Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KidSnide" data-source="post: 5724644" data-attributes="member: 54710">I tend to think that stat-based bonuses are problematic because of how they distort the ability allocation.  The to-hit bonus is so important that there are very few instances where an optimized character doesn't want to maximize that bonus at the cost of whatever other benefits are available.  I think good game design should allow for interesting decisions.  If maximizing your primary stat is almost always the optimal decision, then you have an underdeveloped aspect of the game.  Of course, I think fighters should be able to benefit significantly from a high strength (to pick one example), but I don't think the benefits of a high strength should dominate fighter builds (at least, non-slayer builds) quite so thoroughly.Stat-based to hit bonuses are also the bane of V-shaped classes.  There's nothing wrong with the idea that there are two types of paladins who have different personal characteristics (Str vs. Cha) and that affects the sorts of powers they want to use.  But the to-hit issue is so important that Paladins effectively turn into two sub-classes that share the same utility powers.  This is also true of classes that aren't V-shaped, but maybe would be if not for this issue.  I love the idea of ranged-warlords, but it's completely bizarre that they use their Strength for bow attacks.  What?-KS</blockquote>