Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="lutecius" data-source="post: 4290005" data-attributes="member: 60332">This is one thing I wish they had changed, but don't think this particular sacred cow is going anywhere. What bothers me is not the 3-18 attributes vs modifires redundancy, although I'd rather have just modifiers.I don't like these attributes because:1 - They're not equally useful, and yet some classes are too dependent on them (even more so in 4e) which creates balance issues, and makes some multiclassing choices a lot worse than others. 2 - I don't get what some of them are supposed to represent or why they affect some abilities in particular.Wisdom used to overlap with both Int and Cha. It represented some kind of will power, perception, and knowledge in particular fields like healing.The distinction is a bit clearer now that Wis is mostly reduced to perception skills, but besides its name and history, I'm not sure why it should be the cleric's core attribute or a prerequisite for feats like Expanded Spellbook.And now Charisma has become the new catchall attribute. Tieflings with &quot;centuries of other races' distrust and outright hatred&quot;, &quot;in a world that often fears and resents them&quot; get a bonus to Diplomacy?Goblins are described as short, dirty and ill-tempered cowards but they get a bonus to Diplomacy and Intimidate?They should have done what they did for Eladrin Will and just said something like &quot;such race gets a bonus for such skills, classes or pacts&quot;. Mixing up attributes for defences and some class attacks may make them more useful individually, but it blurs the lines even more as to what they represent. Int adds to reflex? Wisdom (as in &quot;perception&quot;,&quot;sense danger and get a read on other people&quot;) I could see, but &quot;learning and reasoning&quot; not so much.For previous editions, I was in the &quot;Dex should affect melee attacks&quot; camp. Now that any attribute can contribute to attacks, depending on the class, I am not sure what the point of attributes is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="lutecius, post: 4290005, member: 60332"] This is one thing I wish they had changed, but don't think this particular sacred cow is going anywhere. What bothers me is not the 3-18 attributes vs modifires redundancy, although I'd rather have just modifiers. I don't like these attributes because: 1 - They're not equally useful, and yet some classes are too dependent on them (even more so in 4e) which creates balance issues, and makes some multiclassing choices a lot worse than others. 2 - I don't get what some of them are supposed to represent or why they affect some abilities in particular. Wisdom used to overlap with both Int and Cha. It represented some kind of will power, perception, and knowledge in particular fields like healing. The distinction is a bit clearer now that Wis is mostly reduced to perception skills, but besides its name and history, I'm not sure why it should be the cleric's core attribute or a prerequisite for feats like Expanded Spellbook. And now Charisma has become the new catchall attribute. Tieflings with "centuries of other races' distrust and outright hatred", "in a world that often fears and resents them" get a bonus to Diplomacy? Goblins are described as short, dirty and ill-tempered cowards but they get a bonus to Diplomacy and Intimidate? They should have done what they did for Eladrin Will and just said something like "such race gets a bonus for such skills, classes or pacts". Mixing up attributes for defences and some class attacks may make them more useful individually, but it blurs the lines even more as to what they represent. Int adds to reflex? Wisdom (as in "perception","sense danger and get a read on other people") I could see, but "learning and reasoning" not so much. For previous editions, I was in the "Dex should affect melee attacks" camp. Now that any attribute can contribute to attacks, depending on the class, I am not sure what the point of attributes is. [/QUOTE]

Verification