D&D 5E Typical Race Abilities: +1, +1, −1

[Yaarel]

Typical Race Ability Score Modifiers: +1, +1, −1



Race abilities are a complex issue. Some players want to emphasize ability score modifiers to make each race feel mechanically distinctive. Other players want to deemphasize them to keep each race open to any character concept, successful at any class. Some want a penalty to represent a weakness. Others find a penalty especially constraining to the possible character concepts. To accommodate the needs of as many players as possible, the following system seems to help.



The typical racial abilities is a bonus to two specific scores, and a penalty to one specific score. Players who dislike the penalty for a particular character can choose to remove one penalty along with one bonus. Here the modifier tends to be small to suggest a concept type with synergy with certain classes and options, but small enough to allow playing against type. For example, say the Wood Elf +1 bonus to the Dexterity score and to the Strength score, but a −1 penalty to the Intelligence score. Typically, a Wood Elf has all three modifiers. However, less typically, some Wood Elves have normal Intelligence without penalty, and such an individual tends to be less physical, having only one bonus, to either the Dexterity or the Strength, but not to both.

Wood Elf
Choose one of the following three options for modifiers to your ability scores.
+1 to Dexterity
+1 to Strength
+1 to both Dexterity and Strength if also −1 to Intelligence



The presence of three score modifiers allows many permutations to make each race feel different.

SYLVAN ELF
• Wild Elf (+1 to Dexterity or Wisdom, or to both if −1 to Charisma)
• Wood Elf (+1 to Dexterity or Strength, or to both if −1 to Intelligence)



Because a penalty helps balance, many variations for more complex racial designs can remain moreorless balanced to each other.
+1, +1, −1
+1
+1, +1, +1, −1, −1




Note, the typical race design includes three ability score modifiers but also a set of race features equivalent to a feat. For certain races, this feat is instead an additional bonus to ability scores.

ORC
• Ogrillon (+2 to Strength and +1 to Constitution, or +2 to Strength and Constitution if −1 to Intelligence)
• Half-Orc (+1 to Strength or Constitution)



Thus both the ‘simple’ design and the more adaptive design are possible for the Human race. The Human gets a bonus Feat. If not using feats, this Human Feat can instead be spent to boost two ability scores. A specific setting might have a list of Human Feats to choose from to represent various cultures in that setting.

HUMAN
(+1 to any ability plus a bonus Feat, or else +2 to any ability and +1 to any other ability)



HALF-HUMAN
Half-Human subraces, such as Half-Elf or Half-Orc, usually get one +1 like the Human parentage, but only to an ability that is specific to the Non-Human parentage. The Half-Human tends to lack any powerful Non-Human traits but might get some token ones. Meanwhile the Half-Human gains a bonus Human Feat like the Human parentage.



In sum, race ability score modifiers as typically +1 to two abilities with -1 to one ability allows many possibilities and solves many problems, especially when players can opt out of the -1 penalty.

 

[Yaarel]

With the +1 +1 −1 in mind, lets see what races in the D&D traditions might look like.

Here are the elves in the D&D traditions. 4e tried to reduce their number but the missing elves just showed up in later books as options.

Here, Elf is a creature type with three races, that are very different from each other. Each race has its own subraces.



Sylvan Elf
• Wild (+1 Dex or Wis, or both if −1 Int), Shiere Eladrin, Green Elf.
• Wood (+1 Dex or Str, or both if −1 Cha), Bralani Eladrin, Grugach, Athas.
• High (+1 Dex or Int, or both if −1 Con), Ghaele Eladrin, Valley Elf, Avariel (Wings feat?).

Bright Elf
• Sun (+1 Cha or Int, or both if −1 Str), Tulani Eladrin, Gold Elf.
• Moon (+1 Cha or Wis, or both if −1 Str), Noviere Eladrin, Silver Elf.
• Star (+1 Cha or Str, or both if −1 Dex), Fiere Eladrin, Mithril Elf.

Dark Elf
• Miyetari (+1 Dex or Cha, or both if −1 Str), Coure Eladrin, Good ancestral Dark Elf.
• Drow (+1 Dex, Cha, or Wis, or all three if −1 Con and Str), Evil fallen Dark Elf.
• Ilythiiri (+1 Dex or Wis, or both if −1 Con), Good redeemed Dark Elf but still tainted.

 

[Derren]

Race abilities are a complex issue. Some players want to emphasize ability score modifiers to make each race feel mechanically distinctive. Other players want to deemphasize them to keep each race open to any character concept, successful at any class. Some want a penalty to represent a weakness. Others find a penalty especially constraining to the possible character concepts. To accommodate the needs of as many players as possible, the following system seems to help.

