Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 4820713" data-attributes="member: 35909">Yeah, I don't really like this, either.&nbsp; Rounding down means only 10, 14, and 18 are numbers that make much of a difference now.&nbsp; It's already mildly irking that odd numbers are of so little benefit.&nbsp; There's also the fact that casters are a lot better in 3e than 4e.&nbsp; Adding 1/2 int to a bunch of stuff is just a flat boost to wizards and other int casters.And yeah, I saw your round up rule, but I don't particularly like it.&nbsp; It goes against the conventional rounding rules, and just shifts what the &quot;key&quot; stat numbers would be.&nbsp; 10, 12, 16, 20.&nbsp; Why bother with anything in between those?Also, you were too limited.&nbsp; Dex whould split attack bonus with strength, and possibly for damage, if you were to use a system like this.&nbsp; Int or Wis could split for initiative.&nbsp; Wisdom to represent awareness of surroundings, but I guess since there are abilities in existence adding int to initiative already, it has more rules support.&nbsp; In turn, wisdom could replace int in your model for what splits the ranged attack bonus (wis modifies spot and having a good view of the target should help with accuracy) with dexterity.&nbsp; I think it both would make sense for dex to affect melee rolls and would be balanced, since as you list it now, dex is basically just getting badly, badly nerfed.&nbsp;&nbsp; Which would then affect other game factors, such as race selection.&nbsp; Elves lose con for dex, already considered a bad trade.&nbsp; Cut all the things dex adds to in half with no additional things for dex to add to?&nbsp; Wow, that looks like an awful race now.EDIT: You did add 1/2 dex to melee attacks, my bad.&nbsp; if you were going to split the damage attribute, dex would be the first choice, IMHO.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="StreamOfTheSky, post: 4820713, member: 35909"] Yeah, I don't really like this, either. Rounding down means only 10, 14, and 18 are numbers that make much of a difference now. It's already mildly irking that odd numbers are of so little benefit. There's also the fact that casters are a lot better in 3e than 4e. Adding 1/2 int to a bunch of stuff is just a flat boost to wizards and other int casters. And yeah, I saw your round up rule, but I don't particularly like it. It goes against the conventional rounding rules, and just shifts what the "key" stat numbers would be. 10, 12, 16, 20. Why bother with anything in between those? Also, you were too limited. Dex whould split attack bonus with strength, and possibly for damage, if you were to use a system like this. Int or Wis could split for initiative. Wisdom to represent awareness of surroundings, but I guess since there are abilities in existence adding int to initiative already, it has more rules support. In turn, wisdom could replace int in your model for what splits the ranged attack bonus (wis modifies spot and having a good view of the target should help with accuracy) with dexterity. I think it both would make sense for dex to affect melee rolls and would be balanced, since as you list it now, dex is basically just getting badly, badly nerfed. Which would then affect other game factors, such as race selection. Elves lose con for dex, already considered a bad trade. Cut all the things dex adds to in half with no additional things for dex to add to? Wow, that looks like an awful race now. EDIT: You did add 1/2 dex to melee attacks, my bad. if you were going to split the damage attribute, dex would be the first choice, IMHO. [/QUOTE]

Verification