Making each ability score count (Ideas)

mkill

Adventurer
It's a stated goal of 5E that ability score should matter and be useful.

So how to make each stat matter in 5E? - Requirement

The basic idea is that you still have one main stat that your attacks and damage key off. For your other stats, you can put them as you like. Depending on where you put your good scores, you'll have different advantages, and you'll have a different style within your class.

There shouldn't be a real dump stat in the sense that even if you put an 18 there, there is no way to benefit from it. On the other hand, having a low stat in anything except your main attack stat should be a hindrance from time to time, but not so crippling that you can't function in a party.

On top of that, each stat should be useful in some way in all of the three main areas of the game - combat, exploration, and social interaction.

- Main stat -

Each class has a stat that gives a bonus to hit and damage for all attacks. Str for fighters, Dex for Rogues, Int for Wizards, Wis for Clerics...

One stat means that no PC should have to split attacks between stats. For example, if Paladin melee attacks (mundane or infused with divine) are based on Strength, and attack spells are based Charisma, they should get a feature for free to move either the attacks to Charisma or the spells to Strength. This should not be a feat tax. You could include both options to allow both Str Paladins and Cha Paladins.

Avoid the 4E mistake that weapon user classes don't get to use their best stat with all melee attacks for free. I'm looking at you, Rogue, Chaladin, Battlemind, Swordmage...


- Ability scores across game elements -

Social Interaction

Str: Intimidation
Dex: Entertain with sleight of hand (?)
Con: hour-long meetings (?)
Int: logical argumentation
Wis: Sense emotion, read body language, appeal to emotion
Cha: Impress, charm, bluff

Traditionally, Charisma dominated here. It should still be useful, but I'd like to break the situation where the PC with the high Cha does all the talking. It's a bit of a stretch for Dex and Con, but it's no problem to make the other stats count.

Exploration

Str: Kick doors, climb, swim, raw muscle, carry
Dex: Balance, dodge dangers, acrobatics
Con: Endurance
Int: Solve riddles, book knowledge
Wis: Common sense, intuition, perception
Cha: Handle animals

Exploration is probably the one area where each stat traditionally has its niche. Not much need for change here.

- Personalizing combat and magic styles with ability scores -

Traditionally, fighters relied on raw muscle (Str) and endurance (Con). Agility was slightly useful, but only if you wanted to use ranged attacks or wear light armor. But success in a melee duel also depends on clever tactics (Int), intuitive reaction (Wis), and displaying an air of confidence (Cha).

Same goes for Wizards. Wouldn't physical strength make you better at forceful spells? Dexterity give better aim? Endurance give extra magic reserves?

How do let a fighter benefit mechanically from high Int, Wis or Cha? How can a Wizard benefit from Str, Dex or Con?

Well, you could make the attack stat an average of all ability scores. But cumbersome at the table, and doesn't really make the agile fighter feel different from the smart one.

High stats should give you certain bonuses to certain things.

Rules Examples:
* Wizards add their Str modifier (if positive) to the DC to escape from a Bigby's Grasping Hand spell.
* Clerics can use Wisdom or Dexterity+2 to hit with Flame Strike.
* Sorcerers get extra spells per day for high Con (in addition to Cha)
* Fighters who use the Aid Another maneuver to help an ally's attack also grant a bonus to damage equal to their Int bonus.
* Rogues can add Wis to attack with a Riposte if they are missed by a melee attack
* After a successful Feint, add your Charisma bonus to damage

The exact placements of these in the rules depend on what works best and makes the most sense. They can be part of the standard combat rules (Aid Another example), part of the spell description (Bigby), a class feature (Con extra spells), or unlocked with a feat (Cha bonus after feint).

Game balance is achieved by the simple fact that you can't be good at all stats at the same time (unless you happen to roll for stats and roll insanely well). It's an opportunity cost: If you raise Str as a Wizard to be better at Bigby spells, you can't raise Charisma to become better at Enchantment spells.

All should come in the form of a bonus, penalties should be avoided. Bad stats are already crippling through ability score checks. There is no need to make them even more limiting.

- Ideas on which stat should make you better at what -

Combat

Str: hit/damage with heavy weapons, push / pull / throw enemies, wear heavy armor, block with a shield, resist push / pull / throw
Dex: move around the battlefield, hit/damage with light and ranged weapons, initiative
Con: soak damage, resist poisons, avoid fatigue in long fights
Int: Tactics - use terrain, set ambush, flank; spot weaknesses; aid another
Wis: notice ambushes, read enemy body language, intuitive riposte / reaction
Cha: impress with flashy maneuvers, action points; bluff, feint, combat tricks

Spellcasting

Str: Force spells, extra damage, pushing, pulling, telekinesis
Dex: target ray spells, shape zones, fine magic manipulation
Con: endurance casting, energy reserves, blood magic
Int: magic theory, knowledge of formulas, analysis spells
Wis: Intuitive magic, mind reading, healing, nature summons
Cha: illusions, mental manipulation, demonic summons
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Social Interaction

Str: Intimidation
Dex: Entertain with sleight of hand (?)
Con: hour-long meetings (?)
Int: logical argumentation
Wis: Sense emotion, read body language, appeal to emotion
Cha: Impress, charm, bluff
I'd add to Dexterity masking your body language.
 

