FrogReaver
The most respectful and polite poster ever
As an example: I think many people actually prefer their Str+Cha Fighter to fight the same as a Str+Wis Fighter. For them, the secondary stat shouldn't be influencing how they mechanically fight so much as much as the characterization of the fighter and what they do out of combat. For me those are actual choices and trying to force different ways of fighting because I picked Cha or Wis as a secondary stat usually just means I cannot make whatever Fighter I conceive of.For my part, what I prefer is when MAD is the result of making an elective choice, rather than being stuck needing to max a bunch of things that you just can't do that with.
So, for example, some folks were...not enthused with the design of the 4e Paladin, but I actually kind of liked it. Because you could choose Strength or Charisma as your main stat, and then either the other of those two (versatility but weak riders), or Wis or Con as your secondary stat--and some builds even wanted at least a modicum of Dexterity to make the best use of swords (specifically, heavy blades.) Most of these options were quite viable, they just restricted you to a smaller set of worthwhile options, rather than being necessarily "better" or "worse" at their fundamental goals.
A Str/Wis Paladin would have solid riders and be good at smacking things, but would consequently be a bit weaker at the actual, direct Defender role--verging closer to a well-defended Leader with good offense, or even a support-heavy Striker with good defense. A Cha/Wis Paladin, on the other hand, could make one of the best non-Cleric healers in the game, and with the right PP could actually be a full-time Defender and Leader. Going Str/Cha, a "Balanced Paladin," would lead to getting the pick of the litter for powers, but you'd have relatively few uses of Lay on Hands, and your rider effects (which usually are based off of Wisdom or occasionally Constitution) would be relatively weak.
Those produce actual choices, rather than the pseudo-choice of "be strong or be sucky" or the even worse "choose which way you want to suck." That's interesting, engaging design, which enables varied gameplay--a high-Strength, high-Con Paladin is going to feel different compared to a high-Cha, high-Wis Paladin, to the point that you may genuinely end up having starkly different gameplay experiences despite playing the same class.
What I've always seen happen with true MAD systems is that there is a best Combination of ASI's. It might be more of a puzzle to figure out due to more moving parts, but at the end of the day there was always a best configuration.
Last edited: