What 5e got wrong

[Einlanzer0]

Way to miss the point, nearly every responder in this thread. What I was talking about was the design mantra behind the stats, and not the specific mechanics of them.

Sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that having stats that are overtly unequal in usefulness makes any sense whatsoever. Additionally, I'm unlikely to be convinced that int, wis, and cha aren't poorly hodgepodged conceptually and in need of a rethink.

 

[Ath'kethin]

nobody will ever convince me that having stats that are overtly unequal in usefulness makes any sense whatsoever. Additionally, I'm unlikely to be convinced that int, wis, and cha aren't poorly hodgepodged conceptually.

Which begs the question as to why you posted this on a discussion board.

 

[GMMichael]

Because picking the right (attributes) is an extremely hard problem.

Gotta disagree here. I think tri-stat pretty much nails it. However, that only works for the loosey-goosey crowd - the crunch-lovers probably prefer more.

5e is a breath of fresh air compared to 3.5, 3.75, and 4. If anything went wrong, excluding what was needed for legacy... is it possible they did -too much- playtesting? They could've had a nice early-edition feel just by including rules that sound cool. That wouldn't work so well for Adventurer's League though.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Way to miss the point, nearly every responder in this thread. What I was talking about was the design mantra behind the stats, and not the specific mechanics of them.

Sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that having stats that are overtly unequal in usefulness makes any sense whatsoever. Additionally, I'm unlikely to be convinced that int, wis, and cha aren't poorly hodgepodged conceptually and in need of a rethink.

Ok, so I won't try to convince you. That's your opinion. Mine is that I disagree with you. Since you don't want discussion, I guess we can close the thread now?

 

[Awesome Adam]

Way to miss the point, nearly every responder in this thread. What I was talking about was the design mantra behind the stats, and not the specific mechanics of them.

Trust me, your first post was completley vague. If that was your intent, it was completely unclear that was what you were hoping for.

Sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that having stats that are overtly unequal in usefulness makes any sense whatsoever.

Stats being overly unequal in 5E, especially when compared to previous editions is debatable.
STR - Melee, Melee Damage, Saves, Athletics
DEX - Finese Melee, Finesse Melee Damage, AC, Saves
CON - Hit Points, Saves, concentration, sometimes AC
INT - spell casting, crafting and knowledge skills
WIS - spell casting, perception, survival, saves, sometimes AC
CHA - spell casting, saves, all social skills

They all seem to be usefulto me

Additionally, I'm unlikely to be convinced that int, wis, and cha aren't poorly hodgepodged conceptually and in need of a rethink.

They've only worked for 30+ years, and I didn't see you make any actual suggestions on how to improve them, so I'm kind of missing the point of your post.

 

[OldSkoolRPG]

Way to miss the point, nearly every responder in this thread. What I was talking about was the design mantra behind the stats, and not the specific mechanics of them.

Sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that having stats that are overtly unequal in usefulness makes any sense whatsoeverI didn't really come here for your petty opinions you should just agree with mine. Additionally, I'm unlikely to be convinced that int, wis, and cha aren't poorly hodgepodged conceptually and in need of a rethink. I've already made up my mind and you aren't ever going to change it.

FIFY

 

[hejtmane]

Why is Initiative just dex which over values dex it should be based on the characters main stat to balance the initiative role just one mans opinion.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Why is Initiative just dex which over values dex it should be based on the characters main stat to balance the initiative role just one mans opinion.

Initiative is based of reaction time ability. Which is what dexterity covers. I wouldn't want it based off main stat or you'd end up with even more min/maxed PCs than you do now. IMO, I don't like it when every class looks exactly the same as every other same class, ability score wise. I find it metagamy and artificial. YMMV of course.

 

[hejtmane]

Initiative is based of reaction time ability. Which is what dexterity covers. I wouldn't want it based off main stat or you'd end up with even more min/maxed PCs than you do now. IMO, I don't like it when every class looks exactly the same as every other same class, ability score wise. I find it metagamy and artificial. YMMV of course.

This pretty much happens already

 

[OldSkoolRPG]

Why is Initiative just dex which over values dex it should be based on the characters main stat to balance the initiative role just one mans opinion.

I could see an argument for Wisdom possibly being a factor in initiative and possibly even Strength, though I feel that is a real stretch. But it doesn't make any sense to connect initiative with Constitution, Intelligence and Charisma in my opinion.