doesn't need to match the current ones. You can have something like a centaur that gets a better modifier on STR saves then STR checks to represent size and four-on-the-floor. But that's extra granularity, you have the concept.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Class would automatically grant "expertise". So a Fighter is an "expert" with swords. A Wizard is an "expert" with spells. Etcetera.

Oh, sure, I assumed that. I was thinking just in terms of skills. Saves would have to work like attacks and spells.

Which brings up another issue. Personally, I am not keen on using different systems for different things--I'd like to try to keep the concepts "universal". Admittedly, it has been one of the things holding me up on making concrete changes. It's not easy.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Another spitball idea:

If we decouple ASI's from feats, then having a 'good enough' ability score becomes a lot less important, since with the current setup higher ability scores = more feats.

So if we move standard ability boosts to character level and leave feats as class-based (although this would involve some re-balancing) we could reduce the issues of 'bad' race-class combos while leaving starting ability scores (where racial ASIs really matter) alone.

We could even add a feat for breaking racial caps with a prereq of already being at the racial cap... so a 20 Int dragonborn is still possible if you really need it.

This is the way to do it. Remove the "Sophie's Choice" between ASIs and feats, and people will have incentive to choose cool feats and still get the numbers where they need to be.

 

[Haldrik]

Oh, sure, I assumed that. I was thinking just in terms of skills. Saves would have to work like attacks and spells.

Which brings up another issue. Personally, I am not keen on using different systems for different things--I'd like to try to keep the concepts "universal". Admittedly, it has been one of the things holding me up on making concrete changes. It's not easy.

Aptitude/Talent/Proficienct/Ability is different from Experience/Expertise.

So I consider the distinction "universal".

 

[Crimson Longinus]

This is the way to do it. Remove the "Sophie's Choice" between ASIs and feats, and people will have incentive to choose cool feats and still get the numbers where they need to be.

How badly would it break the game that if you just let people to have both instead of having to choose?

 

[DND_Reborn]

This is the way to do it. Remove the "Sophie's Choice" between ASIs and feats, and people will have incentive to choose cool feats and still get the numbers where they need to be.

What do you say to the idea that proficiency bonus can supplant ability score modifiers?

A couple people have voiced the idea, myself included, that you can boost proficiency progression to +11, only using your ability score modifiers when they are better than your proficiency bonus.

 

[CleverNickName]

How badly would it break the game that if you just let people to have both instead of having to choose?

Most characters would end up with 2 or 3 ability scores at the cap by 8th level. Fighters would have twice that many. I don't know if you would call that "broken" or not, but that's the first thing that comes to mind.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Aptitude/Talent/Proficienct/Ability is different from Experience/Expertise.

So I consider the distinction "universal".

But the system wouldn't be universal. Part of the appeal (for many at least) with d20 design is the same system works for ability checks, attack rolls, and saves. Your suggestion would require the bonuses vary between attacks/saves and ability checks.

Unless I am missing something or misunderstanding you?

 

[Micah Sweet]

How badly would it break the game that if you just let people to have both instead of having to choose?

This is what I'm saying. Why not both!

You would need to beef up the half-feats to account for the ASI half. Or keep them and accept there's another way to bump up your stats.