Ability Dependency/Importance

[Minigiant]

Well I was thinking about how different classes put importance on different abilities scores and modifiers. The ways it was handled changed with the passing editions.

Here are the questions.

Should a class's primary ability be the only major ability score the class worries about and let the other abilities grant only whatever passive effects they normally grant? Or should more than one or all or the ability scores matter greatly to each class?

Okay it's just one question.

So should the rogue be heavily focuses on just Dexterity? Dexterity, Strength, and Charisma with no need of Wisdom outside roleplay and passive bonuses? Or all six ability scores? Or should the passive bonuses of each ability be made strong enough to not care (High Dex=Archer, High Int & a Feat=Arcanist)

 

[Hassassin]

The middle two. Each class should be dependent on at least two abilities to do its job, but every low ability should have important consequences to all classes.

 

[Connorsrpg]

I would certainly like to see all ability scores provide good options for most classes. That said however, I can't see how all ability scores could be as equally important for all classes. I do want to move away from all powers being based on one. The push to increase this prime stat into the stratosphere doesn't sit well with me.

At first i was OK with most powers having a secondary effect too, but with so many powers the push to increase the secondary stat became like the prime, especially with dual ability increases at every 4 levels.

 

[Li Shenron]

This question is way too hard...

Of course all abilities should be useful to everyone, but that's not the point here.

IIUC the point is if the class set of signature features/abilities should be designed so that one ability score takes care of everything specific to that class and the other abilities are just good for your character in general but not fueling/boosting your own class-specific features. Or alternatively if each class should be designed so that some class-specific features are based on one ability, and others on another. Or more than two. Or all six.

However there is a fine line between a truly class-specific feature and something that it's technically not but it is almost must-have, or something else which is nice-to-have but applies also to a couple of other classes.

Let's check some 3ed class for instance:

Wizard: Intelligence takes care of everything wiz-specific, such as spells DC and number of spells known. Then there are some skills which technically aren't class-specific, but for a Wizard are almost must-have, such as Spellcraft and Knowledge Arcana (again, both based on Int). Then there is Concentration which may or may not be a must-have depending on how you plan to play such Wizard, and is again not unique to the Wiz class... but normally Constitution is not seen as a primary ability for the Wiz class, despite IMXP being the second-most wanted one. Dexterity is definitely not primary, even tho it's very much nice-to-have. This is almost a single-ability based class.

Fighter: Strength is primary because melee largely depends on it. But what if you build a pure archer? Dexterity is primary or not? I cannot answer because you can make a full-melee heavy-armor Fighter who just doesn't bother with bows and be super-effective, but if you do want to keep decent at bows or mobility then Dexterity becomes primary. And is Constitution primary or secondary? This could be a single-ability based class as much as a multi-ability based class.

Paladin: Strength, Wisdom and Charisma are all considered primary. Without Str you're not much of a melee warrior (although technically you could be a Paladin archer...), without Wis you throw away a chunk of your class features such as spells, without Cha you throw away a different chunk including turn undead, lay on hands and divine grace. This is clearly a multi-ability based class.

Really... I don't know what to answer about "should". All those classes above worked perfectly fine for me.

The only problems I have (and only online IMXP) come from rules that allow to easily substitute one ability for another to "fuel" your class feature: gamers always ask for them with the excuse of creativity but end up using them for score-dumping mostly.

 

[Ahnehnois]

This is a great point because people so often talk about "balance" as between classes, but ability scores are so much more fundamental. If there was ever an improvement to be made in balance, it would be in making it so there was some meaningful benefit to all characters from each score, and some meaningful drawback to having it low.

That would really change.

Moreover, this is something that was bad in 3e and before, and which 4e really flubbed. By letting you choose which ability score to use for saves (or their equivalents) and attacks, it makes it easier to dump scores.

Conversely, the six saves we've heard about are an improvement.

 

[Rhenny]

I think all of the abilities should be used throughout the game, but for specific attacks one may be used depending on the attack. Heavy blades and crushing weapons (str), light blades (dex), bows (dex), unarmed (str), arcane spells (int), divine spells (wis), etc.

I like the way Dragon Age RPG handles abilities in general. They use a bell curve (3d6) to determine abilities (like D&D if you roll) and they grant bonus of +1 beginning at 9. This way, if you have a lower ability you don't feel like you are gimped when you try to climb, swim, run, move quietly, etc. With the bell curve, only 1 or 2 of the stats provide a +2, +3 or +4 bonus usually, which is ok if others have a +1. Additionally, background and class add to certain bonuses and grant ability focus (like thievery, light blades, etc).

I've always been in favor of well-rounded PCs but all too often, in D&D (especially 4e) it felt as if you had to max out the primary ability at least.

