Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jmartkdr2" data-source="post: 7962712" data-attributes="member: 7017304">This is fine if (and only if) the costs for taking a low score are roughly even across all the non-primary ability scores. If you're playing a wizard and you decide to put a low number into charisma, then you're not as good at skills you don't need and weren't expected to be good at anyways. If you put a low number into Constitution, you die early and often. These do not seem like equally deleterious outcomes to me. Which means you get a lot of shy clerics, but no scrawny ones. I find that lack of variety to be detrimental to the game overall. Especially since it prevents really classic concepts that fit well into the game, like the absent-minded, clumsy, or sickly wizard. These should be playable, IMO.I don't think that the clumsy wizard shouldn't notice that they're clumsy, and fail at things that require a lot of dexterity or grace like stealth or picking pockets, but I can't see a good reason for the game to eliminate that concept entirely by making them bad at not dying. (I'm also quite alright with making stupid wizards a non-option. That's tied directly to the concept of a wizard in a way that grace and agility are not.)</blockquote>