D&D (2024) Is it possible to balance the six abilities?

[Horwath]

Ah, DEX, the "God" stat. So, let's move all damage to STR and that will help balance things out.

I would keep dex as damage for ranged and option for dex to be damage on melee or STR, but every weapon would have MIN STR requirement, basically bigger base damage die, higher MIN STR,
dagger could be N/A, while shortsword would be 10, and greatsword/axe 18 or even 20.

so you have 22 dex and 20 str? good for you, you can "finesse" the greatsword if you want to.

same for bows;
d4 bow can be N/A
d6 could be 10 STR and 2d6 could be 20 STR

for crossbows;
all reload would be Action,
2 STR above min, loading is Bonus action
6 STR above min, loading is free action

also add MIN STR for ALL armor and shields,
from 10 STR for leather to 20 STR for Fullplate.

 

[Yaarel]

This is pretty much how I always saw the breakdown, with perhaps a bit of a lean for Intelligence and Wisdom towards power and Charisma towards Endurance (as conviction).

Heh, I am certain that "force of personality" loosely parallels the physical force of Strength, and the perseverance of "will power" the physical perseverance of Constitution.

Among the saves, Reflex/Perception avoids the harm, while Fortitude/Will survives intact after suffering the harm.

Ah, DEX, the "God" stat. So, let's move all damage to STR and that will help balance things out.

This might be part of the solution. Only Strength can grant a physical damage bonus.

Things like shooting eyes and hitting vital organs are what happens at zero hit points, not during normal combat. Nevertheless, I think @Xeviat suggested assigning Dexterity to expanding the chance of crit? That might work if simple enough and part of an overall system of checks and balances.


Also, toward balance, it is important to give Perception (from Wis) and Initiative (from Dex) to Intelligence, in the concept of being observant and understanding clues.

 

[Guest 7037866]

Which I suppose would leave Endurance = Charisma by process of elimination, although I’m still working through that one in my noggin.

Charisma is conviction (belief in others or a higher power) and belief in oneself. That has always worked for me anyway and why we moved Clerics to CHA for casting instead of WIS.

There's a growing "sentiment" (probably the wrong word) in the ttrpg community revolving around the validity of "ability scores". Like, what are they really good for? What part of the story DEMANDS the character have STR X or CHA Y or DEX Z? Do we NEED ability scores to roleplay?

Not trying to derail here tho. It's just a conversation I'm ready to have I think. Thoughts?

This is why @DND_Reborn starting moving in the direction of more skills and removing abilities. He would always say, "You aren't good at athletics because you are strong, you are strong because you are good at athletics." He began working on a system where you would get X number of talents, and each talent was grouped into an ability. The more talents you took from an ability, the higher your ability modifer.

I always thought there was something to it, but it made character creation a bit lengthy for my tastes.

It's weird that folks want to shrink mental stats, yet increase physical ones to me.

I don't find it strange at all, personally. Combat is more influenced by the physical than mental (perhaps sadly...) and D&D is combat-focused. Also, it is impossible for a player to physically represent their character in the game, but mentally is pratically guaranteed. Our PCs are only as smart as we are, or only as eloquent as we are if we role-play. Many tables don't like rolling to solve a puzzle, or sweet-talk a merchant, etc. but are fine with rolling to climb a cliff wall or swim a rough river.

So, having numbers for physical actions makes more sense than having them for mental actions. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, just my observations.

 

[Guest 7037866]

Heh, I am certain that "force of personality" loosely parallels the physical force of Strength, and the perseverance of "will power" the physical perseverance of Constitution.

But "will power" isn't part of Wisdom in D&D since 5E at least. That is why will power or conviction is part of Charisma IMO.

Among the saves, Reflex/Perception avoids the harm, while Fortitude/Will survives intact after suffering the harm.

Sure.

One of the things we've played around with returning to the 3-save system is:

Fortitude = CON + WIS
Reaction = DEX + INT
Resistance = STR + CHA

It also keeps more balance by having a physical and mental ability with each one.

This might be part of the solution. Only Strength can grant a physical damage bonus.