Dragon Age RPG also signifies 3 or 4 attributes as primary and 3 or 4 as secondary for each class. Then, when it is time to level up, you alternate adding bonus of +1 to a primary and secondary with each level. This is interesting, but perhaps unnecessary. Maybe for D&D, allow +1 bonus to be applied to any primary or secondary attribute, but limit so that the player cannot put the +1 bonus on the same attribute twice in a row.

 

[billd91]

By my estimation, the solution to single-attribute vs multi-attribute classes is more multi-attribute dependency for everyone. I don't think there's every really going to be a point in which all stats matter equally for every character. I don't even see that as a good goal to strive for. But every stat needs to have some value to every character so that it's not simply a no-brainer to dump in favor of the prime score.

The idea of 6 saves is an intriguing one, but the designers would need to be careful to try to make each one matter to a similar degree. It's no good having that many saves if 75% of all saves hit just Dex and Wisdom.

I had been thinking of making 3 stats mainly defensive (Con, Dex, Wis) to use in saves and the other 3 offensive (Str, Int, Cha) to modify attacks/powers/spell save DCs/whatever 5e uses. I just wish the conceptual pair of Dex and Int worked together better, since I don't really want to rename or reconceptualize them any more than I have to. I think, in any event, the designers should avoid basing a classes offense on just one stat. I would encourage at least 2, even 3. 4e did this at least a little bit with some of the classes I noticed - most powers based on Stat1, some alternative powers based on Stat2, both groups of powers sometimes modified in effect by Stat3. I thought that had some potential.

 

[mkill]

I voted "all six should matter", but I meant it in a bit different way.

Each class should have one ability score for the two most important vectors - attack and damage (save DC for spellcasters is an attack mechanic under a different label).

Depending on the class, you can switch out the standard attack stat for a different one. For example, Paladins have the option to use Charisma for all their melee attack and spellcasting (and it doesn't cost them a feat).

Every other score is not dead important - if you have a low score, you can somehow work around that. However, there are ways to make a good score count, for each class and each ability score. Ideally, this means optional class features that key off different ability scores.

For example, if you are a Sorcerer:

* High Strength gives your spells extra oomph to throw enemies around the room
* High Dexterity gives your spells extra reach and precision
* High Constitution gives you extra physical reserves, which allows you to turn a spell all the way up to eleven
* High Intelligence helps your logical arcane understanding, and allows you to remember more spells
* High Wisdom is a sign of intuitive understanding, which makes you better at metamagic, i.e. changing the spells you know on the fly
* Charisma is your bread and butter stat that your spellcasting DC and damage key off

Except for Charisma, a Sorcerer doesn't need all of the ability scores to function. But depending on which of your other ability scores are high, you can gain advantages that other Sorcerers don't have.

 

[Mengu]

I want all ability scores to matter, but I want all of them to matter less such that none of them are overwhelmingly important, if that makes any sense. For instance, would love to see attack bonus and AC divorced from ability scores.

 

[Minigiant]

I voted "all six should matter", but I meant it in a bit different way.

Each class should have one ability score for the two most important vectors - attack and damage (save DC for spellcasters is an attack mechanic under a different label).

Depending on the class, you can switch out the standard attack stat for a different one. For example, Paladins have the option to use Charisma for all their melee attack and spellcasting (and it doesn't cost them a feat).

Every other score is not dead important - if you have a low score, you can somehow work around that. However, there are ways to make a good score count, for each class and each ability score. Ideally, this means optional class features that key off different ability scores.

For example, if you are a Sorcerer:

* High Strength gives your spells extra oomph to throw enemies around the room
* High Dexterity gives your spells extra reach and precision
* High Constitution gives you extra physical reserves, which allows you to turn a spell all the way up to eleven
* High Intelligence helps your logical arcane understanding, and allows you to remember more spells
* High Wisdom is a sign of intuitive understanding, which makes you better at metamagic, i.e. changing the spells you know on the fly
* Charisma is your bread and butter stat that your spellcasting DC and damage key off

Except for Charisma, a Sorcerer doesn't need all of the ability scores to function. But depending on which of your other ability scores are high, you can gain advantages that other Sorcerers don't have.

Yes this is how I'd prefer it too.

For example the Paladin's main class feature would be Divine Power. Divine Power's usages per day is Charisma based. The other paladin class features would use Divine Power usages and each would key off a different ability score.

Smite Evil would be a melee attack and thus Strength based
Sacred Missile would be a ranged attack and be Dexterity based. Lay on Hands would being Constitution based. The Avenger-like feature would be Int based. The spell-like abilities would be Wisdom based.

So a palidan could have a wide range of ability scores but all would use Charisma.