D&D (2024) D&D 6th edition - What do you want to see?

[Garthanos]

Some would sat that wise people can be very perceptive.

And if your task is standing guard discipline(associated with wisdom) can keep you focused on being aware . I really do not think Perception being a wisdom trait is at all stretching anything

 

[FrogReaver]

And if your task is standing guard discipline(associated with wisdom) can keep you focused on being aware . I really do not think Perception being a wisdom trait is at all stretching anything

And intelligent people can be some of the most unpreceptive

 

[Garthanos]

And intelligent people can be some of the most unpreceptive

or the fastest thinkers able to respond quickly if they are also decisive ... but yes general awareness is different than perceptive about a target of focus

 

[Sacrosanct]

It’s almost as if the skills and attributes a person can have are impacted by more than just one of six total ability scores

 

[Guest 6801328]

It’s almost as if the skills and attributes a person can have are impacted by more than just one of six total ability scores

I would not be in favor of D&D going this direction, but I do have an appreciation for systems where the scores you actually use on a consistent basis are derived from two other "primary" scores. So maybe Strength and Dexterity are primary, but they combine into an "Athletics" score (or whatever) that actually gets used for things like attack rolls, climbing, etc.

Thought experiment: starting with the six classic D&D attributes, what six derived attributes would be most useful? How many cross the physical/mental boundary? (E.g., Dexterity and Intelligence for Defense?)

Or is six not enough?

 

[Garthanos]

It’s almost as if the skills and attributes a person can have are impacted by more than just one of six total ability scores

Its the reason I like having flexibility in this regards take a feat and get to use intelligence wisdom (or yes maybe that vivacious bubbly personality which decides without worries) for your initiative

 

[Lanefan]

Yes, that was the idea. I find Wisdom too fuzzy if it includes both awareness/perception and the spiritual power of a cleric (I got the impression @Lanefan did not share this assessment).

Let's break it down a bit - what does Wisdom (in game terms) include:

1. Intuition and instinct
2. Long-term reasoning and deduction (as opposed to immediate problem-solving; that's Int)
3. Willpower and-or spiritual strength
4. Awareness and-or perception (the actual act of noticing things)
5. Processing of perceptions (the mental realization of the meaning of what you perceive)
6. For Clerics, the ability to better channel spells given by a deity

Of those, AFAIC 1, 2, 5 and 6 are hardcore Wisdom, and would be left behind as such regardless - there'd still be a Wisdom stat.

3 should IMO get shifted into Charisma.

4 is a tough one. It doesn't belong under Wisdom, but where else to put it? The answer, at cost of some added complexity, is nowhere - it becomes kind of its own thing. Not a stat along with Str, Int, etc., but a number (or series of numbers?) arrived at by determining each character's inherent vision, hearing, and smell capabilities vs. an arbitrary average. Race* would play a big role here, and class** a lesser; along with a random die roll for each - say a d10 where 1-2 indicates poor, 3-8 indicates average, and 9-0 indicates particularly good at that sense for that race (this could be granularized even further, to allow for inherently blind or deaf PCs). Then situational factors like armour and environment come in.

* - Elves and Hobbits would be good at hearing, Gnomes at smell, etc., for example
** - Rangers and Rogues would be better at all simply via training

I don't think there's enough in Willpower by itself to justify giving it its own separate stat. And there needs to be some ongoing in-play importance to each stat, to avoid it just becoming a dump.

 

[Guest 6801328]

** - Rangers and Rogues would be better at all simply via training

I dunno. You get trained to notice specific things. If you hang out with hunters, for example, they are often really good at noticing birds and animals a long way off. Cops will notice expired registrations. My wife notices (and remembers) gas station prices. Proofreaders notice subtle grammar and spelling errors.

 

[Lanefan]

I would not be in favor of D&D going this direction, but I do have an appreciation for systems where the scores you actually use on a consistent basis are derived from two other "primary" scores. So maybe Strength and Dexterity are primary, but they combine into an "Athletics" score (or whatever) that actually gets used for things like attack rolls, climbing, etc.

Thought experiment: starting with the six classic D&D attributes, what six derived attributes would be most useful? How many cross the physical/mental boundary? (E.g., Dexterity and Intelligence for Defense?)

Or is six not enough?

Now this is on to something!

First, I'll say it doesn't have to be symmetrical - there's no need to try to force multiples of 6 combinations, for example, when only maybe 4 or 7 or 13 make sense.

But here's a few ideas, starting with yours kind-of as quoted:

Strength-Dexterity - Athletics (climbing, jumping, etc. but not attack rolls)
Strength-Intelligence - Attack Rolls (you know how best to apply your force)
Intelligence-Dexterity - Martial Defense
Wisdom-Charisma - Mental/Spiritual Defense (e.g. vs psionics and charms)
Constitution-Charisma - Physical/Spiritual Defense (e.g. vs direct non-damage death effects, possession, etc.)
Constitution-Wisdom - Physical/Spiritual Resilience (e.g. revival from death)

And after all that, by sheer accident there just happens to be 6, with each stat used twice!

 

[Lanefan]

I dunno. You get trained to notice specific things. If you hang out with hunters, for example, they are often really good at noticing birds and animals a long way off. Cops will notice expired registrations. My wife notices (and remembers) gas station prices. Proofreaders notice subtle grammar and spelling errors.

Which is just what I'm getting at: Rangers and Rogues are trained to notice everything. Other classes might be good at noticing things specific to class e.g. a Fighter might notice something about her foe's armour that others would likely miss, but that comes under 'situational'. For Rangers and Rogues, it's blanket.