D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Aldarc]

You're loss. I was introducing a topic and trying to define a word that wasn't going to have a commonly used definition, but I can't make you listen.

But you can choose your words and how you engage with others.

 

[Horwath]

Yep, we currently cap ability scores at 18 in my game. If you want something above 18 you need a magic item to get you there.

I like that rule and we used it few times.
But agreeing players to reduce power can sometimes be like pulling teeth, hehe.
I have also floated idea that we all have same array at start(no ASIs later or from species) only from magic items.

Array: 18,16,14,14,12,10.
for ASI's, you take 2 feats.

 

[Remathilis]

But you can choose your words and how you engage with others.

I don't think I was being rude, but if you feel I was, feel free to block me.

 

[dave2008]

And I said what solution could be.
Either +1 mod or take 2 feats together without ASI bump.
no need to track +1/2 mod in the background.

That doesn't work because of below.

I like this idea.
do you allow also taking 2 feats together while forgoing their ASIs?
IE: I want to take GWM and PAM together at 4th level, without any STR boost?

No, but we never really considered that idea actually. The whole point is to have half a feat coupled with a modest increase to ability. You can't have a half feat if you combine to half feats.

 

[dave2008]

I like that rule and we used it few times.
But agreeing players to reduce power can sometimes be like pulling teeth, hehe.
I have also floated idea that we all have same array at start(no ASIs later or from species) only from magic items.

Array: 18,16,14,14,12,10.
for ASI's, you take 2 feats.

I don't see any need to start with such high ability scores. A 16 works fine in 5e. We have toyed with making that the max too (since AD&D maxed at +3 to ability score it would match that).

 

[dave2008]

But you can choose your words and how you engage with others.

Like I said, this medium his hard. It is completely possible you took their words as being rude and they never saw them that way and never intended them to be that way. It is the nature of the medium.

 

[TiQuinn]

I don't see any need to start with such high ability scores. A 16 works fine in 5e. We have toyed with making that the max too (since AD&D maxed at +3 to ability score it would match that).

It would be nice if having a high stat didn’t feel so necessary to a character’s viability.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Oh those are GREAT house rules - Natural cap at 18 and no ASI's outside of feats!
Will definitely be using introducing that for secondary characters into the campaign.

 

[Reynard]

Just a reminder this is a + thread. It's here so folks can discuss what they would (or wouldn't) like to see in a hypothetical 6E -- positively.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

But agreeing players to reduce power can sometimes be like pulling teeth, hehe.

I mean, it should be?

The point of the game is to face challenges. That means the goal of learning to play, at its most baseline level, is learning how to make choices that improve your ability to overcome the challenges you face.

It should be a hard sell to tell payers, "Okay, I want to introduce a rule, where the only function of that rule is to make you worse at overcoming the challenges you're going to face. How does that sound?"

Any player, trying to play effectively, should tell you that that sounds awful and maybe you should get better at negotiating.