D&D (2024) What should be ability score cap for standard PCs?

[Scars Unseen]

• 18 cap
• No ASIs
• B/X era bonus scaling
• Magic and class features to break the cap temporarily, but only through consumables (e.g. potions) or recharge on a long rest.

Personally, I'd also go with something resembling the Epic 6 variant of 3.5, though that would be a lot more work for 5E without all of 3.5E's feats. I'm also in favor of making spells treasure again instead of the magical Sears catalog.

Honestly, I think I'd have better luck introducing modern features I like to OSE than I would trying to bend 5E into something that suits my tastes.

 

[Yaarel]

Relatedly.

I would make the array standard for the 2024 Players Handbook:
15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10

(Intentionally avoid negative bonuses.)

Then move both dice rolling and point buy into the 2024 DMs Guide as variant rules.

 

[Horwath]

Relatedly.

I would make the array standard for the 2024 Players Handbook:
15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10

(Intentionally avoid negative bonuses.)

Then move both dice rolling and point buy into the 2024 DMs Guide as variant rules.

point buy 31 pts

Default array
15,14,13,12,12,10

 

[Yaarel]

point buy 31 pts

Default array
15,14,13,12,12,10

I like the symmetry of 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10.

But it is moreorless the same thing.

It doesnt really matter what the array is, since everyone will be using the same array.

An advantage of using lower numbers is accommodating bounded accuracy.

 

[Horwath]

I like the symmetry of 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10.

But it is moreorless the same thing.

It doesnt really matter what the array is, since everyone will be using the same array.

An advantage of using lower numbers is accommodating bounded accuracy.

to much odd scores, spending +1 ASI to fix that 11 to 12 is just an insult.

also 4d6D1 on average is around 31,4 pts worth.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I like the symmetry of 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10.

But it is moreorless the same thing.

It doesnt really matter what the array is, since everyone will be using the same array.

An advantage of using lower numbers is accommodating bounded accuracy.

And some people really don't like having many odd numbers. And some want there to be one weak stat. Some people like being able to represent a prodigy at low levels, being able to have an 18 at level 1.

If there was a stat cap of 18, the following could make all of them happy, and reduce the need for ASIs later on:

16
14
13
12
10
9

That is equivalent to a 31 point buy (if the 16 counts as 3 points). Below are some examples of what can be accomplished using the +2/+1 background ASIs.

Character 1, the Prodigy: The 16 could be bumped up to an 18 if they really wanted. The remaining +1 could shore up the 9 to a 10, or the 13 to a 14. This could end up with a 18, 14, 14, 12, 10, 9. Every ABI going forward would shore up secondary stats, if that was important to the build. Otherwise the player could focus on feats that expanded their function.

Character 2, the Well-Rounded Expert: The 14 and 13 could be bumped up to 16 and 14 respectively, for a 16, 16, 14, 12, 10, 9. This is a solid build that helps MAD characters.

Character 3, The Jack of All Trades: The 13 and 12 can be bumped up to 14 and 14, resulting in a 16, 14, 14, 14, 10, 9.

Character 4, The Better than Average Joe: The 12 and the 9 can be bumped up, resulting in a 16, 14, 14, 13, 10, 10 and would have no penalties. The 13 can be used to qualify for Heavy weapons, or multiclass, or just be bumped up easier in the future.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

But ultimately, I like the 20 cap that gives a +5 bonus. It correlates well to the primary d20 system, with cleaner percentages and expectations. A Natural 20 is the best roll you can get, and a 20 is the best stat you can get, and each +1 is 20% of the cap ability modifier. I also like that PB caps at +6, so that in the long run, practiced skill is more important than natural talent (barring other factors). It just feels right to me.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

I kinda dislike ability scores in D&D because they are, well, quite weird. The system expects you to interact with the world through other features that "manifest" these abstract scores into useful things, but a lot of characters won't have these abilities for a lot of scores. Your intelligence score doesn't really matter unless you have some way to make direct use of it. Same with strength etc. etc.

It made some rudimentary sense in earlier editions where content was gated behind ability score limits. If you were a wizard you needed an int score of 10 + spell level to be able to learn a particular spell so a wizard with less than 19 intelligence could never learn level 9 spells, for example.

Ability scores are too much of a sacred cow, but if I were in control I'd just scrap them entirely and make your class your character straight up. This leads to a bunch of roleplaying potential too. You'd detach the social and performance parts from the mental ability scores.

• A player who plays a "charisma" caster wouldn't need to actually have to play a character who is charismatic.
• A player can play a very eloquent and strategic barbarian without feeling like they have to invest in intelligence.
• You could have a stupid wizard.

 

[DammitVictor]

If we're not changing anything else about how D&D does up its ability scores, I'd break it down to 20 at 4th level, +1 for every "pure" ASI chosen.

Given carte Blanc, I'd allow PCs to buy up to 16 and roll up to 20 at first level (super special hybrid method) and then characters would get a standard feat/ASI every four character levels and a... more restricted +1/X +1 cap ASI every six character levels.

 

[Yaarel]

to much odd scores, spending +1 ASI to fix that 11 to 12 is just an insult.

also 4d6D1 on average is around 31,4 pts worth.

It is:

+2, +2, +1, +1, +0, +0

I think that is fine for a well-rounded character.

Meanwhile, the Background improvements add up to:

+3, +3, +1, +1, +0, +0

Looks good to me.

It is nice for a standard array.

Meanwhile the dice-roll and point-buy variants are also available in the DMs Guide.