Trimming the Fat: Three Ability Scores

[Sir Sebastian Hardin]

Well that's true. It will be fun to play, as long as we don't give it a lot of thought.
All in all... The point buy system works better with dump stats... For example, if I used the 4d6 roll system, i played paladins or clerics if my scores were high enough.... If I rolled low I had to go with a Fighter or wizard.
With the point buy system I usually end up with 3 good stats and 3 bad ones.... I think I just hate that now they tell me exactly wich 3 scores I should dump. I am going to try house-ruling just to give it a shot.

 

[CleverNickName]

Mind, Body, and Soul...I think it is an interesting concept. I can see its appeal; it is clean and simple. A lot of new gamers are confused about the difference between Intelligence and Wisdom, or Strength and Constitution. Sometimes less is more.

But I don't think it is for me. I might be just another "grognard" who resists change, but I like having six ability scores (in fact, for a while we added Comliness to the list, for a total of seven.) It's hard to describe...it's like adding more pixels to an image. You get more resolution, more detail.

With only those three scores, how would you mathematically describe a strong, clumsy barbarian? or a nimble yet frail rogue? An absent-minded professor? A shy, insecure priestess who has great faith in her god, but no faith in herself? These would each be incredibly fun characters to play, IMO.

 

[neceros]

I sincerely hope D&D never turns into Mind, Body or Soul, or any other dimmed portion of ability scores. Mind you, I'm not against changing the number of scores: I rather like Shadowrun 4ths ability scores. So long as we are able to make the character with proper stats without feeling like you could have done better anything would work.

I don't like three stats due to BESM3. I like BESM, but it feels arbitrary to have to roll one stat for two severely different sort of requirements. Roll Body to test a Poison and also to see how quick you are? It just doesn't make immediate sense. In an aside I whole heartedly believe you shouldn't have to take defects in order to "tone" your character down in a certain area.


It's just been bad experiences when you have so few stats. Doesn't make sense: too many things run into each other; characters become blobs.

 

[Betote]

If it's true, the "select your Defense ability" substracts from the game, at least to me. It invalidates some fantasy archetypes that I like to be reflected from time to time in my games:

- Old, weakling scholar.
- Charismatic but gullible fella.
- Not-so-strong, although my-Gawd-he's-resilient Hobbit-like character.
- Big guy who gets down with the first punch.
- Wise, grumpy "get off of my lawn" priest.
- Smart-ass rogue.
- etc...

And, what'd the 4E Reflex score for Stephen Hawkins* be? It's just ridicule.

*: I intended to use Charles Xavier for this example, but I realized he isn't in his wheelchair as for these times.

 

[small pumpkin man]

If it's true, the "select your Defense ability" substracts from the game, at least to me. It invalidates some fantasy archetypes that I like to be reflected from time to time in my games:

- Old, weakling scholar.

An NPC version has whatever AC you decide, remember, Raistlin had particularly low con, not low dex.

- Charismatic but gullible fella.

He's still gullable, you can still bluff him, you just have trouble magically stealing his mind (because of his forceful personality). (or, I guess, deceive him easily in combat, that one is a tad weird.) But you can certainly mess with his head normally. In fact this character is far more likely to come up, since it doesn't hurt you as much.

- Not-so-strong, although my-Gawd-he's-resilient Hobbit-like character.

Again, more likely to come up, all the new rules mean is that he's harder to grapple and push around.

- Big guy who gets down with the first punch.

str doesn't affect hp. Again, more likely, very easy to do with a brawny rogue, I was thinking of making a character like this.

- Wise, grumpy "get off of my lawn" priest.

You mean kinda like the example Cleric? (sure, he had 12 chr, but that isn't particularly high for a holy man) Doesn't really have anything to do with defenses.

- Smart-ass rogue.

Yes, this one I will pay you. However it's been bandied around since we saw the rogue class.

- etc...

And, what'd the 4E Reflex score for Stephen Hawkins* be? It's just ridicule.

*: I intended to use Charles Xavier for this example, but I realized he isn't in his wheelchair as for these times.

Hawkins in paralyzed, you don't have to be, well, Stephen Hawkings to figure out he doesn't get his stat to his AC. And of course Einstein would totally kick you butt.

I really don't mean to threadcrap, I do see where the OP is coming from, but these most of the examples in this are really easy to do in current 4e, but actually quite hard in the system the OP proposes.

 

[lutecius]

If it's true, the "select your Defense ability" substracts from the game, at least to me. It invalidates some fantasy archetypes that I like to be reflected from time to time in my games:

- Old, weakling scholar.
- Charismatic but gullible fella.
- Not-so-strong, although my-Gawd-he's-resilient Hobbit-like character.
- Big guy who gets down with the first punch.
- Wise, grumpy "get off of my lawn" priest.
- Smart-ass rogue.
- etc...

And, what'd the 4E Reflex score for Stephen Hawkins* be? It's just ridicule.

*: I intended to use Charles Xavier for this example, but I realized he isn't in his wheelchair as for these times.

You pretty much nailed what was bugging me.
I like that a class is not penalized too much for boosting its main stats but not to the point of abilities being interchangeable.

 

[ruleslawyer]

If it's true, the "select your Defense ability" substracts from the game, at least to me. It invalidates some fantasy archetypes that I like to be reflected from time to time in my games:

- Old, weakling scholar.
- Charismatic but gullible fella.
- Not-so-strong, although my-Gawd-he's-resilient Hobbit-like character.
- Big guy who gets down with the first punch.
- Wise, grumpy "get off of my lawn" priest.
- Smart-ass rogue.
- etc...

And, what'd the 4E Reflex score for Stephen Hawkins* be? It's just ridicule.

*: I intended to use Charles Xavier for this example, but I realized he isn't in his wheelchair as for these times.

I really don't understand how the "select the ability that affects defense" rule invalidates any of these archetypes. Far from it; it encourages them!

Defenses are simply about survivability; like someone said about hit points, they're a measurement of script immunity. If you want to play an old, weakling scholar, you can; it's just that he can use his intelligence to anticipate incoming fireballs and get out of the way. (And what does Str have to do with it anyway?) The other archetypes (low-Str but resilient, high-Str but fragile, wise priest, smart-ass rogue) have absolutely nothing to do with defenses.