Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LordEther" data-source="post: 2978336" data-attributes="member: 29298">Hey, Aus_Snow. Yeah, I think there was a brief flood of threads involving pharmaceutical ads a little while back. Maybe they're looking a bit harder at new forum members because of that. Whenever you get there ( <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />  ), I look forward to seeing you on the forums. Yeah, this is a bit of a sticky one. The general consensus is that Lucky shouldn't add to Toughness saves. It still leaves the issue of lucky spellcasters getting a bonus to their fatigue saves, but that might be in-genre for some settings. Well, Constitution would be much less valuable. The only reasons I can think of right now to take it would be for Fortitude saves or feat prerequisites. Hmmm... do you feel that, as is, Strength is comparatively weak as an ability score? Some people do. I look at it like this: damage infliction and reduction is a bit more tightly controlled than attack/defense. While Dexterity is often perceived as an "ultra-stat," Strength is pretty solid, too. It provides a bonus to defense in limited situations (parry), and it provides a damage bonus as well. The latter is really difficult to get in True20, only available with a couple of specific feats (each of which only offer benefits in limited situations; with Attack Specialization, one must be using a certain type of weapon/attack, with Sneak Attack, one's opponent must be flat-footed, etc. Neither feat is a general feat). I think Strength is already pretty good, just because it does what so few other stats in the game do (increases damage). For some campaigns, though, I could possibly see a Warrior feat that allows a character to replace his Con bonus with Str for the Toughness saves... don't know what one would call it... That might be based on the old conversion rules. I don't have the new book in front of me, but in "old" True20, weapon damages used to be converted as following: per d4: +1 damageper d6: +2 damage (greatsword 2d6 = +4 damage)per d8: +3 damageper d10: +4 damageper d12: +5 damage (greataxe 1d12 = +5 damage)Again, I don't have the new book in front of me, but if the conversion rules have changed, the discrepancy might just be an artifact of the old system. Hope this helps! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification