Multiple Ability Dependance and other tall tales

[Crothian]

But mechanically, they kind of do. Thats why I said what I said...if you ignore the mechanics and are only interested in the RP aspects, then yea it doesnt matter. But if you want a character to really get the good out of their mechanical class features, you are going to need at least medium or high scores in the abilities that affect those functions. And that includes combat itself.
.

True, but the key is medium or high scores. It seems people think they have to be high scores, where I am saying they have to be medium. If I truely wanted to ignore mechancis, d20 is not the game I would play.

 

[JoeGKushner]

With bonuses being given out at lower ability scores, it's not as bad as it used to be. In addition, some of the classes that have multiple ability scores that are useful, can be run different ways depending on the high points of the ability score. for example, a very wise paladin whose almost never prone to succumbing to being charmed or the charismatic paladin with ability to turn undead greater than a cleric. The monk grappler or the elusive monk. All valid concepts.

However, to really trade blows with some of the other core classes that only rely on one stat for their primary ability... yea, they can be a little difficult to get around at maximum ability. Probably part of the min-maxing cultures that are out there.

A paladin is a fighter. He needs good physical abilities. A paladin also needs good charisma and wisdom (paladin and spell ability).

A monk is a fighter. he needs good physical abilities. A good wisdom also helps.

A fighter? Good physical abilities.

Rogue? Ditto.

Wizard: Really only need a good INT. Everything else is gravy. The little bonuses they get from having a good dexterity or constitution don't compare with the ability to cast higher level spells and what those spells can do.

 

[Merlion]

True, but the key is medium or high scores. It seems people think they have to be high scores, where I am saying they have to be medium. If I truely wanted to ignore mechancis, d20 is not the game I would play.

Well basically in most ability generation methods, they are going to be medium...it isnt possible to have more than one high (16+) ability score, really.

However this is a disadvantage for them. Because the Fighter, for instance, will probably spend the whatever to get a 16 in either Str or Con and probably a 14 in the other one.

A Paladin probably isnt going to get to have even a single high starting score, without basically sacrificing some class abilities.

Thats why someone said that a 32 point buy Paladin and a 32 point buy Fighter will be a lot better matched than the same two in 25 point buy.


And thats why I'd never use anything lower than 32 point buy (one of the reasons), And why I...and most of the DMs I've been under...if using die rolling, allow some re-rolling of 1's or something similar.

A paladin is a fighter. He needs good physical abilities. A paladin also needs good charisma and wisdom (paladin and spell ability).

A monk is a fighter. he needs good physical abilities. A good wisdom also helps.

A fighter? Good physical abilities

Exactly.

 

[JustaPlayer]

A paladin is a fighter. He needs good physical abilities. A paladin also needs good charisma and wisdom (paladin and spell ability).

A fighter with cool special abilities in place of all those combat oriented feats a fighter is going to pick up. The Palidin without his abilities should be just as good at fighting as a Fighter without his feats. In place of those feat, the Palidin gets those special abilities that require certain stats to be of any use. If a Fighter doesn't have a high enough ability for one of the feats they want they can grab another. The Palidin doesn't have that option. They have the decent ability or not.

Now once all feats and abilities are considered, yes the fighter will be slightly better at combat with a sword than a palidin but that is where the trade for some of those special abilities comes in and if you don't have the scores to power those abilities then you aren't getting an even trade off.

Give each of the two classes one 16 and the rest 10s and tell me which one is of more use.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Well basically in most ability generation methods, they are going to be medium...it isnt possible to have more than one high (16+) ability score, really.

However this is a disadvantage for them. Because the Fighter, for instance, will probably spend the whatever to get a 16 in either Str or Con and probably a 14 in the other one.

I'm with Crothian on this. The only difference is your perception of the relative value of a bonus -- where a +3 is a worthwhile bonus and a +2 is not.

