Hypothetical: raising the 20 stat cap based on Feats/Race

[Zhorn]

Just having a random musing; Say your cap on ability scores COULD exceed the 20 cap due to the bonuses granted by half feats and racial ASI?

So there's still the standard cap of 20 (+5) in each stat, and an absolute maximum of 30 (+10), but in between those are values that would be achievable with a dedicated build.

Example: A tiefling could potentially raise their CHA to 22 and INT to 21, and with the Actor and Keen Mind feats could potentially raise their CHA to 23 and INT to 22 respectively.

Just interested in people's gut reactions to this, and how they might revalue feats that are usually ranked lower in usefulness, and/or maintain a diverse sense of racial identity between selections rather than everyone capping at 20 (ie: an exceptionally smart gnome has a higher potential INT compared to an exceptionally smart goliath, while an exceptionally strong gnome still doesn't reach the same potential as an exceptionally strong goliath).

[BurgerBeast]

I think it’s great. I don’t think you’ll get a lot of positive feedback, but that could just be a vocal minority.

My guess is that the reason it was capped at 20 to begin with was for simplicity’s sake, so they didn’t have to write up a table of racial ability maximums and then add a few caveats for exceptions.

The only thing to watch for, that I can think of at the moment, is how it would affect skill and save DCs.

Edit: and I agree that it will add value to the half feats, and that this is a good thing. Would you want to limit the number of times a character can benefit from half-feats tied to each score? Because I think some ability scores have more half-feats than others.

[Sindeloke]

My table does a thing with size categories, where Small races are capped at 18 str and 22 dex. We never saw a practical difference in play between few Small PCs to begin with and nobody tending to get above 18 in a stat anyway, but it does change the feel of the world a little bit, just knowing that Small races have that difference in potential even if it never manifested.

[MrStabby]

I think this would have a deliterious effect on character diversity. As it is you can play a dwarf sorcerer or a half Orc bard and not feel pushed out of it - at high levels you can still get the same DC checks to your spells as a half elf or a tiefling. It lets people play into a character concept a bit more.

[Xervous]

Mechanically I like it.

From the perspective of what 5e is aiming for it clearly does not fit with their one hole one peg shape approach. Save it for a system that actually wants depth.

[Tes]

Not gonna lie, the system is never going to be great for realism.
And that's a "realism" feature.

Limiting i.e. Halflings to max 18STR while allowing 22Dex is mainly going to make people want to minmax more often. Your own group is obviously a small sample size so, not necessarily relevant for you. It's still not going to be realistic though. 18STR Small Race vs 22STR Goliath is still way too close for any sort of accuracy based on physics.

As a reference, Shadowrun 5E does racial mods well and imho has one of the best systems for it with the Edge stat existing outside, but working hand in hand with other attributes. Shadowrun 5E unlike DnD 5E is also a pretty complex game so YMMV on taking it as reference and inspiration. It has/had its own array of problems.

DnD went too far on cutting things imho.
From where I stand the use of flat +/- was cut too hard in favor of Advantage/Disadvantage.
A separate "luck" stat that can influence everything a bit could have gone a long way to make small race martials comparable to i.e. Goliath or VHuman Martials.
The mechanics are there, it just feels like the devs just stopped halfway during fine tuning stuff.
You can honestly tell by how Sharpshooter, XBE, GWM and PAM are right next to Dual Wielder and Mage Slayer.

They could have something as boring as awarding race+class combos without a racial ASI in their main stat a free use of Inspiration every day. But they didn't and it's really on you if you want to celebrate clean simplicity or house rule the heck out of it.

[Xervous]

When drawing comparisons to almost any version of shadowrun it is important to note that SAD characters don’t exist in the same capacity as D&D. With how the convoluted numbers work out behind the scene you are incentivized to have a more well balanced spread of ability scores to ensure some baseline competency and survivability. It’s worth noting that more recent SR editions broke dex and wis each into two separate ability scores to dilute their potency. Casters need 3 ability scores to do their thing but shooting a gun only needs 1.

[Hytheter]

Alternately, how about just removing ASIs from the game altogether? Or perhaps you can only get one ASI for each stat? The stats you have at level 1 are then basically your stats for the whole game, barring magic items or stuff like barb 20.

