Simplifying Ability Scores and Proficiency System

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I've been churning this in my head for a while and wanted to write it down.

Based on 5e and some work I did years ago.

So you keep the 6 ability scores. However you place a 1 to 6 next to each of these. This is your proficient score.

You gain a 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 to place next to each. If you do something you aren't proficient with, you add half your score, rounded down.

You gain ability score increases every 2 levels. You can't switch these out for feats.

At level 2, 4, 6, 8, 14, 16, 18, 20 you gain a +1 to your score. At 10 and 12 you gain a +2. You split the scores up into two groups of three. At level 2 you gain the bonus to one set and then at level 4 you gain it to the other set... Keep switching off in such a way.

Doing this, your final proficient scores will be 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7. Your non-proficent scores will be 6, 5, 5, 4, 4, 3.

You do not gain ability score increases from race, you will gain proficiencies and other features.

*******

Morbo is a barbarian talk show host. His stats at first level are.

6,5,4,3,2,1

Str: 6
Dex: 3
Con: 5
Int: 1
Wis: 2
Cha: 4

He's proficient with athletics and performance, but not with deception or acrobatics. Dang, Morbo needs to make a history check too...

Athletics: 1d20 + 6
Performance: 1d20 + 4
Acrobatics: 1d20 + 1
Deception: 1d20 + 2
History: 1d20 + 0

He needs to make a Cha save and then a Con save...

Charisma Save: 1d20 + 2

Constitution Save: 1d20 + 5

*****

With this system you remove the need to remember what prof bonus goes to what level. This also speeds up stat generation.

This also keeps most of the math the same as 5e... Mostly meaning sweet and simple. You still get capped out at +12 like you would with ability score + proficiency bonus in 5e.

Expertise would be adavantage on the roll. No breaking the system but still a very handy feature to have.
*****

I'm working on homebrew project of three generic classes (Crusader, Feelancer, and Sorcerer) and wanted to simplify the ability score system with them.

Though I may take a page out of 13th Age and just stick with 10 levels so the bonuses would only gain +4/+2

With this, features (such as spells) will give two defense options to choose from. So fireball will be a Con or Dex save (resist or dodge) which gives more people the flexibility to have a proficient save... Much like how 5e allows Athletics or Acrobatics to negate a creature's athletic's check to grapple.

[Zhorn]

Simplifying Ability Scores and Proficiency System
Reading through this, i'm not sure that it's actually simplifying anything.
Yes, you have cut it down into smaller numbers and don't need to convert scores into modifiers, but the extra steps added are a little less intuitive. That could just be coming from being comfortable with 5e and trying to move across this this system's line of thinking.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Reading through this, i'm not sure that it's actually simplifying anything.
Yes, you have cut it down into smaller numbers and don't need to convert scores into modifiers, but the extra steps added are a little less intuitive. That could just be coming from being comfortable with 5e and trying to move across this this system's line of thinking.

Ability scores (not mod) are 90% useless and waste time in genersting a character. The only use you get is to find your modifier and using strength. You can use the modifier to figure out encumberance or jumping.

Using point buy is troublesome and using an array... Just gets you a bunch of scores that you don't need.

Most people I've played with can't recall the prof bonus for their level and I've seen veteran players forget to boost their prof when the level up.

I've been playing D&D since 2e, ability scores are a golden cow that needa slaughtered. Even the official 5e character sheet has you put the mod in the big box and the scire in the small box.

Array and using the 1/2 number for non-prificent is so much faster and cuts all the fat.

I know a lot of people who prefer 3e and 4e ability score progression, disconnected with feats and how many you get, so I went that way with it due to fun.

Steps

* 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
* full mod = prof, half mod = non-prof.
* boost scores every 2 levels (3 at a time, +2 at 10).


Versus

* Array or point buy (both have multiple options)
* Figure out modifier
* check prof bonus, especially if you start higher than first few levels (keep checking as level up)
* boost scores by race
* boost scores, get a feat, or both

Simplified with the fat cut out.

[Zman]

Honestly, I fundamentally like it. But, I think we can make it even easier, more flexible, and easier to explain.

You start with 21 Ability Points which you can spread out in any way you choose. No Ability can start with more than 6 points. Standard Array is just 6/5/4/3/2/1

At levels 2/6/10/14/18 you increase your highest 3 abilities by 1.
A levels 4/8/12/16/20 you increase your lowest 3 abilities by 1.