Take the standard array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

Take a fighter with those stats: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 8

Vs. a paladin with the same stats: Str 13, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 8, Wis 14, Cha 15

Both can use all their abilities, and meet feat prerequisites for most likely feats, etc. Is the paladin gimped because his attack bonus is +1 to the fighter's +2, his Dex bonus is +0 to the fighter's +1, and has 1 fewer hp and slightly fewer skill points, in return for his spells, aura, lay on hands, etc, etc? Is a single +1 bonus that valuable? Mechanically, one may be better than another in specific areas, but overall both are balanced. If you're telling me the paladin is unplayable with these sorts of stats, I think the issue is your expectation of what stats you need to feel comfortable, not the game mechanics themselves.

 

[JustaPlayer]

I'm with Crothian on this. The only difference is your perception of the relative value of a bonus -- where a +3 is a worthwhile bonus and a +2 is not.

Take the standard array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

Take a fighter with those stats: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 8

Vs. a paladin with the same stats: Str 13, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 8, Wis 14, Cha 15

Both can use all their abilities, and meet feat prerequisites for most likely feats, etc. Is the paladin gimped because his attack bonus is +1 to the fighter's +2, his Dex bonus is +0 to the fighter's +1, and has 1 fewer hp and slightly fewer skill points, in return for his spells, aura, lay on hands, etc, etc? Is a single +1 bonus that valuable? Mechanically, one may be better than another in specific areas, but overall both are balanced. If you're telling me the paladin is unplayable with these sorts of stats, I think the issue is your expectation of what stats you need to feel comfortable, not the game mechanics themselves.

No, but if you take away the 14 and the 12 and turn them into 10s or 11s your fighter will still be good at what he is made for and your palidin will not. Thus the term multiple ability depenency.

BTW, on those chars you have a total ability bonus of +5. I find it hard to get +3 even rolling 4d6 drop the lowest.

 

[Anax]

No, but if you take away the 14 and the 12 and turn them into 10s or 11s your fighter will still be good at what he is made for and your palidin will not. Thus the term multiple ability depenency.

BTW, on those chars you have a total ability bonus of +5. I find it hard to get +3 even rolling 4d6 drop the lowest.

This is among the reasons my group finally switched to point buy. If you get unlucky with rolling, then sure, you're in trouble. But you're in trouble in that case no matter what class you're playing. If you get really lucky and get super high rolls, you're in great shape no matter what class you're playing. (And the variation in 4d6-drop-the-lowest rolls is pretty extreme. The difference between 25th percentile and 75th percentile rolls is easily worth an ECL.)

I guess that if you're still sticking with rolling dice for ability scores, some classes are significantly more painful than others. In that situation, you don't have the choice to adjust your stats so that you can choose to emphasize one stat or another. With the standard point buy (which is what the stats above are based on--the standard array is a 25 point buy set of stats, which is on the *low* side of the probable results of 4d6-DL) you have a hard time getting any spectacular ability scores, but you also don't have to worry about being forced to be completely useless on some stat.

Anyway, just another reason I just don't understand people who roll dice for ability scores.

 

[Andor]

I'm with Crothian on this. The only difference is your perception of the relative value of a bonus -- where a +3 is a worthwhile bonus and a +2 is not.

Take the standard array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

Take a fighter with those stats: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 8

Vs. a paladin with the same stats: Str 13, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 8, Wis 14, Cha 15

Both can use all their abilities, and meet feat prerequisites for most likely feats, etc. Is the paladin gimped because his attack bonus is +1 to the fighter's +2, his Dex bonus is +0 to the fighter's +1, and has 1 fewer hp and slightly fewer skill points, in return for his spells, aura, lay on hands, etc, etc? Is a single +1 bonus that valuable? Mechanically, one may be better than another in specific areas, but overall both are balanced. If you're telling me the paladin is unplayable with these sorts of stats, I think the issue is your expectation of what stats you need to feel comfortable, not the game mechanics themselves.