[Tes]

When drawing comparisons to almost any version of shadowrun it is important to note that SAD characters don’t exist in the same capacity as D&D. With how the convoluted numbers work out behind the scene you are incentivized to have a more well balanced spread of ability scores to ensure some baseline competency and survivability. It’s worth noting that more recent SR editions broke dex and wis each into two separate ability scores to dilute their potency. Casters need 3 ability scores to do their thing but shooting a gun only needs 1.
As a whole it's several magnitudes of complexity more complicated and definitely not balanced either.
My main point is I wouldn't feel gimped going Orc, Troll, Elf or human on a Fighter (Street Sam) in SR. And I think you could easily replicate that in DND with an Edge/Luck stat that generates out of your.

A Human "Fighter" ("STR" and "DEX" versions) in SR is viable next to Trolls, Orcs and Elves no problem.
Can't say the same for a Halfling and Gnome STR Fighter in DnD. Or Orc Wizards (which aren't exactly great in SR either, to be fair).
I'd feel gimped pretty hard, even compared to something as "suboptimal" as a Dragonborn.
All in all Shadowrun definitely gets you more of an actual character rather than a generic blank slate DND MMO player avatar, so the comparison isn't fair to begin with :smallwink:
This wasn't about that though, simplicity has a lot of value. There's a reason you can play DnD casually with friends or strangers.
Having the option to raise a tertiary stat that potentially impacts everything, would give at least one more alternative to build an optimized character by picking up a 20 in your main stat and the best mix of Feats to go along with it.

[Anymage]

If you want to make all stats relevant in some 5e spinoff, you'll have to give mechanical bonuses tied to all of them. You'll note that very few people dump dex currently, and nobody dumps con. Alternately, if you want to make stats relevant in core 5e, you'll have to make an active effort to throw a out a lot more saves and to make sure you go after a spread of which abilities they target.

As to the proposed rule, my most immediate worry is that odd stats are a waste of a stat point. Letting you go to 21 is indistinguishable from 20. When you start adding single stat points to your caps here and there, it encourages fiddly long-term builds when one of the things that works well in 5e's favor is being easy for a new player to pick up during D&D's popularity boom.

[Zhorn]

When I first started musing about this concept, racial modifiers were not a blip on my radar. It was a few weeks back (before the article) I was thinking just about feats, and how the half feats generally speaking are valued as lesser compared to the other options, be it when compared to the likes of Sharp Shooter and Great Weapon Master, or even just the option to take the half feat when you're not using on an odd attribute or if already capped.

I was thinking about how to increase their value/usefulness without just making a collection of custom house rulings for each individual feat, or nerfing the more common picks.

The racial ASI discussions are what prompted me to bring this concept up to the forums. The other thread(s) have a lot of other baggage that needs to be unpacked to discuss them properly (best left over there for the full discussion), but there is one part in particular that resonated with me. What is the purpose of a racial ASI when all races would cap out the same? It also just strikes me a strange to treat the conversion to floating ASIs or outright removal in the name of diversity. That's just a backwards step away from diversity and towards homogeneity. Diversity is about differences. Recognising, accepting, and celebrating the difference strengths those fantasy races bring, not eliminating them and making everything more samey.
So tying racial ASIs into the same concepts as Feats raising the stat cap felt like a right direction.

[clash]

I personally dont like it for a few reasons:

As far as race go, I feel like a race changing the stat cap basically makes it mandatory to take a race that fits your class. Under the other system it was you could pick a race that doesnt work well but, usually by level 8 it doesnt matter anyways as you have your 20 and your no further behind.

This new system does 2 things. First it makes it so that unless you take a synergistic race you will always be behind. Your cap of 20 cant catch up with the cap of 22. Second, it make it take longer to reach the new cap, which means it is going to be longer before I seriously start considering feats bar the most powerful ones. My dwarf fighter for example used to be able to spend his asi at 4, and 6 on maxing his stat and by 8 could pick up inspiring leader for his warlord feel, or observant or whatever he wanted depending on the feel. Now I have to spend yet another asi getting to 21 or 22 in order to feel like I'm not missing out.

