Seminar Transcript - Reimagining Skills and Ability Scores

thzero · Feb 4, 2012

catsclaw227 said:
This is the kind of hyperbole that ignites edition wars, and this is something that I hope EVERYONE wants to avoid with this new edition. At least WoTC appears to be trying to avoid it.

I gotta agree with what you said catsclaw in your entire post.

For myself I'm not really a fan of the Devas, Dragonborn, etc. but hey if they fit in your world, great. That being said, if they were an integral part of 4E, then they should probably end up in some manner in the next edition whether it be in the initial books or supplements who knows.

catsclaw227 said:
And here is some reason... We're not going to get everything in the first book. And it is not a reason to start screaming that WoTC or "Hasborg" has stolen your dog and kicked your cat.

And if they don't end up catering to your specific wants, there is NOTHING that says you can't continue to play your chosen existing edition.

MrBeens · Feb 4, 2012

The worrying thing for me about rolling for stats being the default is that the rest of the game has to be balanced against something (monsters etc) so the base systems are going to have to take into account that characters are going to have wildly differing stats.
This means 1 of 2 things - either the differences in stats are not going to be that important (in which case why bother?) or encounter and monster design is going to be a lot looser or difficult for DMs. I can see published adventures being very difficult to design well (or have to include lots of variance in encoutner setups etc).

What is also worrying me is that the standard responce to people not liking a particular thing is "don't worry, there will be a module for that".

catsclaw227 · Feb 4, 2012

MrBeens said:
What is also worrying me is that the standard responce to people not liking a particular thing is "don't worry, there will be a module for that".

This may be less troublesome than you think. Obviously, not everything will be available at launch. But if there's a decent OGL/GSL/5eLic then 3rd party companies can thrive by creating the content you might be looking for. And if WoTC is going to do what they say, then the "module" approach will still fill your needs, whether in 3 months or 6-12 months. In the meantime, wing it!

thzero · Feb 4, 2012

MrBeens said:
The worrying thing for me about rolling for stats being the default is that the rest of the game has to be balanced against something (monsters etc) so the base systems are going to have to take into account that characters are going to have wildly differing stats.

Well rolling for stats has been in D&D since day one! So I don't quite understand the beef about it. You can always use the other options, but really D&D isn't a point-buy system. And all they can do is give it their best shot at balance. As we saw in 3.X, it was like chasing your own tail and everyone has their own opinion about it. Not to mention sometimes its just not obvious even during play testing that something is out of whack; happens a lot with software.

MrBeens said:
This means 1 of 2 things - either the differences in stats are not going to be that important (in which case why bother?) or encounter and monster design is going to be a lot looser or difficult for DMs. I can see published adventures being very difficult to design well (or have to include lots of variance in encoutner setups etc).

Probably neither. Stats will be important; that is really one of the cornerstones of D&D. And really I think people overstate the importance of both encounter and monster design. The latter matters little, if the monster ends up being tough, well too bad, gain a few levels before you go after it. And for encounters, well, the DM can always fudge things if he's feeling nice and the encounter is too hard or such.

MrBeens said:
What is also worrying me is that the standard responce to people not liking a particular thing is "don't worry, there will be a module for that".

Well, to some extent, that *is* the stated goal of the 5e design. No matter how much the the designers and developers try, 5e won't be for everyone. If they try that, it will just be a losing battle for them. IMO if they get the core essence of both 1e-3e and 4e (just because 1e/2e have far more in common with 3e and 4e is just its own animal) plus add some new twists of their own, then it may just succeed.

And yes, like everyone else, if someone doesn't like a particular piece, or feels that X, which wasn't included, must absolutely be in the game, there is always "rule zero" aka house rules!

thzero · Feb 4, 2012

catsclaw227 said:
In the meantime, wing it!

Ding ding ding, we have a winner winner chicken dinner.

Aehrlon · Feb 4, 2012

thzero said:
Well rolling for stats has been in D&D since day one! So I don't quite understand the beef about it. You can always use the other options, but really D&D isn't a point-buy system. And all they can do is give it their best shot at balance. As we saw in 3.X, it was like chasing your own tail and everyone has their own opinion about it. Not to mention sometimes its just not obvious even during play testing that something is out of whack; happens a lot with software.

...Probably neither. Stats will be important; that is really one of the cornerstones of D&D.

I completely agree; rolling stats is the way to go; most I know who play in Edition X of D&D do the 4d6, drop the lowest & arrange as desired. This does not normally yield wildly differing stats & also tends to have few stats below the 10-11 range and a few more in the 13-14 range. Some randomness is just the way is has been since day one and should continue to be used IMHO. If your stats are a little better than mine, good for you! You won't hear me whining about it

thzero · Feb 5, 2012

Aehrlon said:
I completely agree; rolling stats is the way to go

Not exactly what I said... I personally like the die rolling, because I've been doing it in D&D for eons. But the point-buy abilities has been in the game for quite some time too. Its just as viable for the game too, even if its not a true point-buy system (ala True20, Hero, GURPs, etc). And if a DM allows people to pick their stats that is cool too.

Aehrlon · Feb 5, 2012

Oh, I understood what you were saying & I was agreeing with the rolling part (but notice I had the entire quote so I didn't mis-quote you). I too have played in D&D games where stats have been rolled up (nearly 30 years now). And I'm not saying the point buy system is without merit; it keeps things exactly equal... but unless you're using one of the more generous methods, it's hard to have more than one good stat. In my opinion, D&D characters are heroes & as such should have a chance at a few exceptional stats.

thzero · Feb 5, 2012

Aehrlon said:
In my opinion, D&D characters are heroes & as such should have a chance at a few exceptional stats.

I would definitively agree with that.

triqui · Feb 5, 2012

Kaodi said:
I think that we have a real problem if the word " charisma " in D&D does not at some level mean the same thing as " charisma " in real life. And in real life, charisma and cowardice go together all the time.

I disagree. George Washington or Alexander the Great were both charismatic and brave, just to name a few.

Remember also that "charismatic" is not necessarelly the same than "eloquent". Batman speaks very little.

Just change "charisma" for "personality". Does it work?