Is +2 to one ability balanced with +1 to two?

[Giant2005]

The simple answer seems to be 1+1=2, so of course the two ASI options are balanced with one another, however that doesn't seem to be the case in practice.
In reality, even MAD classes value one stat above the rest, so the equation tends to be more like 2X>X+Y. That seems less balanced to me, so I would like opinions on possible changes.
Which of these options seem more balanced to you?

1. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to two abilities of choice as per canon,
2. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to three randomly chosen abilities,
3. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to two randomly chosen abilities and one ability of choice,
4. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to one randomly chosen abilities and two abilities of choice, or
5. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to three abilities of choice

[Knaight]

The simple answer seems to be 1+1=2, so of course the two ASI options are balanced with one another, however that doesn't seem to be the case in practice.
In reality, even MAD classes value one stat above the rest, so the equation tends to be more like 2X>X+Y. That seems less balanced to me, so I would like opinions on possible changes.
Which of these options seem more balanced to you?

The simple answer here is wrong, and it makes sense when you consider the units. Specifically, there's a 6 variable system, with each variable being an attribute. This corresponds to 6 different +2 boosts, and 15 different +1/+1 boosts, and there's no guarantee that any of them are equal. To use an extreme example of this, consider +1 to every stat versus +6 to one, and how much more useful that is. Some choices end up working better mechanically than others. That doesn't mean that each of the 21 choices needs to be balanced with each other for every character, nor does it mean the +2 set needs to be balanced to the +1,+1 set. At the very least, there's the odd ability score mechanics which insure both see use.

[esotErik]

I think that the point is, since only even numbers matter for your modifier, if your most important stat is already even you add 2 to get the next modifier, if your most important stat is odd you add 1 to it and another odd stat to get both to the next modifier.

Also, while they present it as the binary choice "+2 to one or +1 to two," it's basically "you have 2 attribute points to spend however you want."

[HammeredWharf]

I don't think adding a +1 to a random stat would change anything. Most likely that +1 would go completely to waste, since only even numbers count.

The problem is with D&D's traditional 3-18 stat progression and how it doesn't work well with the current rules. At this point, it's just legacy baggage that the system would be better off without.

[SharkForce]

i don't see a problem. you have two options, and it's pretty obvious when you use one, or when you use the other. you might as well be worried about the fact that when you have extra attack, you can either choose to attack the same target twice or attack two different targets.

[bid]

The best balance would be you cannot +2 at all and must always split it between stats. This way, starting with odd values would have meaning.

You must also consider how long it takes for +1/+1/+1 to give something. So at level 8 you'll have 18/18/16, but that other player will have 20/16/14.

Because I hate random, I'd go +1/+1/+1 to 3 stats, but one of them must be your lower 3. so:
- 16 15 14 12 10 8
- 17 16 14 13 10 8 (first ASI)
- 18 17 14 14 10 8 (second ASI)
- 19 18 15 14 10 8 (third ASI, either 14 could be lower 3)
- 20 18 16 15 10 8 (fourth ASI)
- +4 +3 +2 +3 = = (total +12)

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Actually, I would consider two +1's to be more powerful than a single +2, given a dice rolled stat spread with two or more odd numbers. What we care about are results, after all. A +2 is a guaranteed stat bonus increment. However, if you have two odd numbers, you end up with TWO stat increments. Which could potentially be far more powerful.

[bid]

However, if you have two odd numbers, you end up with TWO stat increments.
Out of the 5 ASI you'll get, you'll do it once if your top stat is odd. It will be used something like 10% of the time. Lets call it 20% since you might want to even up your second stat.

So 80% of the time, +2 ASI is better.

If you stop playing by level 10, it might come close to be used half the time. So yes, for short campaigns it can be somewhat powerful.

[PoeticDwarf]

The simple answer seems to be 1+1=2, so of course the two ASI options are balanced with one another, however that doesn't seem to be the case in practice.
In reality, even MAD classes value one stat above the rest, so the equation tends to be more like 2X>X+Y. That seems less balanced to me, so I would like opinions on possible changes.
Which of these options seem more balanced to you?

1. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to two abilities of choice as per canon,
2. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to three randomly chosen abilities,
3. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to two randomly chosen abilities and one ability of choice,
4. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to one randomly chosen abilities and two abilities of choice, or
5. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to three abilities of choice

This isn't something as a subclass. This way you get odd stats right and that you will rather take +2 is no problem. It's not like one overshadows the other. Random is cool but not in every campaign and this way it is just good

No reason to change it at all

[SliceandDiceKid]

i don't see a problem. you have two options, and it's pretty obvious when you use one, or when you use the other. you might as well be worried about the fact that when you have extra attack, you can either choose to attack the same target twice or attack two different targets.

Thank you. Thank you so much. If this thread had stopped here, we'd all be better off.

[Serket]

The simple answer seems to be 1+1=2, so of course the two ASI options are balanced with one another, however that doesn't seem to be the case in practice.

For just about any specific character there is going to be a primary stat that needs either even or odd. If it needs even then it's +2, if it needs odd then it's a feat or +1. If primary stat is maxed out then it's the secondary stat and the same logic, or feat time. So no, it's practically never "balanced" in the specific here and now sense for an individual character, in that it's incredibly rare for an individual character to consider these options of equal value. But that doesn't mean it needs fixing - it's a calculation, not a choice, it's for the player to work out what they thing the best option is and it's not hard.


2. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to three randomly chosen abilities,
3. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to two randomly chosen abilities and one ability of choice,
4. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to one randomly chosen abilities and two abilities of choice, or
5. An ASI equals +2 to one ability of choice or +1 to three abilities of choice

I would never use the option in 2). I would the option in use 3) if there were only one odd-numbered stat that I really cared about. 4) and 5) would encourage me to build odd numbers in at creation in order to take advantage of them.