The Philosophy of the Stats

[takyris]

Had a random thought while looking through d20 Modern, and I thought it sort of applied to D&D as well.

Does it seem to you as though some stats are naturally opposed? In particular, it seems as though the AVERAGE character, PC or NPC, who has a good score in the first, second, or third physical attribute has a bad score in the corresponding mental attribute -- and vice versa. That is to say, Strength and Intelligence don't go together, Dexterity and Wisdom don't go together, and Constitution and Charisma don't go together.

Sure, there are exceptions -- D&D and d20 Modern are both flexible enough for you to make a good and playable character with any combination of skills. I just found it interesting that the scores lined up that way, making things really simple for the:

- Strong but Dumb Fighter
- Agile but Impetuous Rogue
- Tough but Rude Dwarven Warrior
- Intelligent but Weak Wizard
- Wise but Clumsy Cleric
- Charismatic but Frail Bard

All of those seem practically iconic to me -- and while there are plenty of strong war wizards, they do have to be mentioned as the exception, rather than as the rule...

I dunno. Just me? Am I thinking about it too much?

-Tacky

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

You are thinking too much.

There are lots of cardboard cut out characters you did not mention:
--strong but clumsy fighter
--smart but unwise mad scientist (wizard)
--charismatic but dumb leader
--smart but uncharismatic nerd

There are endless examples of "Advantage, but Disadvantage" descriptions of characters. Which are more common depend on the genre you choose.

Which pidgeonhole do you put James Bond? Or Indiana Jones? Or Luke Skywalker? Or Chewbecca? Or Aragorn? Or Frodo?

Your system falls apart when you start looking more broadly.