Multiple Ability Dependance and other tall tales

[DM_Matt]

Paladin are fine with spread-out moderate states. They can wear armor so they do not need dex, and they dont need great int. A decent Cha is good to lead and smite, but they dont need to start with more than a 14. Wis they only need a 12 or so, since they dont really have attack spells they need to worry about DCs about, and by the time they need more wis, a +2 item is easy to come by. Then maybe a 14 con and a 14 or 16 str, and they are a perfectly good pally that doesnt sacrifice anything.

So, 14, 12, 14, 10, 12, 14 is a 28 point buy pally, and 16, 12,14,10,12,14 is the 32 point version.

I'd be comforatable playing either.

HOWEVER.

While Paladins have a lot of scores that SHOULDN'T be LOW, monks have a lot of scores that MUST be HIGH. They really need the attack and damage form str, since their speical move, Flurry, makes thier less-than-steller BAB need to be even higher until they reach high levels, and their other special moves are opposed rolls. They need wis AND dex to make up for the loss of armor, they need con to offset their lowish hp.

A monk is not a fighter, but has very few extra abilities that let him do other things well except fight. He has a more specialized kind of fighting that can rely more on grappling, tripping, etc, but a monk needs higher stats to hold a candle to a similar fighter. The only monks I like to play are half-ogres and other brutish races that have abilities that can offset their MAD problems. A HOGRE monk with the right feats (whihc may require a fighter level or two), wis panalty notwithstanding, is a very scary sight.

 

[FireLance]

I don't believe in multiple ability dependency, but it is a fact that certain classes need minimum scores in certain abilities to access all of their class abilities:

Bard: Charisma (for spellcasting)
Cleric: Wisdom (for spellcasting)
Druid: Wisdom (for spellcasting)
Fighter: Technically none, but ability scores may restrict choice of bonus feats
Ranger: Wisdom (for spellcasting)
Paladin: Wisdom (for spellcasting), Charisma (for divine grace and lay on hands)
Sorcerer: Charisma (for spellcasting)
Wizard: Intelligence (for spellcasting)

Assuming a 25-point buy game, or a dice rolling method that gives approximately the same result, every character should have a score of 13 or more in at least two ability scores. In fact, 25-point buy allows you to generate a character with ability scores of 14, 14, 13, 12, 10, 10 - two scores with a +2 bonus and two with a +1 bonus.

If we're talking a game where all the characters had ability scores of 9 or less, then I agree that there is little point to taking certain classes. However, that's not the core assumption.

 

[Nightfall]

Eld B,

Some times it's just the way it works out. I agree with the idea but I play in a group where being a cleric is considered "a waste" unless you pr-class it to something else. Or if you only get like 1-2 levels in it.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Eld B,

Some times it's just the way it works out. I agree with the idea but I play in a group where being a cleric is considered "a waste" unless you pr-class it to something else. Or if you only get like 1-2 levels in it.

Cleric levels as a waste? I am actually totally stumped by that.

 

[Nightfall]

Like I said, I have some very...non-cleric/divine dislikers in my group. Which is probably why I always end up playing the paladin OR the cleric. Some times both.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The phenomenon of multiple ability dependency is very real but it's somewhat overblown.

Given the set of stats: 10, 10, 10, 6, 8, 18, which classes could you build that would be strong examples of their class? And which ones would be weaker.

Cleric and druid would do just fine. A bard could get by fairly well too.

Wizard and sorcerer would hurt for hit points but otherwise they'd be fine. Fighter and barbarian would be short on hit points (and barbarian on AC), but they'd do allright unless they wanted to be archers.

A rogue would find himself playing a very non-traditional role if he was going to be effective.

A paladin, ranger, or monk would be unable to fill their traditional roles in the party.

Now the same question, but with a different stat set:
18 14 14 8 8 8

Is that a build for a monk, a paladin, a wizard, or a barbarian? You may not be able to tell whether it's a wizard (str 8, dex 14, con 14, int 18, wis 8, cha 8) or a barbarian (str 18, dex 14, con 14, int 8, wis 8, cha 8) but you can probably be pretty sure it's neither a paladin nor a monk--or if it is, the player isn't much of a power gamer.

Some classes base their primary ability on enough different stats that they need bonusses in more stats to be effective. That doesn't mean that you can't play a paladin in a low stat game--I've seen very effective paladins in 28 point games, for instance. (And my Living Greyhawk fighter/mage--another MAD class combination--is one of the few 17th level characters in my area who never died through his whole career). You can even make a decent paladin in a 25 point game though, at that point, you have to make some serious sacrifices. I wouldn't try for a paladin or monk on 22 points though. There's just not enough to support the classes. The real effect of MAD is that an effectively powergamed MAD character will look very different from an effectively powergamed non-MAD character. You will see barbarians and wizards in the 18 14 14 8 8 8 mold. You'll see very few paladins that look like that. Why? MAD.

 

[The Cardinal]

MAD core classes:

3 stats

1. Monk (Dex, Wis, Str)

2. Paladin (Str, Wis, Cha)

3. Cleric (Wis, Cha, Str)

4. Druid (Wis, Cha, Str *or* Dex)

5. Bard (Cha, Dex, Int)

 

[Rystil Arden]

MAD core classes:

3 stats

1. Monk (Dex, Wis, Str)

2. Paladin (Str, Wis, Cha)

3. Cleric (Wis, Cha, Str)

4. Druid (Wis, Cha, Str *or* Dex)

5. Bard (Cha, Dex, Int)

Strength or Dexterity for the Druid? Why? I have a Druid who has 8 to both of those stats, actually. They're more or less totally worthless for a Druid in my opinion...

 

[The Cardinal]

Strength or Dexterity for the Druid? Why? I have a Druid who has 8 to both of those stats, actually. They're more or less totally worthless for a Druid in my opinion...

well, I don't see the druid as a pure spellcaster - so I need some combat ability, i.e. Str or Dex for melee or ranged engagements, or I'd be completely dependent on my shapeshift ability for combat...

 

[Rystil Arden]

well, I don't see the druid as a pure spellcaster - so I need some combat ability, i.e. Str or Dex for melee or ranged engagements, or I'd be completely dependent on my shapeshift ability for combat...

Druids get full spellcasting, and Wild Shape makes those stats redundant by replacing them with the animal's. All in all, I'd rather have more skill points.