If you are proficient, you add your whole Ability score. If you are not proficient, you add half etc. etc.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Honestly, I fundamentally like it. But, I think we can make it even easier, more flexible, and easier to explain.

You start with 21 Ability Points which you can spread out in any way you choose. No Ability can start with more than 6 points. Standard Array is just 6/5/4/3/2/1

At levels 2/6/10/14/18 you increase your highest 3 abilities by 1.
A levels 4/8/12/16/20 you increase your lowest 3 abilities by 1.

If you are proficient, you add your whole Ability score. If you are not proficient, you add half etc. etc.

I like how you put/word things.

The issue with giving ability points to spread as a player wants is that it you get some wonky issues like having 6,6,6,3,0,0.

Perhaps having two or three fixed arrays for people to choose from, to add a bit of flexibility... But really I think adding flexibility on the back end (more prof, more options on saving throws, etc...) might be a better way of doing it.

At levels 2/6/10/14/18 you increase your highest 3 abilities by 1. At level 10 the increase is +2
A levels 4/8/12/16/20 you increase your lowest 3 abilities by 1. At level 12 the increase is +2

This way your highest score, 6, will top out at +12. A nice round number.

[Zhorn]

Just asking these questions to get a better understanding of the design decisions:

is there a particular reason why the increase at 10 and 12 is different to the other levels?

Similarly, why must the score increases be alternated? Does something break if all six received their increase at the same time every fourth level?

What's the issue caused by that 'wonky' 6,6,6,3,0,0 array since the scores are guaranteed to increase?

Was there a particular issue against expertise and negative modifiers? This system looks like it will generate a lot of very samey builds.

[Composer99]

This isn't an improvement on the 5e system. It's all well and good for a mechanic for another game, but for 5e? Not any better. Overall, worse, I would say.

It's too restrictive
You pooh-pooh arrays upthread, but this is just another kind of fixed array. Kind of self-contradictory, to be blunt. The thing about point-buy and rolling dice are the variety of builds available - along with the ability, if that's what your concept calls for, for your character to be genuinely bad at something. In 5e core, DMs and players can agree on whatever method suits them and, especially with point buy, there's a lot more flexibility to build the characters they want. With this method, you only get an array to choose from. Period, end of story.

It simplifies creation, a little, at the cost of making advancement far more convoluted
5e core advancement:

- Your proficiency bonus increases by 1 every four levels
- One ability score of your choice increases by 2, or two ability scores by 1, or you get a feat, every four levels (almost)


Your method

You gain ability score increases every 2 levels. You can't switch these out for feats.

At level 2, 4, 6, 8, 14, 16, 18, 20 you gain a +1 to your score. At 10 and 12 you gain a +2. You split the scores up into two groups of three. At level 2 you gain the bonus to one set and then at level 4 you gain it to the other set... Keep switching off in such a way.


How, exactly, is having to remember which ability-triplet you increased last time in order to increase the next one this time actually simpler? Especially when one of your complaints about the existing system had to do with players' memory?

It's no better in play
All you're doing is changing the point of confusion from, "Do I add my proficiency bonus or not to this die roll?" to, "Do I use the proficient or non-proficient modifier on this die roll?"

In fact, I would say 5e core is still marginally better, because your method means having two different die roll modifiers for each ability, increasing the possibility for visual confusion, while 5e core has only one die roll modifier.

What's more, gutting expertise really limits the ability of the DM to set higher DCs if they feel they are called for for certain tasks (such as, say, disarming a trap like the one in Girard's pyramid), and it really limits the capabilities of "skillmonkey" PCs. If you can't hit the DC on even a roll of 20, advantage is useless, after all.

[Bjarkmundur]

I think Composer got it right; it's not better or worse, it's different.

Since it's an original system, different is good. Cheers!

I still recommend a different standard array. I really don't think a 5 should ever be a part of a standard array that has no racial bonuses.

6/4/4//3/2/2

6/4/4//4/2/1

6/4/3//3/3/2

[Zman]

I like how you put/word things.

The issue with giving ability points to spread as a player wants is that it you get some wonky issues like having 6,6,6,3,0,0.

Perhaps having two or three fixed arrays for people to choose from, to add a bit of flexibility... But really I think adding flexibility on the back end (more prof, more options on saving throws, etc...) might be a better way of doing it.

