D&D General Is Seven Abilities Too Many for a D&D Feel and/or Comfortable Generation?

[cbwjm]

Was it this book back in 2e days that broke up all 6 attributes into 2 parts each. I want to say that Strength was split into force and power. It was an option, but I never played it.

View attachment 151051

I believe it was the skills and powers book that split up the ability scores. I think my friends and I tried it out but then went back to the standard 6 ability scores.

 

[Minigiant]

What about 3 physical and 3 mental if both of those changes were made?

Depends if you can manage every class to be Dual Ability Dependent.

 

[Cadence]

Depends if you can manage every class to be Dual Ability Dependent.

Which do you currently think are single ability, or > 2 ability, dependent?

 

[payn]

So, the three main questions:

1) Would adding a seventh ability add a lot of complexity to that part of character creation? Is it already a bit fiddly to take a point total and split it among six things?

I dont think it would be too complex, nor do I think it would add much of anything to the game.

2) Is there something magic about six for the D&D feel to you? (I mean they tried adding comeliness back in 1e). Or does the number of them not matter?

I like the 3 physical, and 3 mental stats. I think 6 is a good number and I dont have much trouble putting everything into them. Just right is my answer to this.

3) Would it be bad or good if each class really had two stats that were particularly helpful instead of just having one that they really lean on?

I wish all stats were potentially useful to every class. I know thats not completely reasonable, but I miss have 3E/PF1 style stat mixes where fighters could be strong, or agile, or smart. Now, most classes just choose the correct array and way folks go.

And then two more going for if they would break the D&D feel for you, and not necessarily if they would work in terms of mechanics.

4) What is your gut reaction to splitting Dexterity into something like Dexterity (Coordination/Aim) and Agility (Reaction/Acrobatics) ?

Unnecessary.

5) What is your gut reaction to merging Strength and Constitution so that handled both weight training and cardio type fitness?

Im not sure why dex needs to be split and str and con combined? This is also unnecessary to me.

 

[Minigiant]

Which do you currently think are single ability, or > 2 ability, dependent?

All the full casters plus rogue are single ability dependent.

 

[Cadence]

Im not sure why dex needs to be split and str and con combined? This is also unnecessary to me.

Separating melee to-hit and melee damage has some appeal to me, as does separating acrobatics-agility and hand-eye coordination. (Although the separating of to-hit and damage impacts how AC and hitpoints are viewed).

The combining of str and con is something that gets brought up, iirc, by folks who would like fewer abilities. I suggested it as a way of getting to six if the symmetry was viewed as really important.

 

[payn]

Separating melee to-hit and melee damage has some appeal to me, as does separating acrobatics-agility and hand-eye coordination. (Although the separating of to-hit and damage impacts how AC and hitpoints are viewed).

The combining of str and con is something that gets brought up, iirc, by folks who would like fewer abilities. I suggested it as a way of getting to six if the symmetry was viewed as really important.

I can see some appeal in that. Probably drive folks nuts having to have a stat for accuracy and one for damage. Though, I don't mind getting more mileage out of the stats. Design has been moving towards them not really mattering much anymore, which is too bad.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Which do you currently think are single ability, or > 2 ability, dependent?

For myself: nearly every class is three-ability dependent because they have a key ability (for weapons or spells), dex and con.

If Dex is their key ability, then they only need two.

 

[Cadence]

I can see some appeal in that. Probably drive folks nuts having to have a stat for accuracy and one for damage.

I had forgotten until looking it up for another thread that the to hit and damage bonuses were different in 1e. (Like +2 to one and +4 to another for the write 18% strength or whatnot).

In 3.5 finesse weapons were Dex for to hit and Str for damage. I don't remember if that bothered folks or not.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Whenever I see a thread saying, "I think X core part of D&D's traditional rules should be changed", I think, "yeah, wouldn't that be nice", but then quickly remember how much outrage a significant part of this community has had in response to some extremely minor changes that WotC has made to the rules in new books/errata (giving Goblinoids Fey Ancestry, removing alignment suggestions from PC races, changing Vistani lore to be less racist, etc).

Yeah, there are changes to sacred cows of D&D that I wish would change. However, if we as a community can't handle changes to books that won't affect your games in any way . . . we're never going to dump any of the dozens of useless/detrimental sacred cows that the game has.