D&D 5E (2024) The impact of reducing Ability Scores?

[GuyBoy]

With Ravenloft on the horizon, I’d certainly favour lower power characters. It seems like a better fit for creating a strong horror vibe. Call of Cthulhu certainly achieves this with fairly fragile investigators.

 

[tetrasodium]

5.5 is criticized as being the most powerful edition of the game so far. Which might be challenge if you want to play in something like a Ravenloft campaign, where unbridled heroic power might limit the options for interesting encounters. If you are looking for something lower power which doesn’t limit your characters ability to progress, how does the following sound as an option?

Much of heroic power is tied to ability scores - HP, damage dealt, saving throws, spell DC etc. While at the same time multi-ability score dependency has become less prevalent with the many subclasses and spells that grant primary ability scores to damage and to hit.

You could just reduce the points buy but another option is to increase the cost of higher points. Keep your 27 point buy but have stats start at 7 instead of eight and increase the scaling.

8 - 1 point
9 - 2 points
10 - 3 points
11 - 5 points
12 - 7 points
13 - 9 points
14 - 11 points

This will give you and average of 10-11 and allow people to push their stats to a maximum of 16 (with background bonus) but only if they trade in some significant weakness elsewhere.

I guess the question is what would the consequences of this be? Would everyone just drop Charisma and Intelligence and you’d end up a party of Neanderthals. Or would niche protection become a bigger thing as players specialize in one area alone?

Would having a primary ability score two points lower put you off playing the game, if everyone else is in the same boat? For the purposes of the discussion if you’re looking for a heroic game then obviously this isn’t going to be something you would want, so that kinda goes without saying.

I've done similar and the game played out much better with magic items being more important but absent actual support from wotc it falls prey to any single player at the table deciding "there is no way this can work or be fun" and playing in a way that ensures the decision becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. I'm not going to do the math on your point buy but would suggest a 6 & 4 at +1 & +2 (just skip 5 & 7 totally). since that widens the gap between minmaxed primary attrib & dump stat to a meaningful degree in play and still rewards players who want a more rounded midrange attribute array suitable for broader &less focused goals.

There are so many abilities with charges tied to proficiency bonus now that going an extra step to slow proficiency bonus growth causes a lot more secondary effects to consider beyond what magic item churn can cover but it too can suffer from the self fulfilling prophecy problem.

 

[Maxperson]

Roleplaying dump stats or horrible 3d6 rolls can be funny for one-shots, but it sounds exhausting when doing anything long-form. At some point you gotta ask yourself, is Ravenloft about People braving the Dark and Triumphing over Evil TM or Grog the Barbarian being really really deficient in crystalline intelligence tasks.

That's why I don't consider any stat to be a "dump stat." All of them are important to every one of my PCs. That doesn't mean that some can't be low or I won't roleplay a low stat, but I don't believe in making a stat low to dump it there because it's not important.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I like the idea. Starting with less buying points is the other method.
Limiting/caping scores for races or certain levels is another way assist in players not min/maxing too much.
Requiring a feat for multi-classing is what I'm using for our 2014 game.
We also have benefits for odd-numbered ability scores...

• Intelligence offers additional proficiencies/languages, sets your limit for spell-level casting etc
• Charisma determines attunement limit

and so on.

 

[jmartkdr2]

My own experience has been that higher ability scores lead to more diverse parties and fewer cookie-cutter builds. When you raise the floor, players seem more open to unusual concepts and risky ideas.

So I suspect lowering base scores will push players towards safer, more reliable (more powerful) characters and away from taking risks on a race/class combo that isn’t optimized - or even shunning “lower tier” classes entirely.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I have sucessfully played a rogue3/bard4/sorcerer3 in 5.0 with comparable stats (14 dex and 14 cha after stat increases).
The character was focussed on blade cantips and rituals.
I was given some nice magic items and we played in a 2 player party.

No. It really does not effect your character very much, as long as you don't play overoptimized. Ravenloft characters should feel a bit less powerful and lower stats do exactly that by reducing number of uses and the impact of some abilities. In my case, bardic inspiration was only used in special circumstances and usually held for emergencies by my party member.

 

[Maxperson]

I have sucessfully played a rogue3/bard4/sorcerer3 in 5.0 with comparable stats (14 dex and 14 cha after stat increases).
The character was focussed on blade cantips and rituals.
I was given some nice magic items and we played in a 2 player party.

No. It really does not effect your character very much, as long as you don't play overoptimized. Ravenloft characters should feel a bit less powerful and lower stats do exactly that by reducing number of uses and the impact of some abilities. In my case, bardic inspiration was only used in special circumstances and usually held for emergencies by my party member.

In 5e a +1 doesn't mean nearly as much as it used to in past editions. I'd much rather have a feat than pick ASI.

 

[TheSword]

In 5e a +1 doesn't mean nearly as much as it used to in past editions. I'd much rather have a feat than pick ASI.

Yeah there are lots of feats I would take over +2 ASI. Even if I didn’t know if I would ever get a second feat.

 

[Distracted DM]

Unfortunately, reducing efficacy on the player side is making it easier on the GM but the players feel it more keenly. Whereas if you just ramped up every enemy, the players might feel like the world is a lot more lethal, if all DCs were upped things would feel more difficult, but that would involve the DM changing literally every monster and challenge. It might be a simple change, for example, adding 3 or 5 to everything (attack rolls, damage, DCs, AC), but it's a lot more fiddly.

So yeah adjusting player characters is definitely the easiest way, but you're going to see a lot of pushback in the forums of public opinion. Usually it's a similar conversation to the player versus DM agency debates.

If you're running in person, adjusting every number for enemies and difficulty might not be that big of a deal. But if you're running online with things being automated, something as simple as adding a +2 or + 3 to all hits is a bit of a pain in the butt. But you need to edit every stat block you come across.

 

[TheSword]

Unfortunately, reducing efficacy on the player side is making it easier on the GM but the players feel it more keenly. Whereas if you just ramped up every enemy, the players might feel like the world is a lot more lethal, if all DCs were upped things would feel more difficult, but that would involve the DM changing literally every monster and challenge. It might be a simple change, for example, adding 3 or 5 to everything (attack rolls, damage, DCs, AC), but it's a lot more fiddly.

So yeah adjusting player characters is definitely the easiest way, but you're going to see a lot of pushback in the forums of public opinion. Usually it's a similar conversation to the player versus DM agency debates.

If you're running in person, adjusting every number for enemies and difficulty might not be that big of a deal. But if you're running online with things being automated, something as simple as adding a +2 or + 3 to all hits is a bit of a pain in the butt. But you need to edit every stat block you come across.

I can’t disagree. I suspect there would be pushback from the general public. Particularly in an open online campaign. Would it cause folks on Start Playing to walk on by… I suspect yes.

It’s a shame though because I think it would improve a Ravenloft game. I would keep it in the bag for a home game with friends with whom there would be a compact. I’d work my ass off to make it really atmospheric and fun in exchange for their forebearance.