Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5832268" data-attributes="member: 54877">I have liked this kind of suggestion for rolled ability scores, with the XP adjustments applied in reverse from early D&D versions. That is, give bonus XP for those with low stats in the necessary spots and take away XP for those with high stats. The grounds are that those with the lower stats have to work harder for the same objective.  However, there is a difference between rolled ability scores, which could use such a balancing act, versus abilities gained through play, and presumably available to the whole party. You'd like to be able to use what you have so gained. However, if you tied the power of magic used to power of ability scores, the above would accomplish much of the same objectives, in an indirect manner.  If you need a 16 Int to cast 6th level spells, but a 16 Int costs you 10% XP, then you have it balanced on each end. It wouldn't take much extension from that model to say (as with the early dual-classing rules), that abilities you don't use, don't count.  If you can go through the whole adventure and never use 6th level spells, or use your 16 int for a skill and so on, then you don't take the penalty.  This would be a character deliberately holding back to test themselves.  Most people wouldn't bother for the 10% XP difference, but it might encourage people to hold back early to see how things went, then pull out the stops under pressure.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification