Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 4705726" data-attributes="member: 14506">I think that making the game more SAD actually improves the games options. If the assumption is that your character is going to have an 18 or 20 in your primary (like it already does) embrace that design restraint but don't make more design requirements like secondaries and tertiaries. That just muddies the water and makes characters forced into certain stat placements and abilities. Why needlessly do that? Open it up give more options. Do you really expect that every class (they are planning on quite a few) is going to get the necessary development space to make every nuanced option a reality. I don't, I think that is a pipe dream.I think this is a perfect example of what needs to be done with the overall system. But taken to the next level it will completely free up character design. Options baby options. With a completely SAD system you can then choose whatever options you want outside of your primary. You decide what feats you want to qualify for, you decide what skills you want to be good at, etc.Completely embracing SAD will make it a forgone (which it already is), with that being a constant it frees up a lot of design space. Here in lies the issue, if you have to have a great primary and then you are also required to have a good secondary and possibly a tertiary or second primary. Every class winds up looking cookie cut. When designing my characters I dont want to come out of the WotC cookie cutter factory I want to make my own unique character. They have not given you much free space to do that with your stats. Embracing SAD will free up those areas to make the character you want not the character WotC designers want.Exactly, although I draw a different conclusion. 4e is so MAD it can be frustrating. Freeing up class requirements free up those stat resources for options like feats, defenses etc.I agree there feat selections for PHB2 really push the fold, their design should continue to be far reaching and free up the stat constraints that are imposed, make the assumption class primary is an 18 or 20 and move on (as it already is whether they consciously designed the game that way or not). Let the player decide what their secondary and tertiary are not the designer. I agree, some blurbs in a future supplement (DMG2?) might be nice with applying a few of the "fix it" feats for free at character creation. Well D&D has moved in that direction whether we like it or not. Targeting energy bolts with your CON, Crossbowing with your STR, swinging a sword with your INT - by realism's standard these would be tossed out the window. I mean you can easily explain away these issues like you are so tough it allows your magic to target better, or you leap forward with your strength slightly when you pull the trigger of the crossbow, or you are so smart you can calculate the trajectory of your sword to give maximum effect. I am and I think most people are beyond the realism problem. 4e is any stat = any use.3e and 4e both torqued up stat reliance, I think this is a function of (.5*stat)-5. Before you needed a 15 or higher to get a stat modifier. My experience though was every fighter type had 18/xx and every thief had high DEX to increase their thieving skills still. I think the stat formula was a good addition. I can see an argument for: 1-3 = +0, 4-6 = +1, 7-9 = +2 etc.Very effective analysis. It is an interesting shift that I had never considered.</blockquote>

Verification