Playing a class with a bad stat?

[Ralanr]

I had an idea about taking up a class and putting my worse stat in the main stat of the class (let's say I have 9 int and I choose wizard). How badly would this effect you? Surely some classes more than others (looking at you, martials). But how bad we talking? And does this seem like something a group would do for ***** & giggles? Can a wizard with 9 int still be powerful?

[Ruslan]

Spellcaster? You can work around it. Just choose spells that have no save and don't require an attack roll (Faerie Fire, Bless, Sleep, etc). You will have fewer than normal spells prepared, and those spells will have to come from a limited selection, but you can still be a functional, contributing member of the party. As luck would have it, a low spell-casting attribute doesn't affect the number of your spell slots.

Martial? You're boned. You can't contribute on a basic level, except perhaps as a damage sponge.

[Demonic Spoon]

Small correction above: Faerie Fire does trigger a DEX save.

[ruy343]

Spellcasters that play with buffs would be just fine. Abjurer/transmuter wizards that cast enlarge/reduce, Shield, haste, etc: all spells that don't require any measure of intelligence to be perfectly helpful. Also, their domain abilities would still work just fine as well.

A similar strategy can be applied for clerics: just pick spells that don't require wisdom. You could actually make a reasonable War Cleric that way.

Druids are easy: just choose circle of the moon, and you no longer need to worry about spells at all. Just use goodberry for your standard healing spell: it gives a straight 10 HP every time.

Bards could also do it reasonably well: their spells are usually focused on buffing as well.

As for the rest, I think that you can manage to create a character concept that works by skipping the main ability for many martial classes by simply switching from DEX to STR. If you're going to dump both of those, then you're truly toast. However, even a DEX-based barbarian would work well (you could get some insane AC early on that way). A Str-based rogue or a Dex-based fighter aren't out of the question either.

Overall, it could be done, but you'd have to use some non-standard strategies. If you want to have fun with a character concept though, try using the most overall powerful/useful stats (like Dex) as your dump. You just might like it!

[Ruslan]

You're right on Faerie Fire. Anyway, point stands: casters, due to large amount of various spells to choose from, can still be functional with a low main attribute. Martial characters - who basically only have one action, "roll a d20 and add your main attribute modifier", can't function.

[Ralanr]

You're right on Faerie Fire. Anyway, point stands: casters, due to large amount of various spells to choose from, can still be functional with a low main attribute. Martial characters - who basically only have one action, "roll a d20 and add your main attribute modifier", can't function.

So what you're saying is...any moron can cast a spell?

Moron is not directed towards anyone. I thought it'd be funny.

[Ruslan]

So what you're saying is...any moron can cast a spell?Yes, Paladins can cast spells *rimshot*

[D.U.P.A.]

Martial? You're boned. You can't contribute on a basic level, except perhaps as a damage sponge.

There is still an option for martials if they dump both Str and Dex, they can use Magic initiate (or multiclass 1 level) feat for Druid to get those Wis based attacks. However they still need to mantain relatively good Con and not dump completely both 'attack' stats, because are needed for armor (Str 13-15 for heavy, Dex 14 for medium). However rogue still needs a good Str or Dex to use its finesse weapons, Dex being much better, because it governs armor.

Depends what you mean by main attribute? Martials can choose, while spellcasters are bound to one mental stat which is used for their spellcasting.

[Ralanr]

So what you're saying is...any moron can cast spells?


Yes, Paladins can cast spells *rimshot*

That's one for the quote book when I get to my computer. XD

[silveralen]

Every class can function this way to a degree, though none are all that effective.

Full Casters: Focus on buffs, healing, or other spells without saves. Not much else to do unless you happen to have a good dex/str, in which case you could use a plain weapon to do a little something.

Partial casters: Varies a bit more, but really any one of str. dex, or your casting attribute leaves you at least marginally effective. This works for fighters and rogues with good intelligence as well to a degree, as well as monks with a decent wisdom, assuming you go for the caster like subclass. You won't be amazing, but you at least have cantrips or spells you can land.

If all three are low (somehow) you still have weaker buffs, heals, and summons potentially. Even a decent con on fighters allows for sticky, if weak, buffs and true strike+BA attack means you can land an attack per round, though monks practically useless.

