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

[doctorbadwolf]

You said you wanted to decouple primary class competence from ability scores. That's a very major change.

It’s not as major as it looks. The math is very transparent. You could literally get rid of ability scores, and replace them with “Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary, Competence”, and change nothing else about the system. It’d make for a long document, but the work wouldn’t be complex, mostly just repetitive and time intensive.

Another option would be to let each character choose their primary ability score from the normal 6, with the note that physical attack score and Spellcasting score can not be the same, unless a feature allows it (ie, anyone but Hexblades pretty much still has two “main” stats).
This could either be restricted to physical stuff requiring a physical score and magic stuff requiring a mental score, or not, at a group’s preference. I’m fine with Strength wizards and Con sorcerers and Cha fighters, others won’t be.

I absolutely will not be hashing out details of either idea in this thread, so please don’t try to pick them apart. The point is simply that ability scores changing doesn’t require an overhaul of every system, which is what I imagine when someone talks about redesigning completely, or whatever the exact phrase was.

 

[Horwath]

Im for no starting racial ability bonuses/penalties.

max score 18 by default.

point buy from 8 to 16.

racial preference: ability that is prefered by race cannot be lower than 12 at character creation. I.E. elves cannot have Dex lower than 12.

racial penalty: ability that has penalty cannot be raised above 16 without magic. I.E. halflings/gnomes cannot have Str higher than 16.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Im for no starting racial ability bonuses/penalties.

max score 18 by default.

point buy from 8 to 16.

racial preference: ability that is prefered by race cannot be lower than 12 at character creation. I.E. elves cannot have Dex lower than 12.

racial penalty: ability that has penalty cannot be raised above 16 without magic. I.E. halflings/gnomes cannot have Str higher than 16.

I’m fine with all but the last part. It’s not only worse than the current setup from the perspective that is objecting to the current setup, it doesn’t even IMO make any sense.

 

[cbwjm]

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.

Back in ADnD I was all for racial adjustments increasing the max score, that's because a +1 getting a 19 meant something back then, you'd see definite improvements for all ability scores. In 5e, if you have a racial adjustment of +1 then increasing your score to 19 means nothing. It means a handful of races don't really get anything from allowing racial adjustments to increase the maximum, most obvious being humans.

 

[Sadras]

Our table has adjusted the ability score tables to ensure the odd numbers mean something.
We begin with lesser point buy and have a cap of 18 + racial bonuses.

Strength: Odd numbers allow one to specialise in in subskills (swimming, climbing, running, grappling) = +1 bonus. We also use encumbrance. A 15 or above allows one to specialise in Might (the +1 is additional damage). One can select a subskill multiple times. Might applies to monsters as well so a 21 Strength = +9 damage.
Low scores provide penalties to various subskills.

Dexterity: Odd numbers allow one gain an Avoidance bonus from touch attacks.
13 = 1, 15 = 2, 17 = 3...etc. So a ghost's touch attack for instance.
Noncorporeal attacks ignore physical armour/shields.
Low scores increase the damage from touch attacks.

Constitution: Odd numbers affect Recovery. i.e. They determine how much healing one requires before one may become conscious.
So if someone drops below 0hp from damage - they generally require 15 hit points of healing to recover.
An 11 Con score drops that Recovery required to 13. A 13 Con score drops that Recovery required to 11...and so forth.
Low scores worsen the 15hp base.

Intelligence: Odd numbers allow for additional proficiencies. Low scores remove proficiencies off the base.

Wisdom: Odd numbers provide someone Virtues. Low scores provide Vices.

Charisma: Odd numbers determine number of magical items one can be attuned to at a time.

 

[Horwath]

I’m fine with all but the last part. It’s not only worse than the current setup from the perspective that is objecting to the current setup, it doesn’t even IMO make any sense.

small race, less muscle mass, less leverage, so they cannot get max score in strength.

 

[Coroc]

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!

No, do not fall into that trap. I tortured my brain around this topic, especially considering the STR 20 Halfling.
5e simply is not designed for that (other than 3e), because of the bound accuracy mechanic.

A meager +1 from attribute in 3e with a +10 to hit (from level 10 fighter e.g.) is a 10 % increase

The same meager +1 from attribute in 5e at level ten (prof be +4) is a 25% increase, so far stronger. It is irrelevant that most players tend to max their prime (attack) stat anyway. several +1s from attribute, magic, etc. can break the balance really easy. The more so if it affects armor class.

Edit: Nothing can happen though from installing racial minimums, e.g. elves Dex 12 min, Dwarves Con 12 min. It just will effect what race maximisers would use preferable for a distinctive class.

 

[Lanefan]

My vote is for variable-by-creature maximums and minimums: other than Humans for whom the range is 3-18 across the board, each creature has 6 different ranges, one for each stat.

Thus an Elf might have starting ranges of ranges of Str 3-17, Int 5-19, Wis 3-18, Dex 6-20, Con 3-16, Cha 5-19. Later stat advancement could take any stat one beyond its normal range max.

 

[Sadras]

It just will effect what race maximisers would use preferable for a distinctive class.

They maximise anyways.
The limits would nice as the base in the PHB with a sidebar for the option to remove them.
That would then cater to both styles.

 

[Horwath]

No, do not fall into that trap. I tortured my brain around this topic, especially considering the STR 20 Halfling.
5e simply is not designed for that (other than 3e), because of the bound accuracy mechanic.

A meager +1 from attribute in 3e with a +10 to hit (from level 10 fighter e.g.) is a 10 % increase

The same meager +1 from attribute in 5e at level ten (prof be +4) is a 25% increase, so far stronger. It is irrelevant that most players tend to max their prime (attack) stat anyway. several +1s from attribute, magic, etc. can break the balance really easy. The more so if it affects armor class.

Edit: Nothing can happen though from installing racial minimums, e.g. elves Dex 12 min, Dwarves Con 12 min. It just will effect what race maximisers would use preferable for a distinctive class.

stating this kind of percentage increase/decrease is kind of wrong. Yes +1 added to +4 is a 25% increase, but it depends on the average target number or DC.

if in 5E attack roll on average hits 60% of the time then that +1 increase is worth 8,3%

but if attack hits on average 40% of the time then that +1 increase is worth 12,5%