D&D 5E Folding Constitution into Strength

[Fanaelialae]

That's fine and dandy, Fanaelialae, but there are games that distinguish between these stats, as per D&D, and there are those that don't. And I don't think that "realism" is a particularly convincing argument to make, when it's mostly about convention, aesthetics, and preferences. But it's difficult to make an argument of "verisimilitude" on the one hand while just about any other D&D convention exists on the other, particularly when it comes to personal attributes that we associate in the fiction with D&D stats.

Yeah, I get what you are saying.

I have a double-sided bookshelf taller than I am (not that I'm the jolly green giant or anything) overflowing with different RPGs which I have studied. I'm extremely familiar with the idea that some RPGs are more realistic than others.

That doesn't change the fact that Strentitution is less realistic than Strength and Constitution, because the latter is a more accurate depiction of how they function in the real world.

Does this mean that everything in the game has to be based on the real world? Of course not! HP isn't very realistic, but it models heroic action fairly well, and it is extremely easy to use compared to more realistic models of injury. Traditional, but not realistic.

However, I don't think that verisimilitude is something we should discount when creating house rules. It may not be the most important factor, but it ought to be a factor nonetheless. If I were to make a house rule that all humans gain non-magical flight, my players would probably look at me askance. Is it fun? Yeah, probably, for the human PCs at any rate. Does it break verisimilitude? Unless I come up with one doozy of an answer for why humans can fly, yeah, it really does. Enough so that, quite possibly, my players would have overall less fun as a result. Hence, it should be considered.

I'm skeptical of this, to be honest.

I'm neither lying to you, nor am I deluded. You're just going to have to take my word on it.

If D&D had Strentitution for 40+ years, would we be having this conversation at all?

More or less. We'd simply be discussing the value of breaking Strentitution into Strength and Constitution, and one of my points would have been that this change would be more realistic.

 

[Lanefan]

Strength Constitution and Dexterity are the three stats that are relatively easy to understand and comprehend; and each have their own quite clear purpose. I wouldn't mess with these too much.

Intelligence Wisdom and Charisma, however, always cause problems due to their somewhat fuzzy definitions. One could, if one wanted, make a decent argument that Wisdom should disappear as a stat (if it's felt necessary that a stat go away at all), with a bit of it - mostly to do with perception - folded into Intelligence and most of it folded into Charisma which would then be redefined into more of a Willpower or Spirit-power stat. This would cover things like resistance to spells, resistance to pain (broken out from Con.), concentration ability, persuasiveness and personal magnetism, leadership ability, and so forth. (though what to do with the physical attractiveness side of Charisma remains an open question...this might be the one monkey-wrench that jams the works on this idea)

Late in 1e they tried introducing a 7th stat - Comeliness - to break out Charisma's attractiveness aspects from its persuasiveness aspects; this went over like a lead balloon mostly because it took what was already widely seen as a dump stat and watered it down even more. For some strange reason Comeliness never made it to 2e.

Lan-"there's also been some ideas over the years for splitting each stat into two, leading to a 12-stat game with each one more clearly defined"-efan

 

[Fanaelialae]

Late in 1e they tried introducing a 7th stat - Comeliness - to break out Charisma's attractiveness aspects from its persuasiveness aspects; this went over like a lead balloon mostly because it took what was already widely seen as a dump stat and watered it down even more. For some strange reason Comeliness never made it to 2e.

Actually, believe it or not, Comeliness did make an appearance in 2nd edition (although given the breadth of that edition, what didn't). I don't recall which issue it was, but it was in Polyhedron magazine (which was distributed by the RPGA, which was something like AL is now). The rules for Comeliness appeared alongside an adventure in which the villain was rendering others hideous in order to increase her own beauty (I think it revolved around a wedding, but I may be mistaken).

Personally, I've always preferred to just treat appearance as up to the player. A character who is beautiful but possesses a 3 Charisma might attract a lot of attention, but will dispel it just as quickly. Whereas people might not go out of their way to get to know someone who is ugly but has a 20 Charisma, but if he introduces himself to them he'll have them hanging on his every word within moments.

 

[Lanefan]

Actually, believe it or not, Comeliness did make an appearance in 2nd edition (although given the breadth of that edition, what didn't). I don't recall which issue it was, but it was in Polyhedron magazine (which was distributed by the RPGA, ... )

Which explains why I never saw it; I pretty much ignored everything RPGA-related at the time, much like I ignore pretty much all things AL-related now.