As far as feats go, I feel like while it promotes some of the lesser taken feats it promotes taking them once again later than you normally would. As is those feats are only valuable if taken before reaching 20 in your primary stat. This system lets you take them after reaching 20. So instead of planning my bard build to take actor and fey teleportation on the way to 20 charisma, I am going to wait until I have 20 charisma then take them.

Overall I feel like it is just reopening the stat race of 3.5 where basically every bump, your not spending on your primary stat, you are going to be missing out.

[heavyfuel]

I don't like the idea of half-feats increasing the cap, though I think 20+racial ASI is pretty good. It'd tone down the supremacy of VHuman since they could only get a 21, and other races get, at best, an extra +1 to the thing they're supposed to excel at


I think this would have a deliterious effect on character diversity. As it is you can play a dwarf sorcerer or a half Orc bard and not feel pushed out of it - at high levels you can still get the same DC checks to your spells as a half elf or a tiefling. It lets people play into a character concept a bit more.

On the other hand, I like it because of it. I don't think every race should be equally good at everything. Some races are better warriors, some are better casters.

[Zhorn]

This new system does 2 things. First it makes it so that unless you take a synergistic race you will always be behind. Your cap of 20 cant catch up with the cap of 22. Second, it make it take longer to reach the new cap, which means it is going to be longer before I seriously start considering feats bar the most powerful ones. My dwarf fighter for example used to be able to spend his asi at 4, and 6 on maxing his stat and by 8 could pick up inspiring leader for his warlord feel, or observant or whatever he wanted depending on the feel. Now I have to spend yet another asi getting to 21 or 22 in order to feel like I'm not missing out.
Concerns noted, though this part feels more like it's just from the completionist mindset "must have all the things". Like the notion of "My character isn't complete until I get the ideal weapon/armor for my build" or "My wizard isn't complete till I get every spell I want copied into my spellbook". I understand it's a way to play, but not every character is going to get ALL the things. Choosing a different race is giving different benefits, just as pursuing different storylines in game will yield different rewards, or even just opting to roll vs standard array changes how you'll build out you character.
Also, say all other aspects are equal on character creation (same class, same standard array, just two different races). the number of Feats/ASI they are spending as they level up will be the same to reach their respective caps. The one without the +2 racial in their desired stat isn't missing out, they have some other stat/feature in another area. Differences are not automatically bad.


As far as feats go, I feel like while it promotes some of the lesser taken feats it promotes taking them once again later than you normally would. As is those feats are only valuable if taken before reaching 20 in your primary stat. This system lets you take them after reaching 20. So instead of planning my bard build to take actor and fey teleportation on the way to 20 charisma, I am going to wait until I have 20 charisma then take them.
Why the wait? You'd still be able to take the feat at the previously intended level. You can take Actor's +1 while at 16 going onto 17 CHA and the cap is still pushed up from 20 to 21 just the same.

[MrStabby]

I think I would prefer to see something like if you get a racial bonus to a stat, you get your boys at the odd level below what you normally would, so +5 at 19 strength for a dragon born for example - giving you an extra half feat effectively. Obviously this works less well for humans and half elves that become a bit overpowered.

[BurgerBeast]

Alternately, how about just removing ASIs from the game altogether? Or perhaps you can only get one ASI for each stat? The stats you have at level 1 are then basically your stats for the whole game, barring magic items or stuff like barb 20.

This is also solid, in my opinion.

You might need to reduce the number of ASIs (which are not feats) granted by classes, or increase the number of racial feats available, but it would be fine.

[47Ace]

Also, say all other aspects are equal on character creation (same class, same standard array, just two different races). the number of Feats/ASI they are spending as they level up will be the same to reach their respective caps. The one without the +2 racial in their desired stat isn't missing out, they have some other stat/feature in another area. Differences are not automatically bad.


