Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 229049" data-attributes="member: 1106">"Ba-pssschhhht!" yourself.  You can build in other penalties for making them "dump stats" for fighter types that don't involve dictating character personality like INT, WIS and CHA do.  I haven't gone into any detail over what they might be, because I haven't paid much thought to it - but assuming that they'd automatically be made with bad game design principles - simply because it serves your argument, as it appears here - seems pretty convenient.Once again, common designerthink agrees that balancing combat ability with roleplaying penalties is bad game design, so balancing pluses to hit with stupidity is poor form.You'd be right, IMO....if it weren't for the solid relationship between physical attributes and physical effects, and the more or less arbitrary relationship between magical aptitude and the different mental stats.As the sorceror proves, the relationship between intelligence and arcane magic is arbitrary.  The relationship between dodging and dexterity is not so easily divorceable.  I can easily imagine a dumb wizard - a savant who is skilled at his spellbooks, but unable to rationalise in real life situations - or alternatively, you can disassociate the ability to use magic from intelligence and make it an "innate" gift of some sort, which seems to be common in fantasy novels.  I cannot rationalise a character with big muscles and low strength, unless he has some kind of disease, so your point doesn't really stand, IMO, unless you're overly adverse to killing the "all Wizards must be smart in order to be decent casters" sacred cow (and related ones).No, I don't want Amber - it's quite different to D&D, neh?  I know what I'm referring to - D&D without stats that map to character's mental ability.  And again, I don't necessarily want it, but I can see the potential for it.</blockquote>

Verification