Personally, I've always preferred to just treat appearance as up to the player. A character who is beautiful but possesses a 3 Charisma might attract a lot of attention, but will dispel it just as quickly. Whereas people might not go out of their way to get to know someone who is ugly but has a 20 Charisma, but if he introduces himself to them he'll have them hanging on his every word within moments.

Perhaps. It's the ones in the middle that always seem to cause problems - if your Charisma is 11, say, how much of that is physical and how much is personality; or are you just blandly average in both?

Lan-"blandly average"-efan

 

[Fanaelialae]

Which explains why I never saw it; I pretty much ignored everything RPGA-related at the time, much like I ignore pretty much all things AL-related now.

Perhaps. It's the ones in the middle that always seem to cause problems - if your Charisma is 11, say, how much of that is physical and how much is personality; or are you just blandly average in both?

Lan-"blandly average"-efan

They might be blandly average. Or they might be attractive/unattractive but about as enjoyable to hold a conversation with as an average person.

It's easy to see how being unattractive can work against you, but important to keep in mind that being beautiful can also be a disadvantage. Just because such a character can attract a lot of attention, there's nothing to say that it's the right kind of attention. It could just as easily be from people who simply want to use him or her for their own gains.

IMO, having a high Charisma is always an advantage because it means you can generally run circles around other people, socially speaking. People might approach you looking to see what they can get from you, but walk away thinking about what they can do for you.

 

[The Old Crow]

How about just STR modifier to hp. Just once, not every level. A big brawny guy would be tougher than average, but not ridiculously so.

 

[Oofta]

Funny thing is, whenever I discuss Intelligence vs Wisdom with my wife or her family, all we have to do is point out her brother-in-law who is classic high intelligence, low wisdom.

I think one of the reasons D&D has always made sense to me is because the breakdown is fairly decent.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

So just a random thought; what impact would folding Constitution into Strength have?
Obviously we're killing a sacred cow (and even now all the format icons are glitching out in protest ), but asides from that...

Some things that kinda make sense:

• Health becomes dependant upon Strength.
• Likewise, resisting disease becomes a Strength saving throw/check.

Some things that don't:

• Concentration becomes a Strength check.

I'm sure there are others but alas, I cannot think of them at this moment.

GURPS GULLIVER does something like this: makes HP dependent on Strength. One of the elegant consequences to this is that larger creatures automatically become harder to kill. In D&D this effect isn't quite as important because HP are largely decoupled from Constitution.

I don't think I would go quite as far as folding Strength and Constitution together as a single stat because, as you say, some things become quite strange. But I'd be very open to letting HP bonuses come from (the higher of Strength or Constitution bonus). Then choosing between Str and Con becomes a mostly cosmetic choice: spellcasters will boost Con so they can have good concentration saves, and will be skinny and fit; and fighters will boost Str so they can have good melee capability, and will be big and brawny.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

There's no 1:1 correlation between acrobatic skills and hand-eye coordination either, and even less correlation between willpower and perception, still, we're fine with Dexterity and Wisdom as abilities. For myself, I like D&D as it is, and I hope they never change the six abilities as they were originally stated (even if I'm willing to see the eventual changes, such as Dexterity now applying to damage rolls), but I'm pretty sure this is about tradition, not realism.

*coughcough* The original Wisdom stat, representing Wisdom and mostly affecting how good of a priest you are, has been mostly abolished in 5E in favor of a new stat called Wisdom which represents willpower and perception.

Same name, different stat.

 

[Blue]

Considering that Constitution is already the #2 stat, and Strength has a number of benefits like commonly used skills or wearing heavier armor that keep it as a mid-ranged ability score, this would create something very powerful.

I've actively looked at house rules to reduce DEX (and increase INT) because I dislike the imbalance in ability scores. I see this as creating an additional imbalance - that's on the negative side of the roster.

I also dislike it when you look at creatures of different sizes. For example, a tiny creature will either be able to lift a lot, or have a huge penalty per hit die. It gets to the point where even if you gave all small creatures d12s and huge+ creates d4s that HPs will be way off if we use the STR we want. That's also on the negative side.