Point buy Tweak - Balanced?

[PeteNutButter]

I propose a simple point-buy house rule:

Players can spend another 2 points to raise an attribute from 15 to 16 (11 total points) but only if that attribute does not benefit from any racial bonuses.

The intent is to allow non-traditional races to play every class and still be optimal. The races with the stat boosts will still be better at it, due to the increased cost, but with this everyone can start with a 16 in their key stat, with any race.

What do you folks think? Balanced? Should it cost 3 points? Does it ruin the flavor of races being good at certain classes?

[Saiga]

I think it's a fantastic idea that enables more unusual class/race combinations.

I think 2 points is fine, it's already very expensive raising something to 16 just with that. Make it more expensive and it probably won't be used.

[Jexis]

I think the whole point is to make the ASI's more balanced. Starting with 16 in a main stat allows you to max by level 8 (6 if fighter) and I've played in rolled stats games and that's really hard on the DM, especially if you have party members in slower classes like Sorcerer/Wizard.

This gets especially interesting with wisdom-based classes like Cleric because there's no race with a +2 wisdom racial bonus. Using your point buy system with Mountain Dwarf's racial bonuses, you can get the following stats:
STR:16
DEX:8
CON:16
INT:8
WIS:16
CHA:10

which is really nice. 20 Wis at lvl 8 with 16s in both other important stats. Yes this character is dumb, slow, and averagely charismatic but if you have a Rogue that solves most of these issues.
This is nice for the wisdom, but imagine we switch some of these stats around for another class, Barbarian.
STR:16
DEX:16
CON:16
INT:8
WIS:10
CHA:8

16 unarmored AC at lvl 1 with +5 to attacks (+7 to dmg when raging). Combine these stats with all the advantage rolls a barbarian accumulates over time and the whole thing gets slightly out of hand. Sure, the drawback is the inability to do pretty much any mental skill but 5e usually suggests 6-8 encounters per session so this character will dominate quite a bit. Only thing it should really be worried about is mind control and it can take feats to fix that.

(Just for the sake of saying it, you could have a level 20 char with STR:24, DEX:18, CON:24, INT/WIS/CHA some combo of 10,8,8 without any tome shenanigans. And this character has no need for armor so no money being spent there. If you have a cleric then no money on potions either, so basically they can afford ALL the cool magic weapons)

On a small note, this negatively affects races that give +1s since they're usually used in conjunction with paid 15s, and is unusable with human. I'd recommend only allowing this for Wisdom classes or distinguishably MAD classes since other classes can get out of hand quickly. You may even want to have your players pitch the whole concept to you and you approve on a case by case scenario.

[Talamare]

Is everyone forced to use Point Buy? Make it 5 points

Are people allowed to choose between Rolling or Buy?
Are they rolling 3d6? Make it 5 points
Are they rolling 4d6h3? 2 points is fine

[Provo]

I think it is a great idea.

Yes, it is easy to get 16 in three stats, but that isn't a significant concern. You could already do that with human, vhuman (with a half feat like resilient), or half-elf.

Realistically, you will run into very similar stat spreads as before, but on different races.

My only concern is that there could be certain race/class combos that are too strong. Maybe giving a Barbarian the magic resistance of a gnome is a bit much?

[Jexis]

Yes, it is easy to get 16 in three stats, but that isn't a significant concern.

If the campaign starts at lvl 1 and doesn't power-level the PCs to lvl 5, then there's some issue to be drawn here. I play in a game where we rolled stats, and our fighter had 19 STR, 16 DEX, 15 CON (after racial bonuses). He outperformed my ranger (makes sense, he's a fighter) and both of us made our two sorcerers barely useful in combat, to the point that our characters mock them to no end for constantly needing to be stabilized. Martial classes surge quite early while other classes grow more consistently over time. I can see a 3x 16 stat barbarian playing superhero in encounters and being largely unkillable (or at the very least the last by far to die). The problem the DM will run into is trying to make significant threats to the barb while not utterly destroying the casters with the same threats (especially with hordes). At higher levels this advantage peters out but can still be somewhat relevant.

[PeteNutButter]

If the campaign starts at lvl 1 and doesn't power-level the PCs to lvl 5, then there's some issue to be drawn here. I play in a game where we rolled stats, and our fighter had 19 STR, 16 DEX, 15 CON (after racial bonuses). He outperformed my ranger (makes sense, he's a fighter) and both of us made our two sorcerers barely useful in combat, to the point that our characters mock them to no end for constantly needing to be stabilized. Martial classes surge quite early while other classes grow more consistently over time. I can see a 3x 16 stat barbarian playing superhero in encounters and being largely unkillable (or at the very least the last by far to die). The problem the DM will run into is trying to make significant threats to the barb while not utterly destroying the casters with the same threats (especially with hordes). At higher levels this advantage peters out but can still be somewhat relevant.

You can already make a 3 16 Barbarian via either human or variant human. Additionally the extra points in dex are pretty worthless as it just makes his AC equal to cheap medium armor.

Barbarian unarmed defense is a bit of a trap option on point buy unless you are starting high level. All the DM has to do is hit the guy with any mental saving throw.

[DivisibleByZero]

I think it's useless.
You don't need max stats in 5e. And even if you're of the min/max mindset, and even if you wanted to play a non-optimized race while doing it, your stat will get maxed 4 levels later than normal. Bounded Accuracy makes this a non-issue.

The reality is that there are no bad race/class combos in 5e, because ASIs and Bounded Accuracy reign them in.

[PeteNutButter]

I think it is a great idea.

Yes, it is easy to get 16 in three stats, but that isn't a significant concern. You could already do that with human, vhuman (with a half feat like resilient), or half-elf.

Realistically, you will run into very similar stat spreads as before, but on different races.

My only concern is that there could be certain race/class combos that are too strong. Maybe giving a Barbarian the magic resistance of a gnome is a bit much?

Sorry for double post—on cell.

I think there are enough good races out there that it isn’t entirely a problem. A gnome Barbarian would be limited to a sword and board build due to size (or versatile weapon, blech). I think that’s balanced.

[Finieous]

I think it's a fine tweak for players who feel this 5e compulsion to max ability scores, but I wish players didn't feel this compulsion. (Or I wish the game didn't feature this design element.)

[PeteNutButter]

I think it's useless.
You don't need max stats in 5e. And even if you're of the min/max mindset, and even if you wanted to play a non-optimized race while doing it, your stat will get maxed 4 levels later than normal. Bounded Accuracy makes this a non-issue.

The reality is that there are no bad race/class combos in 5e, because ASIs and Bounded Accuracy reign them in.

Useless? That’s a bit harsh.

The difference between a 14 and 16 is about a 20% increase in DPR for a martial. That’s not at all insignificant in my book.