D&D 4E If 5e Had Evolved from 4e...

[Tony Vargas]

And the thing I generally dislike is that 3E and 4E made focusing on one ability score so important, and D&D Next won't really change that either. I have no good fix for that, really - not using an ability score for attack rolls and defenses also sounds wrong. Maybe if you could apply multiple scores but have a cap on maximum bonus? I don't know.

Applying multiple scores could work, other games have done it. RuneQuest, for instance, added STR, DEX, INT, SIZ, and POW all to your attack %.

Doing so could make things like 'finesse' unnecessary - a DEX character would get his DEX, a high STR one his STR, automatically. It could get very detailed and complex, though, especially in the name of 'realism.' Some weapons or spells could use different stats, for instance. A rapier might you STR/DEX/INT but a mace STR/CON/WIS.

Armor could work the same way, with several stats adding to your AC, but your armor capping certain stats, much like Max DEX in 3e.

Heck, weapons could have caps on certain stats. A rapier might be STR +2, DEX +4, INT +3. An exotic 'elven rapier' could be DEX +5.

 

[Pour]

And the thing I generally dislike is that 3E and 4E made focusing on one ability score so important, and D&D Next won't really change that either. I have no good fix for that, really - not using an ability score for attack rolls and defenses also sounds wrong. Maybe if you could apply multiple scores but have a cap on maximum bonus? I don't know.

13th Age determines defenses through a base number of 10-12, then a modifier determined by the middle number of three separate scores that could conceivably affect it. For AC, it's the middle number of Con, Dex, and Wisdom. Physical Defense is Str, Con, Dex. Mental Defense is Int, Wis, Cha. That isn't to say individual scores aren't important for things like attacks and initiative. I haven't played the game yet, but I wonder if that helps alleviate the God Stats / Dump Stats.

 

[billd91]

And the thing I generally dislike is that 3E and 4E made focusing on one ability score so important, and D&D Next won't really change that either. I have no good fix for that, really - not using an ability score for attack rolls and defenses also sounds wrong. Maybe if you could apply multiple scores but have a cap on maximum bonus? I don't know.

I agree that not using ability scores in attacks (and defenses) feels wrong to me too. There's a pretty broad consensus among many RPGs that they should have some impact, though there are many ways in which they do alone and in combination.

I think 4e went the wrong direction with allowing players to pick 3 stats for their defenses - and pick the ones that synergized best with their offensive powers. I would have broken them entirely into offensive and defensive stats and reduced the ability to gain higher benefits for investment in one stat (clerics and wisdom, in particular). I would have made Strength, Intelligence, and Charisma the offensive stats and Constitution, Dexterity, and Wisdom the defensive ones. The Str/Con and Cha/Wis pairings seem to fit really well. Int/Dex a bit less so, but if you describe Int partly as acuity and precision, I think it can work.

I thought the answer to balance problems between SAD and MAD characters is really more MADness, not less of it. 5e is, I think, going in the right direction here. I just hope 5e can find a reasonable balance between effects that target each stat rather than pile too many on Con, Dex, and Wisdom.

 

[Jester David]

Thought: much of 4e was based around being a tactical combat game. While still undeniably an RPG, the bulk of the mechanics of the Game game relate to tactical combat.

Wouldn't that make much of Dungeon Command the next evolution of 4e? Card based powers with limited random elements to be much more skill based.

 

[El Mahdi]

If 5e Had Evolved from 4e...

I don't accept the premise of the thread. 5E is evolving from 4E...and 3E, and 2E, and 1E, and BD&D, and...

To say otherwise is simply wrong.


But, there are some great ideas in this thread that I think WotC would find beneficial to look at.

 

[Pour]

To say otherwise is simply wrong.

Only Sith deal in absolutes...

 

[El Mahdi]

Only Sith deal in absolutes...

Damn! You know my secret!

You know what that means now, right...?

 

[MerricB]

Maybe if you could apply multiple scores but have a cap on maximum bonus? I don't know.

A lot of the trouble in 3E (especially) and 4E (to a lesser extent) come from the insane bonuses given by ability scores. Quite frankly, getting more than a +4 bonus is going to break the game, because it's so out of whack with your lower scores.

D&D revolves around the tension between Attack, Defense, Hit Points and Damage.

In AD&D, Attack overwhelms Defense for physical attacks for the most part as you go up in levels (though PCs tend to get better defenses than most monsters at high levels), but Defense wins against Attack for magical spells. It needs to, because low-level magic is just variant damage spells, but high-level magic is "save or die".

In 3E, Attack overwhelms Defense for all attacks, except when you break one of the defenses. It was extremely easy to break AC - I had a couple of characters that on-CR creatures needed 20s to hit, although they could hit the bard and magic-users of the group on rolls of 2. The overwhelming of Defense was a much bigger problem in 3E due to "save or die" spells still being on the lists.

In 4E, Attack and Defense *mostly* keep up with each other, except for stat-pairs you don't care about. A cleric's Reflex save is laughable at high levels. At least there aren't so many "defend or suck" monster powers.

But 3E and 4E both suffer from the "I'm a thief with a high Dex, my Reflex is great!" but "I'm a thief with a low Wis, my Will is horrible." At higher levels, you're looking at a gap of 8 for those defenses *just from ability scores*. Given that the "good" defense is often hit about 50% of the time, the "bad" defense is hit 90% of the time. (3E is actually even worse: the gap can be between a 34 and an 8 at level 20, or a massive 13 in bonus value and thus defense score).

3E "dealt" with this problem by making the game into "get the right magic" - so Freedom of Movement, Death Ward, etc. are required at higher levels just to stop all the Save or Suck spells, because no character has the ability scores to deal with all the attack types they might be hit by.

Limit ability bonuses to a maximum of +4 and you kill a lot of the problems the mathematics of the system throw up.

Cheers!

 

[billd91]

Limit ability bonuses to a maximum of +4 and you kill a lot of the problems the mathematics of the system throw up.

Cheers!

I whole-heatedly support a cap on ability bonuses, but I'd probably allow for as high as +6.

 

[MerricB]

I whole-heatedly support a cap on ability bonuses, but I'd probably allow for as high as +6.

The real trick is working out what OTHER things will allow bonuses - something that the 3E designers failed to do. Having scores vary is great, but you need to understand how big the difference can be. +6 works great when ability scores are the only thing adding to defenses/attack, but much less well when feats, class abilities, magic items and spells also allow bonuses.

Cheers!