There is a even easier solution. Stop Minmaxing. You can have interesting, and yes, also "effective", characters without maxing its class primary ability.

 

[the Jester]

I have two major issues with this approach.

First, I am very convinced that, at least as long as we use the current chart for ability bonuses (e.g. +1 at a stat of 12, +2 at a stat of 14, etc), giving odd ability bonuses and penalties is a terrible idea that really promotes min-maxing.

Second, and this is a playstyle thing, so YMMV, if a player wants to avoid a stat penalty (in a system where we go back to the balanced bonus/penalty scheme of 2e and earlier), he or she should play a human. I'm really not down with what I'd term "coddling" players. To me, the stat modifiers for a race represent the average variance from human; i.e. a halfling is more dextrous, on average, than a human, but weaker. Eliminating racial penalties just so a player can avoid a stat penalty rubs me very much the wrong way, and I wouldn't be inclined to allow it in my game, just as I'd be disinclined to let a player worship a god who grants access to the domains of Good and Law, yet play his or her pc as CE because it's "fun". If the fun is in avoiding penalties or alignment restrictions or whatever, the player needs to find the options without those things, not expect the dm to rewrite the game to accommodate him or her.

Again, obviously, YMMV.

 

[n00bdragon]

Death to ability scores

 

[Yaarel]

Reallife evolution min-maxes. Nature adapts via advantageous traits. Unused traits diminish. Use it or lose it.

Species of life differ from each other. Humans are physically weaker than Gorillas.

Min-maxing creates characters that make good stories. They have salient strengths and weaknesses that the audience can recognize.

 

[Mistwell]

I think I preferred non-balanced racial ability scores, with the added element of max level limits for races in particular classes. I definitely don't desire that they all have the same exact formula.

 

[Mistwell]

Reallife evolution min-maxes. Nature adapts via advantageous traits. Unused traits diminish. Use it or lose it.

That's true on the macro level over long periods of time for an entire species, but not necessarily on the micro level for a number of years or a single individual. Audie Murphy was the greatest soldier for the U.S. during WW2, and yet he was 5'5" and weighed 110 pounds when he applied for the marines (and was turned down, and then turned down again for the army paratroopers, only to finally be accepted in the army infantry). Min-maxing doesn't really dictate how life goes on the micro level.

Species of life differ from each other. Humans are physically weaker than Gorillas.

Min-maxing creates characters that make good stories. They have salient strengths and weaknesses that the audience can recognize.

Again, not necessarily. Same example - Audie Murphy made for the best hero story of WW2 for the U.S., and it was partially BECAUSE he was not min-maxed that he made the best story. Underdog stories are often the best stories. David vs. Goliath is about how min-maxing isn't the best story.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Min-maxing creates characters that make good stories.

This is simply not true: Min-maxing creates characters that have the exact same potential to tell good stories as un-min-maxed characters. (Or, if you prefer, min-maxing is unrelated to the type of story that players tell.)

Still, it's helpful for you to have put your cards on the table this way. By taking racial ability adjustments and keeping them separate from all the other benefits that one has from a particular race, you are stacking the deck. Even if this were balanced against whatever default you establish (and it's not, IMO), it would not be when all the racial adjustments are factored in.

I get that people like uber-elves (and, perhaps at your game table, they make for "good stories"). But the result of this is to limit the effective choices for players, not to enhance or diversify; or so I believe.

 

[Yaarel]

This is simply not true: Min-maxing creates characters that have the exact same potential to tell good stories as un-min-maxed characters. (Or, if you prefer, min-maxing is unrelated to the type of story that players tell.)

Still, it's helpful for you to have put your cards on the table this way. By taking racial ability adjustments and keeping them separate from all the other benefits that one has from a particular race, you are stacking the deck. Even if this were balanced against whatever default you establish (and it's not, IMO), it would not be when all the racial adjustments are factored in.

I get that people like uber-elves (and, perhaps at your game table, they make for "good stories"). But the result of this is to limit the effective choices for players, not to enhance or diversify; or so I believe.

The first rule of writing is too have good characters, with ‘tropes’ and themes, that include strengths (‘maxes’) that make sense and flaws (‘mins’).

Many stories have some variation of the Fivesome trope. (The Five-Man Band trope seems unnecessarily genderized. Stories demonstrate any role in the Fivesome can be played by either gender.)

Strong Guy (Strength max)
Smart Guy (Intelligence max)
Idealistic Guy (Charisma max, often Heart or Chick)
Realistic Guy (Wisdom max, often Lancer or Truthsayer)
Leader Guy (often generalist, more like a team captain, helps group focus on goals)