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

[payn]

So.... talk about them, otherwise I am not sure what your point was in quoting me.

"They cant change tradition because too many people would hate it."
"They changed tradition and I hate it"

You dont see any irony there?

 

[DND_Reborn]

So, more like 3/3.5/PF?

LOL for me it is something more like d20 SW, but yeah. The universal proficiency bonus, while simpler certainly, doesn't really represent what areas classes should focus on.

I find the idea of a defense score increasing by level. I've mostly thought about that at the low levels though, and I'm not how much it changes things at higher levels or with using a single higher level creature instead of several lower ones.

What we are currently doing is allowing you to use proficiency bonus to your AC OR armor. But, armor provides damage reduction so PCs will still wear it. However, at a point, a rogue in light armor can get a +2 for Armor (non-magical) or a +6 for proficiency... The rogue will likely by then stop wearing the armor. However, the +8 for plate will never be matched by proficiency bonus, so the tanks will keep the armor on.

We're still play-testing some of the finer points of the rules, but that is basically the idea.

 

[DND_Reborn]

"They cant change tradition because too many people would hate it."
"They changed tradition and I hate it"

You dont see any irony there?

No, none at all.

First, PCs being harder to hit was never a sacred cow--but ability scores are. They changed so creatures (not just PCs) are easier to hit in 5E, and their answer was to bloat HP to compensate. It is a design choice, and one I personally hate because it makes combat boring IMO.

But getting rid of ability scores would be killing a sacred cow, not just a design choice.

So, no irony at all. When you change sacred cows, people are likely to hate it. Which is why I wrote "assuming that hurdle could be overcome". I don't think it could be removed and have most D&D fans still consider it D&D.

 

[payn]

No, none at all.

First, PCs being harder to hit was never a sacred cow--but ability scores are. They changed so creatures (not just PCs) are easier to hit in 5E, and their answer was to bloat HP to compensate. It is a design choice, and one I personally hate because it makes combat boring IMO.

But getting rid of ability scores would be killing a sacred cow, not just a design choice.

So, no irony at all. When you change sacred cows, people are likely to hate it. Which is why I wrote "assuming that hurdle could be overcome". I don't think it could be removed and have most D&D fans still consider it D&D.

Oh, so sacred cows are only traditional things you dont like.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Oh, so sacred cows are only traditional things you dont like.

Sigh... I think you are just trolling me. Good-bye.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I don't think it could be removed and have most D&D fans still consider it D&D.

Yeah, I don't think so either, but it's the best outcome I can think of that continues WotC's current trajectory. They're already mostly vestigial. My other suggestion would simply be to abandon WotC's take on ability scores and go back the TSR methods. No linear bonus scaling, no post-creation ASIs, bring back roll under ability score checks and design saving throws around the method of attack instead of ability scores.

This solves most of the problems with ability scores as they presently exist. They become less of a need for class functionality, they don't become a distraction from other character options when leveling up, the scores themselves actually have functional meaning instead of just being a container for bonuses, and characters can actually be good at what they're supposed to be good at (e.g. TSR era martial characters had pretty good saves across the board and weren't quite the paper to magic's scissors they frequently are now).

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, I don't think so either, but it's the best outcome I can think of that continues WotC's current trajectory. They're already mostly vestigial. My other suggestion would simply be to abandon WotC's take on ability scores and go back the TSR methods. No linear bonus scaling, no post-creation ASIs, bring back roll under ability score checks and design saving throws around the method of attack instead of ability scores.

This solves most of the problems with ability scores as they presently exist. They become less of a need for class functionality, they don't become a distraction from other character options when leveling up, the scores themselves actually have functional meaning instead of just being a container for bonuses, and characters can actually be good at what they're supposed to be good at (e.g. TSR era martial characters had pretty good saves across the board and weren't quite the paper to magic's scissors they frequently are now).

Hear hear! I second this motion.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Hear hear! I second this motion.

We can dream, can't we?

 

[payn]

I actually really like how PF2 ditched stat#s and went straight to mods. Ability drain works slick. Some folks go bananas because it seems weaker to them, but the math is really all the same.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I actually really like how PF2 ditched stat#s and went straight to mods. Ability drain works slick. Some folks go bananas because it seems weaker to them, but the math is really all the same.

Unfortunately, I think the mods are half the problem.