The protection fighting style also deserves a mention here. If you aren't going to be a particularly potent attacker, this is a good way to use you reaction every round and contribute a little extra.

Non casters: Depends more on class.

Rogue isn't particularly effective in combat with a low dex/str, and since he is a non caster assume he isn't rocking a decent intelligence, but he could focus on charisma/wisdom skills and take the swashbuckler route to maintain some usefulness even if his three "primary" stats are all in the 8-9 range, though if he also has a piss poor cha he won't be effective considering his entire stat block is apparently trash. You'd also have to worry about AC issues without at least medium armor prof, though con should be high unless the dice gods hate you.

Fighter with low dex, str, and intelligence doesn't have many options. The fact you gain stat increases more rapidly means you could alleviate this if you so chose. If not, the protection fighting style, help action, and a few battle master maneuvers help. Rally at least gives you some healing that keys off cha, commander's strike turns your useless attack into a decent ally attack, and precision attack means you might actually hit. You can also use your additional ability score increases to grab things like magic initiate and inspiring leader to key off useful attributes, allowing for a potentially not useless cha based fighter.

Barbarian is perhaps in the worst spot. Reckless attack means you should at least have some chance to hit, Path of the berserker has one ability that keys off cha, and totem has things like granting allies advantage against adjacent enemies. That's about it.

High elf also gives you a cantrip that keys off int, so if int isn't one of your dump scores that could help anyone, as can magic initiate if it doesn't delay you too badly.

TL;DR every class has, to a degree, some level of effectiveness they can offer even with abysmal scores in their main attributes. None are effective by most standards, but most manage to not be totally useless.

[Ashrym]

Bards could also do it reasonably well: their spells are usually focused on buffing as well.

Bard spells aren't focused on buffing. They are more focused on debuffing, healing, status effects, and utility spells.

A person could work around the spells but should keep in mind that bardic inspiration dice also becomes 1 per day and then 1 per short rest without any CHA modifier so plan the build to not use inspiration either.

[Vogonjeltz]

Druids are easy: just choose circle of the moon, and you no longer need to worry about spells at all. Just use goodberry for your standard healing spell: it gives a straight 10 HP every time.

Healing spells are only really useful in combat now, what with Hit Dice healing. And a Goodberry is the worst possible heal in combat costing an action for 1 measily hit point.


I had an idea about taking up a class and putting my worse stat in the main stat of the class (let's say I have 9 int and I choose wizard). How badly would this effect you? Surely some classes more than others (looking at you, martials). But how bad we talking? And does this seem like something a group would do for ***** & giggles? Can a wizard with 9 int still be powerful?

As mentioned, the key nitpick: A melee character can pretty much use either Strength or Dexterity to attack regardless of class. A Caster must use their casting stat to attack (with spells).

So unless we say a Fighter must dump both Strength and Dexterity, they'll always be able to switch to some other attack type and fight well. And if they're Eldritch Knights, they'd have to also, somehow, have their Int be sort of bad, which isn't really possible using the array, and even with point buy you're looking at excellent Wisdom, Constitution, and Charisma, all of which can be useful in their own right.

[numerek]

Actually casters can be fairly effective against many creatures with saving throw base spells even if they have an 8 in the spell casting ability score. There are many creatures with negative modifier for at least one saving throw many two, strength, intelligence, charisma are most common, which would mean a level one character would have a spell dc of 9 so the creature would have at best a 55% chance to save, possibly a 35% chance. Also I know of at least one creature with an 8 ac which means you would have a 65% chance to hit them with an attack. There are also a number of ways to give creatures disadvantage to their saving throw attempt. And another way to look at a creature failing their save for a damage dealing spells is that you scored a critical hit, said another way if you just look at half damage as full damage and full damage as double damage you will actually be scoring critical hits a lot more than most people with a 20 in the primary stat.(this of course only works on spells that do have damage on a successful save, which is most if not all saving throw damage spells that aren't cantrips)

[Naanomi]

A pretty reasonable Ranger build is Variant Human -> Magic Initiate -> Shillelagh/Magic Stone; requires good Wisdom but you can ditch STR and only need moderate DEX for medium armor and skill support

[CantigThimble]

While you could make a wizard who plays around his weakness with properly targeted saving throws, you have to try to target all those saves with worthwhile effects while knowing significantly less spells.

