D&D 5E D&D Next Q&A: 12/06/13

[Scars Unseen]

I think I actually like #2 specifically because some of the ability scores do have multiple contexts that might not all apply to the same characters in all circumstances. For instance, with the proposed division, you can have a distinction between agility(save), precision(attack) and manual dexterity(check). It gives some mild complexity to what is otherwise a somewhat simpler game than in recent editions.

And while it may seem confusing, I don't think it actually would be once people start playing for a bit. It's not like overlapping concepts are a new thing to D&D (HP & AC are both RAW representations of your ability to avoid harm), and I think that keeping it all centered on familiar universally recognized D&D terms is better than continually trying to find new jargon with each edition.

As for going back to ref/fort/will, I tend to welcome any move that makes it less tempting to center all of your points on one or two ability scores, and having more possible weak points is one way to do that.

 

[Sadrik]

#1 I do not like the cantrip subsystem as presented. Scaling spells should be consistent throughout the game and not scale without slotting them into higher level slots. If that were the case then there would be no need to have something called caster level to begin with.

#2 This is mostly a WIS issue, all the other stats are pretty clearly defined. If willpower were moved to CHA fully and WIS became perception and awareness only it would be easy to make saves for awareness. React to sense something invisible player rolls an awareness save.
STR power save --> break out of webs, grapples, hold on for dear life etc.
DEX reflex save
CON fortitude save
INT reason save --> figure out a clue, illusions, searc.
WIS awareness save --> surprise, passive sensing etc.
CHA will save

Out of the three new saves awareness save happens all the time. Reason save is only a rare one and the STR one could happen a lot more than one one would realize.

#3 Ok.

 

[Klaus]

It's not just a matter of WIS.

- A character might be a master locksmith, with steady hands and great legerdemain, but be unable to hit the broad side of a barn or leap away from danger (good Dex checks, poor Dex attacks and saves).

- A character might be sickly and frail, but simply refuse to go down in a fight out of sheer stubborness (good Con, but poor Con saves; think Steve Rogers pre-Captain America).

- A character might be of average build, but be an expert at wriggling himself out of choke holds and tight grasps (average Str, good Str saves).

- A character might be somewhat uneducated, but have an uncanny ability to unravel clues and see the bigger picture (poor Int, good Int checks).

 

[Ratskinner]

The fix for that (which will never happen) is to replace Wisdom with Observation and Charisma with Personality.

As is, you still have the same problem when Clerics are very good at both will power related saves and perception related saves.

I agree. As time has worn on, I think its become increasingly clear that the traditional six ability scores were actually a bad set to choose. Of course, we'll never see the game abandon them. In particular, I don't know why we don't have a "Faith" stat for the Divine classes. Nor am I all that sure of how "Perception" became a part of "Wisdom". Is it just because "Wisdom" needed some love?

Of course, the real solution, IMO, is to dump ability scores entirely. Almost any set you choose will have these problems in one way or another. So why not wrap the relevant material into the classes and races? That way you can skip the whole step of generating scores and then fiddling with them to make sure your fighter is athletic, your cleric wise, or your whatever whatevery....but that's wayy off course for where Next went.

 

[SkidAce]

#1 I do not like the cantrip subsystem as presented. Scaling spells should be consistent throughout the game and not scale without slotting them into higher level slots. If that were the case then there would be no need to have something called caster level to begin with.

#2 This is mostly a WIS issue, all the other stats are pretty clearly defined. If willpower were moved to CHA fully and WIS became perception and awareness only it would be easy to make saves for awareness. React to sense something invisible player rolls an awareness save.
STR power save --> break out of webs, grapples, hold on for dear life etc.
DEX reflex save
CON fortitude save
INT reason save --> figure out a clue, illusions, searc.
WIS awareness save --> surprise, passive sensing etc.
CHA will save

Out of the three new saves awareness save happens all the time. Reason save is only a rare one and the STR one could happen a lot more than one one would realize.

#3 Ok.

So the wise old man on the mountain top would have a high charisma instead of wisdom?

 

[Ratskinner]

It's not just a matter of WIS.

- A character might be a master locksmith, with steady hands and great legerdemain, but be unable to hit the broad side of a barn or leap away from danger (good Dex checks, poor Dex attacks and saves).

