D&D 5E What if 15 equaled 20???

[DND_Reborn]

Cryptic title but easy enough concept...

Once in a while, I hear someone talk about empty levels or how it annoys them that ability scores have the same modifiers if you had a 14 or a 15.

So, I was thinking if an ability score of 20 is +5, what if we made that 15 instead, with each point giving you a +1 increase to your modifier?

Of course, bonuses would change, numbers affected, etc. and the golden 3-18 wouldn't mean as much.

Now, personally I find bounded accuracy too bounded, so this wouldn't bother me, even if PCs could still get to 20 and have a +10 modifier.

Could the system be persuaded to move to a larger level of bonuses again, without, however allowing the treadmill effect of prior editions?

Such a return would also promote greater proficiency bonuses, I think ranging from +2 to +12, and exchanging Expertise for either advantage or an increasing "floor" roll, leading to something like Reliable Talent in the end.

Without magic or another feature, the maximum bonus would be +22 (10 for ability and 12 for proficiency), which while certainly larger is not that far from the current maximum +17 via Expertise.

I have always been vocal about increasing the concept of bounded accuracy to 40 instead of the 30ish at which it currently stands.

To be clear, this isn't some drastic house-rule I am considering, I've just been rolling the idea around a couple days now and wonder what others might think? So, please share your thoughts if you wish and thanks for reading.

 

[dave2008]

I am working on Immortals version of 5e where your bonus to your roll is your ability score. So I don't mind the concept.

For "mortals" I would prefer that interesting things happen at each score and worry less about the +bonus to the ability. For example, strength already gives benefits for each ability score, not just the even numbers. I think this should be expanded to all ability scores (and Strength could be expanded too).

If I was going to go with ability score -10 for the modifier, which I have thought of doing before. I would probably limit scores more. So max 18 or possible even 16. Also, I would be interested in bringing back the +5 to hit/ +10 to damage. So that to hit bonus is every even number, but damage bonus is every number.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I forget who mentioned it for creating a difference between even and odd scores, but I recall one suggestion was having the modifier apply to ability checks on the even and combat/saves/magic on the odds.

So, a STR 14 would be +2 to Strength checks, but only +1 to attack/damage/saves. When you get 15, it increases to +2 for attack/damage/saves.

If nothing else, I will probably implement something along these lines eventually.

 

[TwoSix]

I think it's a lot of conversion work for a house-rule. I think it's totally fine for the baseline of a new edition; for example, Shadow of the Demon Lord also uses mod = stat - 10 for its stats, and the overall system math is pretty D&D like. The starting stats just go from around 8-12, and generally don't get much above 15.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think it's a lot of conversion work for a house-rule. I think it's totally fine for the baseline of a new edition; for example, Shadow of the Demon Lord also uses mod = stat - 10 for its stats, and the overall system math is pretty D&D like. The starting stats just go from around 8-12, and generally don't get much above 15.

No, I wasn't thinking really for house-ruling 5E, more just a design question and (dare I say?) hopes for the future.

I'll have to look into SotDL. I've head of it but never seen it.

 

[TwoSix]

I'll have to look into SotDL. I've head of it but never seen it.

It's a little grimdark for my personal taste, but the mechanics behind are it are stellar.

 

[Stormonu]

I'd rather go back to the days of rolling under your ability score to succeed on a skill check (Late 1E & 2E).

 

[GMMichael]

I'd rather go back to the days of rolling under your ability score to succeed on a skill check (Late 1E & 2E).

I'd rather just play 3.5. They playtested and expanded the daylights out of that one...and the primary differences between the two games are bounded accuracy and advantage rolls. So if @DND_Reborn wants to ditch bounded accuracy, the easiest thing to do is get a 3.5 PHB and Monster Manual, and whenever a rule says Attacker +X the attacker gets Advantage, and Defender +X means the Attacker gets Disadvantage.

Granting +5 at a score of 15 sounds like throwing a wrench in 5e's rule set. A plastic one, but a wrench nonetheless.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I dunno, but "15 is equal to 20" sounds like a winning political campaign slogan. Think of all the people who would say, "I've always thought so! It's the only thing that would explain why I can't keep a job. I'm voting for that guy!"

 

[Stalker0]

I think it's a lot of conversion work for a house-rule. I think it's totally fine for the baseline of a new edition; for example, Shadow of the Demon Lord also uses mod = stat - 10 for its stats, and the overall system math is pretty D&D like. The starting stats just go from around 8-12, and generally don't get much above 15.

My thought as well. While its a neat idea you basically have to rewrite the math on EVERY MONSTER, EVERY SPELL, EVERY PC, etc etc. That's a ton of work, for not a huge amount of gain.