Why no +1 to Stat races?

[two]

I know there is a "design" rationale for this, but I kinda think it's daffy.

However, off hand, I can't remember what the rationale is, just that I have read about it before and that I think it's daffy.

How come there is some problem with granting a race a +1 to a stat?

Sure, sometimes it does not make a difference (no bonus from 12 to 13) but it will "in the long run," considering the race as a whole. When a member of a +1 race levels up to level 4, they can choose to turn a 12 into a 14 instead of a 13. Helps in point-buy land also. Etc.

Any reason I shuold be wary of sprinkling some +1 bonuses into my race mix, for example half-orcs get +1 to con, Dwarves get -1 to dex, or whatever I see fit?

(or making these +1/-1 differences racial within a group, mountain dwarves get -1 dex, +1 strength, while other sorts of dwarves get -1 strength, +1 wisdom, etc.)?

 

[drunkmoogle]

Because with +1 Stat adjustments, you could hide your weaknesses and play to your strengths with odd PB/rolls for your ability scores. +2/-2 means that you can't hide your weakness, but it shows that you are good at something. Odd scores mean nothing in terms of game mechanics, other than feat prerequisites.

 

[two]

Because with +1 Stat adjustments, you could hide your weaknesses and play to your strengths with odd PB/rolls for your ability scores. +2/-2 means that you can't hide your weakness, but it shows that you are good at something. Odd scores mean nothing in terms of game mechanics, other than feat prerequisites.

Uh, isn't that what racial mods do? Hide weaknesses and plays to strengths?

Apply +2 to a stat, going from 10 to 12. Level up to 4, add 1 to the stat. Result? 13, a +1 bonus.

Apply +1 to a stat, going from 10 to 11. Level up to 4, add 1 to the stat. Result? 12, a +1 bonus.

If you have a level 1 stat of 11, and add +1 to it, you get presto! 12, a +1 bonus.

If you have a level 1 stat of 11, and add +2 to it, you get presto! 13, a +1 bonus.

What's the difference between buying a 13, knowing it will be 14 after a +1 mod, and buying a 14, knowing it will be 16 after a +2 mod?

I'm not arguing with you exactly, I simply don't understand the logic.

Some of the time, a +2 bonus makes more of a difference than a +1 bonus.
Some of the time, a +2 bonus makes the same difference.
Some of the time, a +1 bonus only has an effect at level 4 if it's bumped.

What's the big deal? What is the mystic "hidden weaknesses" or muchkinizing evil that takes place when +1 stat mods are introduced?

 

[jaerdaph]

Ability Score and Ability Score Modifier are two different things.

A character with a 12 Str score has a +1 ability modifier. So does a character with a 13 Str score.

If you apply a +1 adjustment to his Str score of 12 to make it 13, the character would still have a +1 ability score modifier.

A +2 adjustment guarantees that the ability score modifier goes up to +2. Conversely, a - 2 adjustment guarantees the ability score modifier goes down by +1.

Edited for grammar.

 

[Terath Ninir]

I've never bought the rationale, either. However, it did get them to increase the +1's to +2's, which I like, so I haven't really complained.

I really don't think, in this world of d20 munchkins, that odd stats would lead to any more significant twinking than already exists.

 

[Joshua Randall]

You guys are missing the point. It's called "add a bonus, hide a penalty" and is actually spelled out in the DMG.

Example: I create a new race that gets +1 Str and -1 Dex. Using the standard elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) I assign my scores as follows:

Str 15 + 1 = 16
Dex 13 - 1 = 12
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 12
Cha 8

Because of the +1/-1, I have improved my Strength bonus from +2 to +3 while my Dexterity bonus has not changed. I've added a bonus and hidden the penalty. With +2/-2 I would not be able to do this; instead I would have to choose some ability to take a penalty in exchange for another ability getting a bonus.

 

[AuraSeer]

Joshua, you're right about the rationale for not giving +1/-1, but I think this is a different question. What if you gave a race a +1 to one stat, without a corresponding penalty? That's a rather decent benefit, yet still small enough to be on a race with zero LA.

For instance, maybe I have a dwarven subrace that is better at magic use. They lose stonecunning, skill bonuses, and the various combat bonuses, but in exchange they get +1 to Intelligence. There's no "hiding the penalty" because the penalty isn't on a stat, it's elsewhere in the race design.

 

[jaerdaph]

Joshua, you're right about the rationale for not giving +1/-1, but I think this is a different question. What if you gave a race a +1 to one stat, without a corresponding penalty? That's a rather decent benefit, yet still small enough to be on a race with zero LA.

But that would be of NO benefit to a character with an ability score of 12, for example.

Unless I missing something in this conversation, which is possible.

 

[Terath Ninir]

But that would be of NO benefit to a character with an ability score of 12, for example.

Oh yes it would be. You could qualify for feats you wouldn't otherwise be able to get. And when you hit 4th level, you could turn it into a 14 and get a higher bonus.

I'm very well aware of *why* they only give even bonuses to stats. I don't *buy* their explenation -- and I think I speak for Two, too. I get their rationale. I just don't think it matters in real gaming situations. But, like I said, I like the +2 bonus, so I'm not complaining. I'm just not buying the explenation they're selling.

 

[jaerdaph]

Oh yes it would be. You could qualify for feats you wouldn't otherwise be able to get. And when you hit 4th level, you could turn it into a 14 and get a higher bonus.

Yes you are correct, and THANK YOU!