Making stats mean more

[lonewulf]

So some friends want me to DM soon (a mistake on their part, i assure you, lol). I was considering doing some tweaking to some of the attributes to make them a little more meaningful, but trying to avoid doing too much.

So far, INT is the only thing i've come up with anything for.

Intelligence: For every point of INT bonus you have you may pick an additional skill from your base class OR take 1 additional language of your choice. If you later gain another point of INT bonus you may choose another skill or language at that time. (Ive considered having each point give a skill AND a language but think that may be too much)

I should note that Common will not exist in my game. It will be replaced by Human (creative name, i know). The other races do not get Human, they only get their racial language. Half-Elves and Half-Orcs will either get Human and their other racial or will have to choose one or the other, I havent decided on that.

So, any thoughts on all this? Has anyone else made other stats do more in their games? If so, what did you have them do? What effect did it have on your games whether positive or negative? Or do any of you believe the stats are balanced enough as is and I should leave well enough alone? Thanks for any feedback, even if all you do is call me an idiot XD

[Little boy]

Languages, tools, and games/instruments would work for int, but skills are too good. Int 16 would be as good as a feat. Little too much in my opinion. The stats should reflect something from the skill. Con needs to be nice and simple. Basic DR per mod or something. Charisma could allow social rerolls or advsntages on rolls let mod per night. The most simple advantage is just allow advantage per session bases in mod. +3 gets you 3 instances of advantage you could use. As your first time DMing, shoot the moon if you want.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I should note that Common will not exist in my game. It will be replaced by Human (creative name, i know). The other races do not get Human, they only get their racial language. Half-Elves and Half-Orcs will either get Human and their other racial or will have to choose one or the other, I havent decided on that.


I don't have much for the other points, but are you sure you want a mono-racial party? That, or force people to have at least 12 INT (and spend their free choice on a language) just so they can communicate? That seems like an unnecessary tax to me. Is the setting so xenophobic and racially-isolated that there isn't a lingua franca? It doesn't have to even be a major language, but a trade-language would do so that the party can communicate with each other.

Note: I'm not opposed to splitting and doing more with languages. I split High Elf and Wood Elf apart (due to cultural differences and isolation) in my setting. I just think that not having a common language is...not very believable unless the party comes from a wide range of areas.

"Common" doesn't have to even cover very much territory, just where they're from.

[Mellack]

For your first time DMing, I would suggest against making sweeping system changes. You should instead try it standard at least a few sessions first. Making changes as you suggest will have significant effects that are hard to forsee.

[lonewulf]

Languages, tools, and games/instruments would work for int, but skills are too good. Int 16 would be as good as a feat. Little too much in my opinion. The stats should reflect something from the skill. Con needs to be nice and simple. Basic DR per mod or something. Charisma could allow social rerolls or advsntages on rolls let mod per night. The most simple advantage is just allow advantage per session bases in mod. +3 gets you 3 instances of advantage you could use. As your first time DMing, shoot the moon if you want.

Tools/Games/Instruments would be pickable with INT as well, yes.

Ive DM'd 2e and 3.5e before, just not 5e yet. But ive played it plenty and my biggest complaint is that DEX does so much more than anything else. The other stats should get a little bump. I've still got over a month to plan everything out and playtest and tweak, mostly curious to hear what others have done.

[Asmotherion]

Charisma: Non-magical Hypnotism. You can make a Cha (persuation) check against a creature's CR (or level if they have no CR) + 10. If you succeed you may put the target into the Charmed condition for 1 minute. They are only aware of you putting them into the charmed condition if you fail the check.

STR: When using a Str-based weapon for an attack roll, and roll a 16+ on the die, the target of that attack must succeed a DC 10+Str modifier Con saving throw, or be stunned until his next turn.

[Ethambutol]

For your first time DMing, I would suggest against making sweeping system changes. You should instead try it standard at least a few sessions first. Making changes as you suggest will have significant effects that are hard to forsee.

I'd tend to agree with this.

If you want attributes to be more meaningful perhaps allowing the skill checks associated with them to be more important/common is a good compromise?

Honestly, INT is often one of the most important and frequently used ability modifiers in a lot of the campaigns I've played/run.

[JAL_1138]

For your first time DMing, I would suggest against making sweeping system changes. You should instead try it standard at least a few sessions first. Making changes as you suggest will have significant effects that are hard to forsee.

