D&D (2024) Using abilities for only ability checks.

Horwath

Legend
Yes, an idea to remove most effects from abilities so the only affect ability checks/skills.
Have abilities only have mostly RP value.
all combat is based on your level.

In all other aspects of the game; attacks, saves, damage and DC's, ability mod would be replaced by your proficiency bonus.

Attack: d20 + 2×prof bonus, or only 1×prof if not proficient in weapons
AC: 10+prof bonus+armor bonus;
Light armor +1, medium +2 with stealth penalty, heavy +3 with stealth penalty and -5ft move penalty
DC: 8+2×prof bonus
Damage: weapon damage+prof bonus. 2×bonus for fighting styles; choice of 1Handed, 2Handed or Ranged.
Saves: d20+prof, 2×prof bonus if proficient in that save. This would give some scaling to all saves over levels.

then we can return the fixed racial ability ASI's as they would only affect small part of the game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Combined with this, I would agree to your change to armor.

I don't think thisnhas a chance, but if we did this, we should probably add "stat - 10" to our roll and just use the stat as our passive modifier.
Also bonuses to stats should be bigger than they are now, and we should also add some penalties:

Goliath: +4 str, +2 con, - 2 dex.

This way, stat bonuses have an impact where they should.
 
Last edited:



GMMichael

Guide of Modos
Yes, an idea to remove most effects from abilities so the only affect ability checks/skills.
A better way to put this is: ability scores don't affect combat - only level affects combat.

I am against anything that reduces meaningful choice in character creation, and this does that massively. It also makes pcs very much more the same. Not to my taste.
It's only massive if combat is a massive part of your game. I don't quite see how assigning ability scores is no longer meaningful if they don't affect combat. They still apply to every out-of-combat check you'll make.

I don't see why experience points would begin to affect only combat skill (level) besides, you know, experience points being gained primarily in combat. Hmm...it's starting to make sense...
 

the Jester

Legend
It's only massive if combat is a massive part of your game.
I would say that it is a massive part of most games, and that the game rules assume that it will be a massive part of every game. D&D is often largely about killing monsters and taking their stuff.

Which isn't to say that a low- or no-combat D&D game is bad! But it's to say that it is pretty unusual.
 

Horwath

Legend
I would say that it is a massive part of most games, and that the game rules assume that it will be a massive part of every game. D&D is often largely about killing monsters and taking their stuff.

Which isn't to say that a low- or no-combat D&D game is bad! But it's to say that it is pretty unusual.
If we assume that combat is massive part of the game, we will never have high Int or Cha fighter.
You might get away with (relative)high wisdom as it covers an important save, but your str/dex must be primary, follower closely by con, then tertiary wisdom, and what is left for int and cha.

if ALL combat rolls/DCs are made with proficiency bonus only, then there is room for all kind of archetypes.

and it opens of viable jack of all trades in skills, with point buy of 13,13,13,12,12,12 with +1/+1/+1 turning it into 14,14,14,12,12,12 at 1st level.
 


This is the sort of massively fundamental change that simply isn't going to go into a half-edition which is backwards compatible like the D&D Anniversary Edition is slated to be.

If you read the stated goal on the dnd webpage, that is compatibility with published adventures, I see no problem with that.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top