- A character might be sickly and frail, but simply refuse to go down in a fight out of sheer stubborness (good Con, but poor Con saves; think Steve Rogers pre-Captain America).

- A character might be of average build, but be an expert at wriggling himself out of choke holds and tight grasps (average Str, good Str saves).

- A character might be somewhat uneducated, but have an uncanny ability to unravel clues and see the bigger picture (poor Int, good Int checks).

In Fate Accelerated Edition, there are 6 "Approaches": Careful, Clever, Flashy, Forceful, Quick, and Sneaky. Things like Strength are in "Aspects" like "Strongest guy in town", which in D&D I would think get wrapped into Race or Class. I'm not sure that that ends up solving the problem, but Approaches would give you a better way to distinguish amongst two fighters (who are otherwise mechanically pushed to align their ability scores similarly.)

 

[Dausuul]

It's not just a matter of WIS.

- A character might be a master locksmith, with steady hands and great legerdemain, but be unable to hit the broad side of a barn or leap away from danger (good Dex checks, poor Dex attacks and saves).

- A character might be sickly and frail, but simply refuse to go down in a fight out of sheer stubborness (good Con, but poor Con saves; think Steve Rogers pre-Captain America).

- A character might be of average build, but be an expert at wriggling himself out of choke holds and tight grasps (average Str, good Str saves).

- A character might be somewhat uneducated, but have an uncanny ability to unravel clues and see the bigger picture (poor Int, good Int checks).

A character could also be an expert spellcaster who has no self-defense skills and is physically frail. Should we have a mechanic for wizards who don't gain hit points as they level up? A character could be good at juggling tricks but not at picking pockets. Do we need to break up the Sleight of Hand skill? A character could be blind but have very keen hearing. Should we split Perception back into Spot and Listen? Should we further subdivide Spot into long-distance and close-up vision, to account for the nearsighted sage and the farsighted ranger?

This is a rabbit hole that goes down endlessly. The question is not how fine-grained the chargen system could get (the answer is "until there's no more space in the rulebook"), but how fine-grained it is reasonable to get. All of the ability scores merge several distinct concepts, but Wisdom is the only stat that merges two completely unrelated concepts (willpower and perceptiveness).

 

[Sadrik]

So the wise old man on the mountain top would have a high charisma instead of wisdom?

Define wise. And I can tell you what I think.

 

[Klaus]

A character could also be an expert spellcaster who has no self-defense skills and is physically frail. Should we have a mechanic for wizards who don't gain hit points as they level up? A character could be good at juggling tricks but not at picking pockets. Do we need to break up the Sleight of Hand skill? A character could be blind but have very keen hearing. Should we split Perception back into Spot and Listen? Should we further subdivide Spot into long-distance and close-up vision, to account for the nearsighted sage and the farsighted ranger?

This is a rabbit hole that goes down endlessly. The question is not how fine-grained the chargen system could get (the answer is "until there's no more space in the rulebook"), but how fine-grained it is reasonable to get. All of the ability scores merge several distinct concepts, but Wisdom is the only stat that merges two completely unrelated concepts (willpower and perceptiveness).

Not accurate analogies, because I was defending the separation between attacks, active use (skills) and reactive uses (saves), and you're talking about splitting skill checks into more skills. But to play along:

- Wizard that has no self-defense skills and is physically frail: low Con, like Raistilin. Now, if that same Wizard cast "Protection from Poison" (kust made up), that'd bump his Con saves, but not his hp. If saves and checks were the same thing, the spell would boost his Con, which would have the side effect of boosting his hp.

- Juggler who can't pick a pocket: Good Dex, but no Sleight of Hand proficiency. Or even better, Sleight of Hand proficiency being used with Charisma (for showmanship), but poor Dex (the proficiency offsets the lack of natural coordination).

- Blind character with good hearing: good Wisdom and/or proficiency in Perception, but automatically fails Perception checks based on sight.

- Nearsighted: character has disadvantage on Perception checks relying on sight beyond what he can hold, unless he is wearing spectacles.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

I don't understand why point #2 is controversial. If there's a special ability called Evasion, shouldn't it only grant a bonus to Dexterity saving throws, not all Dexterity checks? Sure, you could just write it as a bonus to "any Dexterity check to avoid a spell, trap, or other calamity", but isn't it clearer and more concise to say "any Dexterity saving throw"?