This idea will basically result in a character who will just accomplish nothing round after round. The only thing he can do is buff.

[Safety Sword]

Contrary to popular belief around here, the sky will not fall in if you don't max your primary attribute.

[CantigThimble]

Contrary to popular belief are here, the sky will not fall in if you don't max your primary attribute.

It isn't that the sky will fall, it's just that a character with 8 in his primary is going to be dull in combat. I know how frustrated players get when their rolls are low for a while. ('Oh look, I did nothing whatsoever. Again, for the 5th time in a row. Better wait 5 minutes to see if I do something then.') And this is basically going to be the same IMO. It's not as bad in 5th as it was in 3.5 but it will still be dull. If you don't mind that then fine, go ahead, just a word of warning.

[Safety Sword]

It isn't that the sky will fall, it's just that a character with 8 in his primary is going to be dull in combat. I know how frustrated players get when their rolls are low for a while. ('Oh look, I did nothing whatsoever. Again, for the 5th time in a row. Better wait 5 minutes to see if I do something then.') And this is basically going to be the same IMO. It's not as bad in 5th as it was in 3.5 but it will still be dull. If you don't mind that then fine, go ahead, just a word of warning.

If you're building for optimum combat performance, sure.

I rarely do and my players rarely do. Combat isn't everything in my campaigns.

[numerek]

While you could make a wizard who plays around his weakness with properly targeted saving throws, you have to try to target all those saves with worthwhile effects while knowing significantly less spells.

This idea will basically result in a character who will just accomplish nothing round after round. The only thing he can do is buff.

You are right I didn't realize how few spells a wizard would be able to prepare, 1 for levels 1 and 2 and 2 at level 3.
At level 1 you can choose a spell that doesn't require attack rolls or saving throws such as sleep(will probably trade out later) or magic missile (best damage type, average 10.5 when you take into account to hit this is pretty good) at first level vs point buy the difference is only 3 or 4 (15% - 20%) the 4 only if you are human, high elf, gnome, tiefling or half elf (not including unearthed arcana races). If you do want to go with a saving throw spell at first level thunder wave is pretty good if you don't mind the noise.
I would say then the first one you would want to pick up should target intelligence and be able to effect low intelligent creatures. Phantasmal force should be effective against many creatures. its low damage but it doesn't require you action after the initial cast and depending on the dm and your choice of illusion it could effectively remove the creature from combat.
At 3rd level even at half damage fireball can do a lot of damage. fear is an area effect save or suck spell unfortunately wisdom is one that alot have +0 or better but now your save dc is 10 or 11 if you ASIed your primary.

[silveralen]

If you're building for optimum combat performance, sure.

I rarely do and my players rarely do. Combat isn't everything in my campaigns.

I mean.... using your primary attribute for a dump stat and not building for optimal combat are a bit different.

[MaxWilson]

There's a hobgoblin sorcerer in my game with Cha 9 (11 now due to ASI at 4th level). I use character trees so the player has the option of playing one of his other PCs instead, but he's played Grindle the Hobgoblin Dragon Sorcerer up to 5th level so far. It is not crippling (can still Fireball enemies effectively) but it does make his cantrips pretty rubbish, which might be why he has recently declared an intention to multiclass to fighter/sorcerer.

(And yes, I already realize that he'll have to raise his Cha to 13 before he can multiclass. I'll break it to him gently.)

[Ralanr]

There's a hobgoblin sorcerer in my game with Cha 9 (11 now due to ASI at 4th level). I use character trees so the player has the option of playing one of his other PCs instead, but he's played Grindle the Hobgoblin Dragon Sorcerer up to 5th level so far. It is not crippling (can still Fireball enemies effectively) but it does make his cantrips pretty rubbish, which might be why he has recently declared an intention to multiclass to fighter/sorcerer.

(And yes, I already realize that he'll have to raise his Cha to 13 before he can multiclass. I'll break it to him gently.)

But he's already a sorcerer. I don't understand.

[D.U.P.A.]

A bladelock can afford to have rather low charisma, however it needs to invest in armor via feats and stats (Str/Dex). It is inferior to eldritch spam, but still viable, especially with a dwarf. However it is still advisable that Cha is not that low, because of further invocations and there are still many spells using casting stat.