But the one without the +2 in their primary stat is worse off because primary stats are used way more then any other stat. (In general your specific D&D related game could hypothetically vary) To take an extreme example example of you standard 4-6 encounter ~3 rounds per encounter adventuring day comparing a wood elf and mountain dwarf rouge. Yes the dwarf's con helps with hp a bit and if the DM is stickler for climbing being athletic (they should be) the strength bonus will help slightly on rolls you make once every few days with possible half of your adventuring career going by before you accumulate to 20 attempts to expect the +2 strength to have mattered once. On the elf and its +2 dex we have ~5 intative rolls, ~15 attack rolls, ~20 attacks against your increased AC, a few stealth and slight of hand rolls as well. Saving throw are probably in favour of dex and there are no social skill biased on either stat. So the advantage of the strength is so infrequent to be almost meaningless and the advantage of the dex is realized about twice an adventuring day on average or possibly a bit more.

TLDR: No giving certain races a plus 2 higher cap to the stat that a given calls will use all of the time is not balanced out but other races giving them a 2 to a stat that they hardly ever use.

Now the half feat raising stat caps is an interesting idea. The main thing I would watch out for there is that +2 dex also bumps AC and the AC of light armor and Heavy armor seem to be mainly ballances with light armor capping out at AC 17 with no stealth disadvantage and heavy armor capping out at AC 18 with disadvantage to stelth.

[Nifft]

It's an interesting mechanic, for sure.

Not sure if it's balanced, nor if I would allow it in a game, but it's new and interesting.

I do wonder about power creep. Perhaps start everyone with a cap of 18 instead of the normal 5e cap of 20? Then a +2 race gets you your 20, and feats build up from there.

[MaxWilson]

Just having a random musing; Say your cap on ability scores COULD exceed the 20 cap due to the bonuses granted by half feats and racial ASI?

So there's still the standard cap of 20 (+5) in each stat, and an absolute maximum of 30 (+10), but in between those are values that would be achievable with a dedicated build.

Example: A tiefling could potentially raise their CHA to 22 and INT to 21, and with the Actor and Keen Mind feats could potentially raise their CHA to 23 and INT to 22 respectively.

Just interested in people's gut reactions to this, and how they might revalue feats that are usually ranked lower in usefulness, and/or maintain a diverse sense of racial identity between selections rather than everyone capping at 20 (ie: an exceptionally smart gnome has a higher potential INT compared to an exceptionally smart goliath, while an exceptionally strong gnome still doesn't reach the same potential as an exceptionally strong goliath).

I'm not so fond of the idea of letting half-feats raise the cap, but I like the idea of letting racials increase the cap. However I think you need to come up with a good use for odd stats in that case, otherwise there's not enough differentiation between e.g. humans with Str 21 and gnomes with Str 20, although half-orcs and dwarves with Str 22 still stand out. My preferred fix for odd stats is to give you an extra +1 to ability checks (but not saves or attacks or DCs, etc.), so for me I like the Racial Modifiers Increase Ability Caps (RMIAC) rule variant. It gives orcs, goliaths, half-orcs, mountain dwarves, etc. a distinct niche as the strongest guys and the best GWM fighters, even if humans have more feats.

Mind you, I don't usually play with RMAIC because I like to keep the number of house rules low, but I still like it conceptually.


Alternately, how about just removing ASIs from the game altogether? Or perhaps you can only get one ASI for each stat? The stats you have at level 1 are then basically your stats for the whole game, barring magic items or stuff like barb 20.

This (no ASIs, just feats) is also a conceptually-interesting rule variant that I would be willing to play with, but haven't. However I think it requires a little bit more player buy-in because it's a restriction instead of a buff. For reasons of player psychology I think RMIAC is more likely to get approved for use at a given table, but No ASIs Just Feats has more of an old-school feel and might attract grognards (which is a good thing).

[Hytheter]

This (no ASIs, just feats) is also a conceptually-interesting rule variant that I would be willing to play with, but haven't. However I think it requires a little bit more player buy-in because it's a restriction instead of a buff. For reasons of player psychology I think RMIAC is more likely to get approved for use at a given table, but No ASIs Just Feats has more of an old-school feel and might attract grognards (which is a good thing).

Personally I'd be inclined to allow feats with it, but it's a matter of taste. [edit: I misread, I thought you said "no feats" as well as no ASIs. I'm sure that would have its own appeal for some, though.]