And if we assume that both the Paladin and the fighter are half-elves the Paladin does not have slightly few skill points, he has 1/3 the fighters skill points. If he is not a human, where does he put his single skill point? Ride? Diplomacy? Either lose a class feature or waste your best stat... Joy...

And now the monk with a standard array. Str 13 Dex 15 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 8
A combat class with an AC of 14 and 9 hp Att +1 for 1d6+1. Which other class would he not lose to in a straight fight? A wizard or sorcerer, maybe. Any other base class with that same stat array would kick his ass, and here is why. Everyone else gets to spend cash for what a monk must do with stats! Want better ac? Buy armour! Better damage? Buy a weapon! The most effective way for this guy to deal damage is to stand in the back and use a crossbow. Which he is no better at than the mage. Which makes no use of any class abilities. Which is not what I really think of when I think monk...

Look, what makes a monk cool, is that he can use his stats instead of gear. But he has to have the stats because sure as shooting everyone else will have the gear.

Furthermore no one on this thread is saying a monk needs straight 18s or even a single 18. What we are saying is that a monk without a pile of 14s is dead weight to his party, and that this is simply not true for most other classes.

If you were given a stat array of 16,10,10,10,10,10 what classes would you play? How worthwhile would each class be with that array? The Druid wouldn't care in the slightest. The wizard would be fine. The barbarian, fighter, rogue and cleric would get by. The Ranger and Paladin would have to make some hard choices but useful characters could be made. The monk? Where does he put that 16? Hell with that array I could make an expert or adept that would bring more to the party than a monk possibly could.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Yes, but if you're expecting him to be just as effective as a fighter, I'd say you're missing the point. That's the fighter's schtick. Being a paladin is about being more than just a mere fighter, and trading some of that ability for the ability to do other things. The MAD argument would say that to be effective, the paladin and fighter should have the same fighting ability -- but then why even have fighters in the game? Every class has its way of contributing to the party. You only appear to be gimped by MAD if you're trying to do something another class is really designed to do better.

OK then, enlighten us. What exactly is it that the paladin is supposed to do?

My thought is that the paladin is supposed to be good at fighting evil. A fighter is not designed to do that better than the paladin. The paladin is designed to do that better than the fighter. A fighter's schtick is to be able to fight anyone any time anywhere and in any way and still be effective. Fighting demons. They go down. Eladrin in the way? They go down too. Inevitables coming after him? Bring 'em on. There's plenty to go around. A paladin, on the other hand, is specialized for fighting evil. Mincing demons is his breakfast but if Inevitables or Eladrin are what's coming for him, he's at a definite disadvantage.

Now, let's imagine a paladin who's not as good at fighting evil as a fighter is. What is it about his holy blessings that make him worse at fulfilling his goal in life than someone who doesn't have those blessings?

But, we could go back and forth all day about what classes are supposed to be. Let's propose two different tests for MAD--one for high powered games and one for low powered games.

Here's the high powered game question: how many 18s will the character benefit from? Or, is the character noticably better in his various roles if he has 18/18/18/18/18/18 than if he has 18/18/18/10/10/10? Characters who benefit from additional high scores have MAD.

Let's try applying this. For the barbarian and wizard, the answer is "not really." A wizard can have an 18 strength and an 18 charisma and an 18 wisdom without being noticably more effective or able than a wizard with 10 in each of those stats. A paladin? Well, he's a lot better off with the 18 strength, con, wisdom, and charisma. The 18 dex will help a lot too (though he has ways to make up for a low dex). T

The low powered test is here: Given a limited point buy, how will a serious min-maxer allocate his stats to create a power-gamed character? If 28 point buy games feature a lot of power gamed 18, 14, 14, 8, 8 , 8 characters the class does not have MAD. If, OTOH, the more frequent builds are 15, 14, 14, 14, 10, 8 or similarly balanced builds, it is likely that the class does have MAD.