I think it goes a long way. It is our house-rule right now. It keeps PCs from dumping STR when they are DEX-based and likewise we impose DEX penalty in armor so heavy armors won't dump DEX.

Things like shooting eyes and hitting vital organs are what happens at zero hit points, not during normal combat. Nevertheless, I think @Xeviat suggested assigning Dexterity to expanding the chance of crit? That might work if simple enough and part of an overall system of checks and balances.

If there was a "called shot" mechanic, I would allow DEX to offset that penalty. But expanding crit range is pretty extreme at first glance.

Also, toward balance, it is important to give Perception (from Wis) and Initiative (from Dex) to Intelligence, in the concept of being observant and understanding clues.

Yes, allowing INT or even WIS to be used for Initiative helps IMO.

 

[Yaarel]

But "will power" isn't part of Wisdom in D&D since 5E at least. That is why will power or conviction is part of Charisma IMO.

According to 5.24 Players Handbook, Wisdom is "mental fortitude". In other words, the ability to withstand trauma. Will power is part of this.

One of the things we've played around with returning to the 3-save system is:

Fortitude = CON + WIS
Reaction = DEX + INT
Resistance = STR + CHA

It also keeps more balance by having a physical and mental ability with each one.

Defacto and optimally, there really are four saves. Perception is a saving throw.

If there was a "called shot" mechanic, I would allow DEX to offset that penalty. But expanding crit range is pretty extreme at first glance.

The "called shot" is inherently broken, and unbalanceable.

On the other hand, I do like ending combat early for nonlethal encounters. This means, combat ending effects like stun and forcing surrender can only happen during the Bloodied condition.

I might be more forgiving about called shots if they can only happen against a Bloodied target. But even then, the shot is moreorless the same thing as a crit.

To hit a vital organ is the definition of "zero hit points". Until zero, all damage is nonphysical, or after Bloodied only superficial, and by definition nonvital.

Yes, allowing INT or even WIS to be used for Initiative helps IMO.

Yeah, and conceptually Int works well.

 

[payn]

Charisma is conviction (belief in others or a higher power) and belief in oneself. That has always worked for me anyway and why we moved Clerics to CHA for casting instead of WIS.


This is why @DND_Reborn starting moving in the direction of more skills and removing abilities. He would always say, "You aren't good at athletics because you are strong, you are strong because you are good at athletics." He began working on a system where you would get X number of talents, and each talent was grouped into an ability. The more talents you took from an ability, the higher your ability modifer.

I always thought there was something to it, but it made character creation a bit lengthy for my tastes.


I don't find it strange at all, personally. Combat is more influenced by the physical than mental (perhaps sadly...) and D&D is combat-focused. Also, it is impossible for a player to physically represent their character in the game, but mentally is pratically guaranteed. Our PCs are only as smart as we are, or only as eloquent as we are if we role-play. Many tables don't like rolling to solve a puzzle, or sweet-talk a merchant, etc. but are fine with rolling to climb a cliff wall or swim a rough river.

So, having numbers for physical actions makes more sense than having them for mental actions. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, just my observations.

The argument that one can act stronger than one is but not smarter than one is, isn’t compelling.

 

[Guest 7037866]

The argument that one can act stronger than one is but not smarter than one is, isn’t compelling.

LOL don't shoot the messenger. And thanks for the "sad" emoji.

Anyway, I think you missed part of the point. You cannot represent your PC physically in a game, but you can represent your character mentally and socially, and many DMs have the players represent what their PCs say, think, etc. instead of regulating it to the PC mental abilities.

For exampe, if a DM presents the PCs with a puzzle in the game, you have three options:

1) the players, not the PCs, have to solve the puzzle.
2) the DM regulates the "puzzle challenge" to an ability/skill check, so players just roll.
3) a hybrid of 1 and 2. Perhaps the players get so far, and the DM asks for a check to give them a hint, so they can finish it.

You see this all the time. Well, I do anyway... YMMV.

What you don't see is this: A DM presents the PCs with a rough river to swim across. The DM takes the players outside to the nearby river, and makes them swim to see if their PCs can do it. If the players can't do it, their PCs can't.

