D&D 5E Where's the Dump?

[DND_Reborn]

Oh, definitely. Ideally, a 16 Str, 10 Dex, 14 Con fighter is equally compelling as a 10 Str, 14 Dex, 16 Con fighter. And I mean compelling for me as an optimizer, not compelling in the "Oh, I can make an interesting character with these terrible stats" way.

I was thinking more something like 16/12/12 vs. 12/16/12 vs. 12/12/16. Maybe make one 12 a 14?

If you had each two-stat combination represented, that would be 15 classes, with each stat present in 5 classes. That's not bad.

True, but then you have even less variation IMO because each class focuses on two scores instead of 3.

This is my argument for why ASI's should be tied to Background, and not Race.

I've always liked having Background add more, too.

 

[Hussar]

No specific dump stat. The low stats usually come directly out of the class someone is playing, as each one has a usual triumvirate of ability scores they focus on. The Fighters take STR, CON & WIS and will dump any of the other three... the Warlocks usually take CHA, DEX & CON and will dump any of the other three... the Monks will take DEX, WIS & CON and dump any of the other three, the Paladins take STR, CHA & CON and dump one of the other three etc.

I have never once had that theoretical table that some others always go on about where every single character is DEX-based and dump STR and INT, because DEX is the so-called "uber-stat". I've always found those complaints completely overblown because there's always at least one player at my table that is going to go STR-based and tank or INT-based and cast, because those character archetypes are fun.

raises hand

Strength, IME, is by far the biggest dump stat. Heck, in my current campaign, there was a section where the party had to dig their way through a rock fall. In the module it limited attempts to those with a 10 Str or higher. Only 3 of the six characters in the party could even try to shift the rocks. In the first 5e party I ran, none of the group could shift the rocks. Six characters, none with a strength higher than 8.

Now, while the response numbers in the poll are still early days yet, there is a very, very clear couple of winners here. So, perhaps blowing off the complaints as "overblown" might be a bit dismissive of an actual issue.

 

[DND_Reborn]

HP is overrated.

Brave you are, oh dumper of CON!

 

[Hussar]

Maybe D&D shouldn't have abilities at all anymore. They no longer serve a non-mechanical purpose, so maybe they should just be built into the math.

Hang on, didn't you JUST jump all over me for saying exactly this recently? Told me how ridiculous it was? Or are you being sarcastic here? Hard to tell tone over the Internet.

 

[DEFCON 1]

raises hand
So, perhaps blowing off the complaints as "overblown" might be a bit dismissive of an actual issue.

Yeah... the issue seems to be that party of 6 characters of yours all seemed more concerned about maximizing their own personal optimization than thinking about the kind of stuff they might have to do as a group. LOL. Hopefully your rock fall check showed them the error of their ways, heh heh!

 

[TwoSix]

I was thinking more something like 16/12/12 vs. 12/16/12 vs. 12/12/16. Maybe make one 12 a 14?

Fine with that also. To me, the ideal end point would be something like "Oh, I ended up with 10 Wis because of rolls/choice/whatever. Cleric is the WIS/CON/CHA class, so I can still make a good cleric with my 10 Wis because I have a 14 Con and a 16 Cha."

True, but then you have even less variation IMO because each class focuses on two scores instead of 3.

True, just coming up with 20 classes that can support three different stats and make sense starts to slice the apple a little thin. 15 classes is a little easier.

 

[Seramus]

Str.

I just can't dump Int. I have too many ideas at the table. Not that you need high Int to have ideas, but it helps to justify them!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Many people have argued this, but for D&D it never seems to gain any ground.


Yeah, there is only (maybe) a few times where the actual scores serve a purpose.

So, are you advocating for only the modifiers, or no abilities at all? It sounds like no abilities at all. The only issue I would have with that is you would lose some of the appeal of things like a smart fighter or strong wizard, etc.

If you removed them, how would you build them into the math without making it too generic??

The funny thing is, I wish ability scores mattered more. But they dont, and I think its clear WotC doesnt want them to. They might as well excuse them altogether if they're going to continue down this path.

Doesn't really matter to me, as I have all I need from them, and 3rd party products (Level Up, for example) are out there that do what I want.

 

[DND_Reborn]

so I can still make a good cleric with my 10 Wis because I have a 14 Con and a 16 Cha

A "good" cleric with a WIS 10, but maybe not a great one?

True, just coming up with 20 classes that can support three different stats and make sense starts to slice the apple a little thin. 15 classes is a little easier.

Sure, two scores is easier than three, no doubt.

Maybe something like this:

Each physical attribute is used 4 times, and each mental one is used 4 times.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Hang on, didn't you JUST jump all over me for saying exactly this recently? Told me how ridiculous it was? Or are you being sarcastic here? Hard to tell tone over the Internet.

I want ability scores to mean more, and be a better simulator. They used to be more representative, and that was what was intended when they were created. But they mean less every edition, and WotC clearly likes it that way. I'm getting tired of fighting the wind, especially when I have material right now and upcoming from 3rd party publishers that does what I want. If that's how it's going to be, just go whole hog and take them out. I already have what I need from WotC anyway.