Applying this test yields the same results. 18, 14, 14, 8, 8, 8 builds are common for power-gamed barbarian characters and aren't unheard of for power-gamed wizards. Therefore, neither class has MAD. OTOH, it is rare for a power-gamed monk or paladin to have such unbalanced stats. Power gamers tend to spread those points out a bit more to eek more out of their various abilities. Therefore, both classes have MAD.

That last line is the key. Mechanically the system appears that way -- and I personally feel it is an essential part of the design -- but the actual impact of it is what? That's dependent much more on style of play, and player/DM expectations.

Maybe in some other world. I would say that the actual impact of mechanics is that they determine what your character can actually do in the game. It's all well and good to have the concept "my character is a great archer" but if your BAB is +1, you're not proficient in bows, your dex is 8 and your strength 10 and you don't have any archery feats, your character is not a great archer. He's a pathetic archer who is under the demented delusion that he's a skilled archer. On the other hand, a character with a base attack of +19, every archery feat in the book (and some from non-core sources), a strength of 22 and a dex of 30 can lay claim to the accolades of a master marksman. He really can hit an falling apple five times before it hits the ground and do it at a range of three hundred yards.

Some of that is dependent upon the style of play and player/DM expectations. But some of it is not. I don't think there are any reasonable player/DM expectations that could make the first character a skilled archer. Nor are there any reasonable sets of player/DM expectations that will make a 10/10/10/10/10/14 paladin who can't take a by the book bugbear in a fair fight into a paragon of holy martial prowess. He can be holy all he wants but martial prowess is going to elude him as long as he's around a fighter with 14/10/10/10/10/10 stats who will beat him ten ways till Sunday, put him in a dress and call him Shirley.

 

[FireLance]

Nor are there any reasonable sets of player/DM expectations that will make a 10/10/10/10/10/14 paladin who can't take a by the book bugbear in a fair fight into a paragon of holy martial prowess. He can be holy all he wants but martial prowess is going to elude him as long as he's around a fighter with 14/10/10/10/10/10 stats who will beat him ten ways till Sunday, put him in a dress and call him Shirley.

Um, what level paladin? A by the book bugbear is CR 2, so a standard 2nd-level paladin should have an even chance of defeating on in combat. However, this isn't a standard paladin - it's a 16-point buy character, so it's significantly (about 4 points of bonuses) weaker than a standard 25-point buy character.

That's the original thesis, by the way. No-one can dispute that some classes require high ability scores in more than one ability score to access all their class abilities. The real point is that in a 25-point game (or a random character generation method that approximates that), almost all characters will have enough bonuses in enough ability scores that any character class becomes viable.

However, for the sake of argument, let's compare the 16-point buy fighter to the 16-point buy paladin.

At 1st level, the paladin certainly doesn't compare well. The paladin's sole advantage is that he can detect evil at will. His ability to smite evil only allows him to equal the fighter's attack bonus once per day against an evil opponent, and he falls behind in damage, as well. However, all isn't rosy for the fighter, either. With only one exceptional ability score, his choice of bonus feats is limited. For a start, his ability scores rule out the Dodge, Combat Expertise and Two-Weapon Fighting feat chains.

At 2nd level, it's a bit more even. The paladin gets a +2 bonus to saving throws and the ability to lay on hands to heal 4 points of damage a day. The fighter will still outperform the paladin in a straight fight, but the paladin has a better chance of resisting some dangers.

At 3rd level, the paladin's defenses strengthen further with Aura of Courage and Divine Health. It's a little unfair to compare with the fighter at 3rd level as he doesn't get anything special this level due to a quirk in the spacing of class abilities.

So, even in a 16-point game, all we can conclude is that the fighter will fight better than the paladin. However, the paladin still gets some defensive and healing advantages against the fighter, so he isn't at a clear-cut disadvantage. If you like, we can run this exercise in a 25-point game, with ability scores of Str 14, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 14 for the paladin.