Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8011410" data-attributes="member: 6704184">The issue with the specific example was that high intelligence was too important to the concept to tank in order to have a decent wisdom or charisma, and Im not gonna “reflavor” a character as being good at what they aren’t good at. We don’t even use the MC stat restrictions.The easiest solution for that specific part of the larger issue is probably to let a character use a single stat for Spellcasting, let them choose their casting stat, and have it apply to everything spell related. Probably do the same for strength and Dex to attack.Had there been a good artificer when he was made, and we were using the above, he might have been a Battlesmith/Ranger or Battlesmith/Paladin, rather than a rogue/wizard. I’m pretty happy with the character, now, but he could have fit the concept even better with such a houserule, or soemthing else that solves the same issue.But more generally, the 6 ability scores end up constraining things a lot. Few strength Rogues because Rogues have no reason other than flavor to use strength and lose efficacy by making strength their main stat. That sucks. Barbarians can’t effectively use dex-main, and thus rarely are any good with a bow, which is weird.Making the scores into a resource pool could work, though you still need a basic math fix if you do that. Probably doable, just grouping weapons, skills, Spellcasting, HP, etc, into 3 groups and you pick which group is your +3, +2, or +1.It’s easy in my game, because I built it from the ground up to not have any static modifiers of any kind. (There are static numbers, like health and defense, but even health might be replaced with a damage threshold and a condition/wouand track, and you never add a static number to a roll) D&D is primarily based on adding static numbers to dice rolls, so more care is required.</blockquote>

Verification