I agree with your ideas, but I suspect there would be some resistance to using any stat other than Strength for melee attacks and Dexterity for ranged attacks from old-schoolers/simulationists. :p

Under exploration for constitution you could add holding your breath or resisting thin or poor quality air or smoke for those extreme environments.
 

I agree with your ideas, but I suspect there would be some resistance to using any stat other than Strength for melee attacks and Dexterity for ranged attacks from old-schoolers/simulationists.
Well, Weapon Finesse has been around since 3E came out.

As for the others... of course it takes strength to wave around heavy medieval melee weapons, but to count only strength is not very simulationist in the first place. It's not "unrealistic" for one swordsman to outsmart the other with a clever feint. You'd expect a fencer with Str 10 Int 18 to use his smarts, rather than his brawn to win. Just watch The Princess Bride. "I'm not left-handed either"
 

Ugh, one thing that turned me off of 4e is the puny little pipsqueek causing as much damage as a massive warrior because his attacks and damage was based off of dexterity. Damage is based off strength in 5e or I don't buy.
 

Ugh, one thing that turned me off of 4e is the puny little pipsqueek causing as much damage as a massive warrior because his attacks and damage was based off of dexterity. Damage is based off strength in 5e or I don't buy.
You should try kendo. You'll be surprised how much hurt a frail old Japanese grandpa two heads shorter than you can inflict.

Or look at Aikido: The whole idea of it is not to use your own strength, but your opponent's.

Of course, there is still room for Strength in melee combat. You can't have, say, a Sumo ringer without heaps of Strength. But not every effective melee combatant in D&D should be a hulking brute.

Just last week I helped a player make a monk for a PF campaign and the player was miffed that her slender half-elven monk would still need Strength to be effective (you can use Finesse, but then you deal only about half damage) It just didn't fit what she imagined the character to be.
Same for me, one of my big gripes with the 3E/PF monk in that he can't substitute Wis for damage.

(I'm using tons of Asian examples here but the same applies to Western fencing, especially from Renaissance onwards)
 
Last edited:

Ugh, one thing that turned me off of 4e is the puny little pipsqueek causing as much damage as a massive warrior because his attacks and damage was based off of dexterity. Damage is based off strength in 5e or I don't buy.

There is much more to dealing damage than being a big muscle bound oaf. Watch any Jet Li or Jackie Chan movie. Invariably some hideously muscle bound thug steps up only to be quickly dispatched by a small lithe opponent.

If damage is only based on strength, then my sense of verisimilitude and immersion is broken, and then I don't want to buy 5e. ;)
 

No matter how dextrous, if you don't have the muscle to back a blow up then you simply aren't going to do a whole lot of damage. Those examples you cite would be higher level attackers who have higher levels of skill, they hit more often because they have a better attack bonus. A good system uses dex for attacks and strength for damage. If you use dex for both attack and damage than you have an attacker with a 6 strength doing the same damage as one with a 16 despite the fact that all things being equal the stronger character would do more damage.
 


No matter how dextrous, if you don't have the muscle to back a blow up then you simply aren't going to do a whole lot of damage. Those examples you cite would be higher level attackers who have higher levels of skill, they hit more often because they have a better attack bonus. A good system uses dex for attacks and strength for damage. If you use dex for both attack and damage than you have an attacker with a 6 strength doing the same damage as one with a 16 despite the fact that all things being equal the stronger character would do more damage.

Anyone who has ever been in a knife fight might disagree with you a bit. Strikes made with precision are more deadly and damaging than putting your muscle behind a poorly placed strike. With the light blades, it's not going to be effective to try and muscle your way through it. For axes and clubs its a vastly different story, however.

A more accurate model would be to improve damage dependent upon both the strength behind it and the degree of lethal accuracy of the strike. Although I could envision a more complex system using str, dex, int and even wis.

I still think it's better to keep the system simple and assume that a clever rogue is placing intelligent and lethal strikes on an opponent, the strong fighter is putting muscle behind those overpowering hits, the agile swashbuckler is flashing steel with deadly accuracy, and the wise monk's discipline allows her to use her opponent's strength against them.

:)
 

Remove ads

Top