So, mental and social interactions or challenges can be dealt with by the players and not by their PCs, even though a PC might have INT 20 while a player isn't as clever or knowledgable or whatever concerning the game world the PC is in.

Thus, it really isn't surprising to see mental abilities combined and physical ones expanded. The players can represent the mental aspects of their characters in the game, but it is much harder if not impossible for the players to represent the physical aspects--so more physical options make some sense.

Again, don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Yaarel]

In the effort to try balance the six abilities, both conceptual flavor must saliently make sense, and mechanical benefits must strictly balance. This means, any future system that works, will shift in meaning and-or gain or lose mechanics.

Most of the permutations of the six have fatal flaws. I am currently looking the following arrangement that might work.


Physical = Strength (Attack) + Dexterity (save to avoid) + Constitution (save to withstand)
Mental = Wisdom (DC) + Intelligence (save to avoid) + Charisma (save to withstand)

Notable features of this arrangement:

STR and WIS are extremely powerful because they are the only abilities that can grant the d20 Attack bonus or the DC bonus. STR is more abstract in meaning, more powerful and effective, whether agile or tough. All spellcasters rely on WIS to set the spell DC. Wisdom is moreorless the "magic ability". Beyond this very powerful DC bonus, there needs to be a ribbon to make it interesting.

When arranging the mental abilities, INT (knowledge-perception) and CHA (social skill) already have many noncombat benefits. In comparison, WIS without Perception and without the Will save, lacks a useful concept. So here the concept is "magic" effectiveness or analogously holistic mental attack. Flavorwise, I can imagine INT and CHA being the one that determines the DC. But mechanicswise, when looking at the other features that each offers, INT and CHA become difficult to balance.




Example, the following arrangement might feel "familiar" but seems impossible to balance.

STR (attack) + DEX (save to avoid) + CON (save to withstand)
INT (attack) + WIS (save to avoid) + CHA (save to withstand)

The problem is flavor, WIS is perceptive but lacks knowledge. Beyond the awkwardness of this premise, there is not much for WIS to do beyond the Perception saving throw, it becomes a passive skill. Then the problem is mechanics. CHA has the willpower save, plus many social benefits.

Now for this permutation.

STR (attack) + DEX (save to avoid) + CON (save to withstand)
INT (attack) + CHA (save to avoid) + WIS (save to withstand)

It is narratively weird to make CHA the Perception save. Plus CHA still has the social benefits, while WIS has little or no benefit beyond the save. INT is more powerful that CHA, because of having the lore benefits plus the DC itself.

So on. Most permutations of the six are nonstarters.

 

[payn]

LOL don't shoot the messenger. And thanks for the "sad" emoji.

Anyway, I think you missed part of the point. You cannot represent your PC physically in a game, but you can represent your character mentally and socially, and many DMs have the players represent what their PCs say, think, etc. instead of regulating it to the PC mental abilities.

For exampe, if a DM presents the PCs with a puzzle in the game, you have three options:

1) the players, not the PCs, have to solve the puzzle.
2) the DM regulates the "puzzle challenge" to an ability/skill check, so players just roll.
3) a hybrid of 1 and 2. Perhaps the players get so far, and the DM asks for a check to give them a hint, so they can finish it.

You see this all the time. Well, I do anyway... YMMV.

What you don't see is this: A DM presents the PCs with a rough river to swim across. The DM takes the players outside to the nearby river, and makes them swim to see if their PCs can do it. If the players can't do it, their PCs can't.

So, mental and social interactions or challenges can be dealt with by the players and not by their PCs, even though a PC might have INT 20 while a player isn't as clever or knowledgable or whatever concerning the game world the PC is in.

Thus, it really isn't surprising to see mental abilities combined and physical ones expanded. The players can represent the mental aspects of their characters in the game, but it is much harder if not impossible for the players to represent the physical aspects--so more physical options make some sense.

Again, don't shoot the messenger.

You are not delivering anyones message but your own. I’ll leave it at we see things entirely differently.

 

[Guest 7037866]

You are not delivering anyones message but your own. I’ll leave it at we see things entirely differently.

Well, how do you see it then?

Because what I have expressed is most definitely no merely my own--but how every D&D game I've ever seen or been part of is done.