At levels 2/6/10/14/18 you increase your highest 3 abilities by 1. At level 10 the increase is +2
A levels 4/8/12/16/20 you increase your lowest 3 abilities by 1. At level 12 the increase is +2

This way your highest score, 6, will top out at +12. A nice round number.

Thanks.

I don't see that wonky spread as game-breaking in any real way. They are giving up meaningful statistics to pull it off. Is the 6/6/6 primaries that much better than the 6/5/4 in actual play that it could be deemed broken. I don't think so, and there are real trade-offs in other stats. Sure, 5e doesn't balance their stats great and you'll have some dumping. But I'm not convinced it'll "break" the game.

I know you want some nice round numbers, but that single level where they get an additional +2 is kind of cumbersome. +11 if Proficient, +5 if not, isn't bad in a primary statistic. In some ways, it makes the starting +6 less overgood if it doesn't get the added bonus of rounding up a non proficient ability as well. Also, the math in 5e is tight enough that that single change will not break anything at all, in fact it'll tighten things down more towards the 5e balance point.

Have you considered a different starting number set, say a total of +18 would mean someone that wants 6/6/6 has 0/0/0 in half their abilities. That is bound to have a tangible effect on the game for them.

If you're still not sold on the pool to spread around, at least offer like four to six different arrays.


I kind of do agree with Composer, that this might be better for a new system than a retrofit.

[Balyano]

Another way to do it is instead of halving the bonus and rounding down for non-proficient is to instead use scores of 1-6. Double if proficient, triple if expert.

No rounding math, it's simply do I add once? twice? thrice?

Though I do have the question of what do you do with Jack of All Trades and Remarkable Athlete half bonus to non-proficient checks?

[Zhorn]

Another way to do it is instead of halving the bonus and rounding down for non-proficient is to instead use scores of 1-6. Double if proficient, triple if expert.

No rounding math, it's simply do I add once? twice? thrice?
I was thinking suggesting something like this also, but hesitated since the numbers it would result in will get pretty insane pretty quick if keeping with the same number scale SpawnOfMorbo suggests.

Though I do have the question of what do you do with Jack of All Trades and Remarkable Athlete half bonus to non-proficient checks?
Like others have said above, this system might just not be 5e compatible, requiring too many changes to be viable, and those changes are just needless complexity.
As an original system, I think it could work fine, but it needs a system built around it from the ground up and not being inserted into an existing system like 5e.

[Balyano]

I was thinking suggesting something like this also, but hesitated since the numbers it would result in will get pretty insane pretty quick if keeping with the same number scale SpawnOfMorbo suggests.

Like others have said above, this system might just not be 5e compatible, requiring too many changes to be viable, and those changes are just needless complexity.
As an original system, I think it could work fine, but it needs a system built around it from the ground up and not being inserted into an existing system like 5e.

I'm not so sure about the numbers being insane.

Under normal point buy 5e untrained skills range from -1 to +5
trained skills from +1 to +7 at low level to +5 to +11 at high level
expertise from +3 to +9 at low level to +11 to +17 at high level

with this system (the one i detailed not the one the OP did) numbers range from
+1-+6 for untrained
+2-+12 trained
+3-+18 expertise

-1 to +17 in 5e
+1 to +18 in this system
could just raise all DCs by 1 and the probabilities almost stay the same

[Zhorn]

I'm not so sure about the numbers being insane.

In terms of a d20+modifier, it does get up there pretty quick.
Going off SpawnOfMorbo starting numbers, a +6 in one skill would double to +12, or triple to +18, and for expertise being obtainable at 1st level, a +18 modifier to a d20 roll is a bit excessive.
Now considering that that +6 is the STARTING score, with will boost up to 12 by level can under what SpawnOfMorbo has proposed, that doubles and triples to +24 and +36 respectively.

On the lower end of the spectrum is that score starting at a +1, which doesn't seem too bad, but again that is guaranteed to boost up to +7 by level cap, so their worst statted score with expertise would net a +21 modifier to a d20 roll.

Unless the DC system had its own major overhaul, I just don't see it being compatible that way.

Now yes, there is a difference between how you are approaching this to how SpawnOfMorbo is. My comment was directed towards the OP's method and how this double/triple scores would interact there.