Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 8575853" data-attributes="member: 6799660">I'm unconvinced of the notion of order suggesting importance or inferiority.&nbsp; Excepting when speaking about a single, specific attribute, people almost always talk about all of them at once, so the order doesn't really mean much.SIWDCCh made sense in oD&amp;D where the first three stats shared a category of 'being xp-boosters for each of the 3 classes' and the next three being general utility enhancers for all classes (with Charisma, the last one, being the most useful). The instant supplement I came out, introducing the thief class (using a former utility stat as a prime requisite) and making encumbrance Str-dependent (making class A care about class B's prime requisite, although technically this was true with Int already, given that it gave extra languages-known), any sort of coherence to this was disrupted. The order then changed to grouping physical together and socio-mental together, which, although kinda arbitrary, was the best categorical grouping left available.Personally, I would have just alphabetized them, but if not that I don't know that there is any practical reason for any specific order.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 8575853, member: 6799660"] I'm unconvinced of the notion of order suggesting importance or inferiority. Excepting when speaking about a single, specific attribute, people almost always talk about all of them at once, so the order doesn't really mean much. SIWDCCh made sense in oD&D where the first three stats shared a category of 'being xp-boosters for each of the 3 classes' and the next three being general utility enhancers for all classes (with Charisma, the last one, being the most useful). The instant supplement I came out, introducing the thief class (using a former utility stat as a prime requisite) and making encumbrance Str-dependent (making class A care about class B's prime requisite, although technically this was true with Int already, given that it gave extra languages-known), any sort of coherence to this was disrupted. The order then changed to grouping physical together and socio-mental together, which, although kinda arbitrary, was the best categorical grouping left available. Personally, I would have just alphabetized them, but if not that I don't know that there is any practical reason for any specific order. [/QUOTE]

Verification