I would definitely agree with this. When I started I had several pages of houserules. I've since pared the houserules down substantially; there's only a few I use now--and they weren't the ones I started with for the most part. Things the system did that seemed like bad ideas when I read them turned out to work well in practice, and things I thought were good ideas to use in my houserules turned out to have a negative impact on gameplay. I'd have figured that out much faster, given myself fewer headaches, and my players would have had a better experience if I'd started by running it bog-standard at first and then developing tweaks after I'd gotten a really solid feel for the system.

My experience with 5th has been that it plays rather differently (and better) than it reads at first. And though the plural of anecdote isn't data, in my experience in Adventurers' League, where I see a lot of new-to-5e players and DMs, is that long-time 3.PF players and DMs can sometimes have an even steeper learning curve than someone coming mostly from an older edition or even a complete newbie, because certain things use the same terminology for different purposes, or seem similar at first but have small but significant differences that really add up.

[Tanarii]

Ive DM'd 2e and 3.5e before, just not 5e yet.
I agree with others, if you haven't DM'd 5e before, try it vanilla first.

Furthermore, I highly recommend you go read the DMG Chapter 8 Running the Game. It's the most important chapter in the book. (And sadly despite that, not included in the free DM basic document.) what's really important there is the discussion on ability score checks, the role of dice, making them only if there is meaningful chance of failure, and setting DCs. Because that is really what makes stats more or less valuable in 5e. Ability checks, how often you call for them, and what DC the target numbers are.

For example, if you decide to include a whole bunch of stuff that will require Int checks in your adventure, while keeping in mind that failure should actually have consequences (ie not just lots of 'remember X' checks), then Int becomes important.

[Balyano]

For every +1 INT you gain 1 skill point.
You can only have up to 5 skill points.
You need not spend your skill points immediately.
You can spend your skill points when leveling up, or during a period of down time involving a training montage.

Things you can spend a skill point on.
1 language
1 tool proficiency
1 game proficiency
1 vehicle proficiency
1 weapon proficiency
shield proficiency
+1 bonus to one skill, no skill may receive this bonus more than once.

[Kurt Kurageous]

For your first time DMing, I would suggest against making sweeping system changes. You should instead try it standard at least a few sessions first. Making changes as you suggest will have significant effects that are hard to forsee.

Yes. This.

I'd even go so far as use the standard array for stats.

[Biggstick]

I saw it on Nerdarchy, and would implement this house rule in my game.

Two handed strength weapon based damage rolls add a 1.5 damage modifier instead of the standard damage modifier.

It rewards players for taking a risk and utilizing heavy weapons in both hands, and makes strength weapons overall more appealing.

[JAL_1138]

I saw it on Nerdarchy, and would implement this house rule in my game.

Two handed strength weapon based damage rolls add a 1.5 damage modifier instead of the standard damage modifier.

It rewards players for taking a risk and utilizing heavy weapons in both hands, and makes strength weapons overall more appealing.

Weapons with the Heavy property can only be wielded two-handed already, except when using Lances from a mount; that doesn't need incentivized since it's already required to use them at all. Greatswords and polearms are already the go-to weapons for a lot of Strength melee builds as well, with GWM or PAM seen as needed feats for several builds or even entire classes (it's a very rare barbarian that doesn't use a greatsword or greataxe with GWM, for instance, and it's generally the favored pick for melee Champions and Battlemasters), and GWM's -5/+10 is occasionally houseruled out for spiking the average damage too high. I'm not sure I'd tweak two-handed damage any higher than it already is.

[Professor Beard]

Gotta agree qith everyone who says "play vanilla first." I am an experienced DM in A-DnD through 5e, plus 4 other systems. Start small, learn the rules and lean the WHY behind the rules.

Personally, if i wanted to accomplish something similar, I would give a reroll (use the 2nd, even if lower) for a check using the relevant ability, per long rest. So, a 14 in would give, per long rest, 2 rerolls on an Int skill. However, unless you run a skill-heavy campaign, this might be way overpowered.

You could temper it 2 ways. One, if they have a negative modifier, you could, as a DM, force a reroll. So, if the PC has a 8 cha you could force a reroll on a Persuasion check.

Or, if you wanted to emphasize the PC's specialty, they could pick a single skill to which that reroll rule would apply (but don't allow Death Saves, that is either too powerful or too weak, depending on how often you drop your party.) So the Wiz would have rerolls for 1 set of skills and the Sorc would have another.

Just my 2 cp. But I agree with what is said above about sticking to the rules and how they interact before you make changes. Make the WORLD interesting, let the rules stand.