Seminar Transcript - Reimagining Skills and Ability Scores

avin · Jan 30, 2012

Klaus said:
I love that we have the middle world, with its twin reflections (one light, one dark).

That doesn't work well for a game where people come from different worlds, tho. In fact, 4E idea of one world in the center of the multiverse is (in my opinion, which is not better or worst than everybody else) is as bad as the sun turning around earth... I don't want a snowflake special world... I'm with Galileo here, out with geocentrism...

And I didn't find GW so intrusive. All 4E fluff goes around primals vs gods. I was tired of seeing references of it everywhere on monster manual. It was worst than Blood War for a mile and half. Or then when race X was from World and mutated on Shadow or Fey... Geocentrism again...

If 5E insists on this, it will fail to appeal to a lot of gamers... which it's not what's planned.

Thus 5E cosmology should be modular or as neutral as possible.

howandwhy99 · Jan 31, 2012

Gauntlets of Ogre power as capped stats. As I understand it Gauntlets of Ogre Power grant the wearer Ogre Strength. Maybe that's 18/00 or whatever the new system uses, but a PC already with 18/00 STR would gain no bonus. A creature with even greater strength might view the gauntlets as a cursed item as they limit his or her STR.

Additionally, the 6 different kinds of Girdles of Giant Strength could be included as well with STR's 19-24.

And, if your a crafty kind of PC, you can see how gaining more powerful items might mean paying or adventuring for more powerful components. So that Storm Giant girdle isn't exactly an early project, IYKWIM.

If they go with 25 as the mortal cap, more important A.S. bonuses, and stat boosting items like the above, then we are very much looking at a throwback game. Now I doubt they'll go to curvilinear stat bonus progressions, but I don't see them emulating 3e or 4e with such.

(also, hurray for the silver standard. Now what can I get for twenty dollars?)

SkidAce · Jan 31, 2012

fumetti said:
Die rolls for ability stats? Maybe for noobs.

I haven't rolled a character's stats since the mid-1980s.

I create a character and his basic abilities as if it was the protagonist in a novel. I develop the personality and how I want to play the campaign (combat or role-playing). Advantages and disadvantages are balanced within the character concept, before stats are determined.

Then I pick the stats.

What I tried to say in my exp comment was that I roll and develop character from there.

So the way you chose is not just for noobs.

Siberys · Jan 31, 2012

[MENTION=6762]avin[/MENTION] - I think you mean geocentrism...

Unless you mean heliocentrism as "the sun is the center of creation", not "the sun is the center of the solar system"...

avin · Jan 31, 2012

Was in shower when noticed that used heliocentrism instead of geocentrism. My bad, sorry.

Sent from my X10a using Tapatalk

avin · Jan 31, 2012

Siberys said:
[MENTION=6762]avin[/MENTION] - I think you mean geocentrism...

Unless you mean heliocentrism as "the sun is the center of creation", not "the sun is the center of the solar system"...

Yes, see my post... a shame... my mother would curse me...

Sent from my X10a using Tapatalk

Primal · Jan 31, 2012

stonegod said:
Ultimately, I believe the "rolled stats" issue is a red herring: They've already mentioned they will have non-rolled modules for point buy and this issue has been a solved problem since 3.x that I don't see them regressing on.

I truly hope so, because I've played in a few AD&D/3E campaigns in which my best stat was 14 or 15, and another guy had that as his lowest stat (and DM always supervises rolls, so there was never any cheating involved). If they are going to further emphasize the importance of ability scores, point-buy works far better in terms of balance, even though it usually does encourage stat optimization.

I can live with DA-style focuses, although I hope there will be some sort of official skill/focus list. I'd still prefer 4E/PF style skills that were divorced from stats; for example, if I search a wall for secret doors, my rogue could add his Dex bonus to Perception (using his sense of touch to "feel" any cracks/outline of a door). Or you could use Con for Nature/Survival/Athletics when you're trying to outrun opponents in a forest.

I am concerned about saving throws, however; seems a bit too open-ended for me, and I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to have 6 saving throws in the game (or randomly roll the DC). Playing the Devil's Advocate here, if the wizard can use Int saving throw to escape grapple, why couldn't your fighter suggest Str or Con against Fireball (or, practically, every spell)? Or could you, perhaps, also use Int, saying "My guy is so bright that he *so* could see that fireball coming, so I want a Spellcraft check to get me an Int or Wis saving throw -- besides, I told you I was hanging outside the room, didn't I?" What does this "clever/good play" Monte mentioned mean anyway?

Honestly, what was wrong with 4E Defenses? Besides, I don't see any problem using the 3E/PF saving throw system alongside Defenses... if you get hit by a condition, "save ends" would just become "save ends (Fort DC X)", or something.

Warunsun · Jan 31, 2012

As far as skills go the simpler the better for me. I thought they improved skills each and every edition. First edition skills were a train wreck with 3 major competing sources and they contradicted "secondary skills" in the DMG. Second edition skills still sucked and the mechanics was screwy but at-least it was in the PHB. Third edition skills were a lot better but I felt there was too many. Fourth edition skills was down to small set of largely adventuring skills and they worked and were simple. If fifth edition skills are workable and even simpler than 4E skills I simply will love it. There are room for background skills especially in a simple system. However, I would like to keep the list of skills very small and workable so if having background skills is going to kill that then skip it.

I like skills and skill use but want it simple.

Primal · Jan 31, 2012

Aldarc said:
IMHO, this sounds absolutely terrible.

It is indeed a lot slower; we tried it in 3.5, and combats took forever. Especially at level 15+ it was a pain to roll DCs and opposed defense rolls (vs. attacks). Never again in D&D, never again...

Aehrlon · Jan 31, 2012

Dragonblade said:
With the new emphasis on stat importance, rolling is a horrible idea. To always be second best to the guy that rolled better than you did for the life of your PC? No thanks. Point buy absolutely has to be the default for this.

Strongly disagree; some element of randomness adds to realism... if your Wizard has a higher INT score than mine, that doesn't automatically make him a better character; what if my higher CON score makes mine more durable. I wouldn't have "Stat Envy". Rolling adds some 'realism' to the game. I know, realism in a fantasy game, heheh, but still... If worried about too much of a disparity between characters, limit the randomness somewhat (3 are rolled for, 3 assigned) or have a Low Threshold of some sort.