While it is technically a restriction, I suspect some (myself, for one) would fine it liberating to be able to take some cool feats without worrying about tanking your ability scores. Half Feats get a bit tricky though and may need adjustment. Or maybe being the only way to pump your scores is exactly what they need...

[MaxWilson]

Personally I'd be inclined to allow feats with it, but it's a matter of taste. [edit: I misread, I thought you said "no feats" as well as no ASIs. I'm sure that would have its own appeal for some, though.]

Pet peeve:

While we're at it, can we rename "feats" to something that doesn't imply the EXACT OPPOSITE of what they actually are? I remember first reading about "feats" in IIRC the Combat and Tactics era of late AD&D, although it might have been early Third Edition, and being really puzzled what this so-called "potion-brewing feat" was. "Feat" means "an act or accomplishment of great courage, skill, or imagination; an achievement," with implications of something that's a remarkable one-time event, so it sounded like maybe it was referred to one time when your PC managed to stay up for a week straight brewing potions or something? Turns out it meant "special ability" and was something that was built into your character, instead of something your PC did once.

TL;DR please rename them "traits" or "perks" instead. Or call them "features" instead of "feats", that works too, but "feats" is misleading.

[Zhorn]

The underlying idea of being able to push up that cap isn't new to the game, even excluding the Barbarian's capstone Primal Champion, there are several other ways that are already RAW in game now.

Take a Potion of Giant Size (SKT p236) or Potion of Giant Strength (DMG p187) and combine with Mixing Potions (DMG p140) to make such a boost permanent
Wear any the Belts of Giant Strength (DMG p155)
Manual of Bodily Health, Manual of Gainful Exercise, Manual of Quick Action (DMG p180-181)
Tome of Clear Thought, Tome of Leadership and Influence, Tome of Understanding (DMG p208-209)
Artifacts with a Major Beneficial Property (DMG p219)
Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness (DMG p222-223)
Supernatural Blessings (DMG p228)
Alternatives to Epic Boons (DMG p230)

[Hytheter]

TL;DR please rename them "traits" or "perks" instead. Or call them "features" instead of "feats", that works too, but "feats" is misleading.

I wonder if perhaps "Feats" was intended as an abbreviation of "Features"... You're right though, it is kind of a misnomer.

[BurgerBeast]

I wonder if perhaps "Feats" was intended as an abbreviation of "Features"... You're right though, it is kind of a misnomer.

I can’t remember where I heard it, but I heard this is true. Apparently it happened during the design of 3e.

[Zhorn]

opps, didn't catch this edit when first made.

Edit: and I agree that it will add value to the half feats, and that this is a good thing. Would you want to limit the number of times a character can benefit from half-feats tied to each score? Because I think some ability scores have more half-feats than others.
So just going by the PHB, the number of feats for each stat increase;
STR has 8 feats
DEX has 5 feats
CON has 3 feats
WIS has 2 feats
INT has 4 feats
CHA has 2 feats

Now I wouldn't impose a limit on the number of feats taken beyond what PCs already have access to.

For starters I'd aim to keep any house rules as simple/minimal as possible, so additional conditions and caveats don't appeal to me. Keep it simple.

Secondly, more strength related feats being able to boost the stat cap I find appealing. Casters raw power isn't as stat dependant in the same way martials are, so I don't see it as much of a balance issue. Similarly for strength vs dexterity with how much more value dexterity grants by comparison. Also as noted in my previous post, there are several other ways already in game to get additional stat cap increases, so this is only one additional source amongst many.

[GoodmanDL]

Secondly, more strength related feats being able to boost the stat cap I find appealing. Casters raw power isn't as stat dependant in the same way martials are, so I don't see it as much of a balance issue.

Caster power is pretty well correlated to Saving Throw DC and attack modifiers.

[Zhorn]

Caster power is pretty well correlated to Saving Throw DC and attack modifiers.
True, but not AS dependant. Martials are using it to land the hit AND deal damage, casters (outside of occasional class features) is just the hit, with the damage mostly coming from fistfuls of dice, or negating a threat outright, plus all the additional utility spells bring to problem solving.