Lanefan
Victoria Rules
This is about designing 6e, which - should it ever rear its ugly head - will doubtless be a follow-on from 5e...
This is about designing 6e, which - should it ever rear its ugly head - will doubtless be a follow-on from 5e...
Yeah, but all your suggestions are "make it the same as 1e/2e because that's what I play".
Xaelvaen
Stuck in the 90s
Ability scores should improve with time and use, and sans a system that actually tracks how much you use what on some sort of steady scale increase wholly unrelated to level, ASI is the best way to go.
I just separate feats from ASI in my home games. I do not approve of 5E linking ASI and Feats, but that doesn't mean I want either removed.
I just separate feats from ASI in my home games. I do not approve of 5E linking ASI and Feats, but that doesn't mean I want either removed.
No, if you want it that way play basic or 1e or 2e but do not ruin 5e with your demands, there are systems out there en masse for you.
If you want to limit players ASI or make it a tough one for them to chose between feat and ASI start them with a 21 point build or so. But then you have to adjust monsters or challenge levels or give away many magic + items to compensate, at least if you want to play mobs by the book.
If you want to limit players ASI or make it a tough one for them to chose between feat and ASI start them with a 21 point build or so. But then you have to adjust monsters or challenge levels or give away many magic + items to compensate, at least if you want to play mobs by the book.
TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
I'd change the base calculations in the game to be d20+max(stat mod, prof bonus) or d20+prof bonus + max(stat mod, prof bonus). That way your stats can give you a bonus at the beginning of the game if you want, but they'll eventually be overshadowed by your skill.
Then add more feats that are based on minimum stat requirements, so the stats still have some relevance.
Then add more feats that are based on minimum stat requirements, so the stats still have some relevance.
Croesus
Adventurer
First off, my comments are from the viewpoint of no feats, as I don't allow them in my game.
The problem with the old school way of improving characters is that every character improved the same, based solely on level. An 11th level fighter had particular THACO and saves, which were the same as every other 11th level fighter. I remember one reason my group stopped playing 1E was that characters tended to be the same - most mechanical customization depended on which items a character possessed.
If we view ASI's not as actual physical/mental changes in a character, but instead as the result of training and practice, ASI's give a player considerable flexibility in customizing the character. A Dex-based fighter will look and fight differently from a Str-based fighter. A bard with high Cha, but low Con will be different from one with moderate scores in both abilities.
One could create feats that effectively mimic ASI's. For instance, a feat that improves a character's bonus to initiative, Dex skills and saves, while also improving their ability with ranged weapons (bonus to attack and damage). But it's just so much easier to base all those things on the stat and improve the stat. The one problem is that characters begin to look the same, as stats have so much impact on class abilities, but I'm unsure how to avoid that while retaining bounded accuracy.
The problem with the old school way of improving characters is that every character improved the same, based solely on level. An 11th level fighter had particular THACO and saves, which were the same as every other 11th level fighter. I remember one reason my group stopped playing 1E was that characters tended to be the same - most mechanical customization depended on which items a character possessed.
If we view ASI's not as actual physical/mental changes in a character, but instead as the result of training and practice, ASI's give a player considerable flexibility in customizing the character. A Dex-based fighter will look and fight differently from a Str-based fighter. A bard with high Cha, but low Con will be different from one with moderate scores in both abilities.
One could create feats that effectively mimic ASI's. For instance, a feat that improves a character's bonus to initiative, Dex skills and saves, while also improving their ability with ranged weapons (bonus to attack and damage). But it's just so much easier to base all those things on the stat and improve the stat. The one problem is that characters begin to look the same, as stats have so much impact on class abilities, but I'm unsure how to avoid that while retaining bounded accuracy.
Xeviat
Dungeon Mistress, she/her
I could support ability scores only being a function of skills and saves, with offensive power coming from level. Different ability scores could be used as prerequisites for different abilities, and could contribute to classes differently.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've never played an edition other than 5e, but here is my thought. I think that ASIs at set levels should be completely replaced by feats, but that there should be another in-game, non-downtime mechanism for increasing ability scores. If you use Dex-based abilities, you should get better at Dexterity. If you use Int-based abilities, you should get better at Intelligence.
In A mechanical solution to the problem with rests, we see that it takes an average of 1.63 days per level, with 6-8 (7) encounters per day, for 11.41 encounters per level. If the average encounter lasts 4 rounds, that means you have 45.64 turns per level. Of course, there are out-of-combat turns. The current ASI rules give you +2 per 4 levels. That's +1 per 2 levels, or +1 per 91 turns. Round up to 100. If you roll a d20 once per turn, you should roll 5 20s on average in 100 turns.
So, what if you rolled a d20 every turn, and whatever ability you use that turn (pick one), if you roll a 20, you gain a progress point for that ability. Every 5th progress point, your ability score rises by 1.
In A mechanical solution to the problem with rests, we see that it takes an average of 1.63 days per level, with 6-8 (7) encounters per day, for 11.41 encounters per level. If the average encounter lasts 4 rounds, that means you have 45.64 turns per level. Of course, there are out-of-combat turns. The current ASI rules give you +2 per 4 levels. That's +1 per 2 levels, or +1 per 91 turns. Round up to 100. If you roll a d20 once per turn, you should roll 5 20s on average in 100 turns.
So, what if you rolled a d20 every turn, and whatever ability you use that turn (pick one), if you roll a 20, you gain a progress point for that ability. Every 5th progress point, your ability score rises by 1.
Similar Threads
- Poll
