Steely_Dan
First Post
They will be as common as the DM chooses as they are completely optional, and they stated capping them at +3, so a +1 longsword would be huge, as it should be.
D&D 5E D&D Next Ability Scores
They will be as common as the DM chooses as they are completely optional, and they stated capping them at +3, so a +1 longsword would be huge, as it should be.
Scaled Fixed.
Not because it is my most preferred option though. With the way 5e is going and I think scaled capped is the best fit at this point in time.
If I really had my way I would go for the DCC approach with merciless randomization. But in order to do that properly the entire game really needs to follow through on the philosophy as DCC does (i.e. top to bottom random everything).
Not because it is my most preferred option though. With the way 5e is going and I think scaled capped is the best fit at this point in time.
If I really had my way I would go for the DCC approach with merciless randomization. But in order to do that properly the entire game really needs to follow through on the philosophy as DCC does (i.e. top to bottom random everything).
I prefer fixed ability scores. Skills and feats seem more more representative of training and conditioning to me than experience levels. I feel that a character who "gets stronger" or "becomes more charismatic" does so through training and practice (gaining skill ranks or new feats, improved base attack, improved save throws, etc.), not by getting a new and improved body.
It's not a deal-breaker for me, though. As long as they don't go crazy with the power creep, I'm sure I can work with it.
It's not a deal-breaker for me, though. As long as they don't go crazy with the power creep, I'm sure I can work with it.
Last edited:
You cannot do this and have a mathematically balanced game. It. Is. Not. Possible. Handwaving 'flatter math' around is not going to change this.
ZombieRoboNinja
First Post
Is it a 4e phenomenon that any 5-10% deviation from expected stats is considered catastrophically unbalanced?
I for one would like to be able to roll or even choose less than perfectly minmaxed stats and still have the game work.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
It is only "not possible" if your definition of mathematically balanced rests teetering on a razor's edge, ready to be pushed off by the introduction of any permanent change in the numbers.
"Close enough for rock and roll" is the nearest the system ever needs to get to perfect balance; and it needs to be coarse enough to handle all kinds of stuff that players and-or DMs are going to do to it whether intentionally or not. If +1 or +2 here and -1 or -2 there is enough to break it, all that says it the math is fragile to the point of uselessness.
Lanefan
tlantl
First Post
If D&D N is such a game I don't want anything to do with it. Flawed, unpredictable, and chaotic works for me.
Someone already made the game you're talking about and I don't like it. Lots of us don't like it. Mathematically balanced perfection isn't always desirable.
howandwhy99
Adventurer
If anything, I'd prefer Roll & Keep abilities scores to be altered via Training, Aging, and Magic. And training costs A LOT of time. The game starts after reaching one's adult potential. Increasing these post-puberty is simply more time consuming (which means a safe spot ($), sustenance ($), a trainer might help ($), no class training (leveling halted), the same time not spent adventuring (no XP), and so on).
El Mahdi
Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
I chose "Upgrade, Capped".
I like the game mechanics to mirror the real world as much as possible. So I want player's to have the option of improving their characters Ability Scores with Feat selections, but not automatic improvements (Upgrade). I see improving Strength as Lifting Weights, improving Dexterity as intense training or exercise, improving Wisdom or Intelligence as focused study or meditation, improving Charisma as focused introspection and self-evaluation of how people see you and studying how people react to others (social intelligence), and I see improving Constitution as either focused changes in diet and exercise or purposeful exposure to "toxins" in order to toughen one up.
But I also feel there is an upper limit to which medium-sized mortals are able to aspire to. So I selected Capped also.
However, I think this is one of those things that each and every group is quite able to choose for themselves, without major or adverse consequences to system balance. The option should be there in D&D Next for all of the possible approaches to this, with the core base system as the most simple version of the above options (not necessarily the most popular).
I like the game mechanics to mirror the real world as much as possible. So I want player's to have the option of improving their characters Ability Scores with Feat selections, but not automatic improvements (Upgrade). I see improving Strength as Lifting Weights, improving Dexterity as intense training or exercise, improving Wisdom or Intelligence as focused study or meditation, improving Charisma as focused introspection and self-evaluation of how people see you and studying how people react to others (social intelligence), and I see improving Constitution as either focused changes in diet and exercise or purposeful exposure to "toxins" in order to toughen one up.
But I also feel there is an upper limit to which medium-sized mortals are able to aspire to. So I selected Capped also.
However, I think this is one of those things that each and every group is quite able to choose for themselves, without major or adverse consequences to system balance. The option should be there in D&D Next for all of the possible approaches to this, with the core base system as the most simple version of the above options (not necessarily the most popular).
Last edited:
Steely_Dan
First Post
I don't agree, please explain your opinion.
Similar Threads
