Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MuhVerisimilitude" data-source="post: 9317689" data-attributes="member: 7042567">We should get rid of all ability scores. Drop your pitchforks!A character should be defined by their class. Each class should have optional abilities you can pick that define things they are good at. The system should assume a baseline competence and then permit the players to boost themselves beyond the baseline as appropriate. There should also be something that it is assumed every instance of a class is good at. There is no Wizard that isn't good at spellcasting, there is no Fighter who cannot swing a weapon and take hits.Example 1: The strong fighter simply picks abilities that reflect having strength. You might grab a Heavy Lifter ability that lets you lift beyond what a common person can do.Example 2: The player who wants to play something that feels more like a tactical fighter picks less strength based stuff and more warlordy abilities.Example 3: Some guy might want to play a stupid wizard. They simply skip taking any lore related abilities so they obviously don't know much, but they are competent at spellcasting (because spellcasting is a default thing that wizards are good at regardless of whatever other choices they made)Example 4: A socially inept and clumsy bard is certainly possible. Just avoid picking things that enable that kind of play. The bard is defined by his ability to use bardic magic and play bardic instruments and sing, not by social competence.This means that you are now liberated from ability scores entirely. You don't need to consider things like how certain ability scores synergise with others, or how some ability scores are only useful for certain classes etc. etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MuhVerisimilitude, post: 9317689, member: 7042567"] We should get rid of all ability scores. Drop your pitchforks! A character should be defined by their class. Each class should have optional abilities you can pick that define things they are good at. The system should assume a baseline competence and then permit the players to boost themselves beyond the baseline as appropriate. There should also be something that it is assumed [B]every[/B] instance of a class is good at. There is no Wizard that isn't good at spellcasting, there is no Fighter who cannot swing a weapon and take hits. Example 1: The strong fighter simply picks abilities that reflect having strength. You might grab a Heavy Lifter ability that lets you lift beyond what a common person can do. Example 2: The player who wants to play something that feels more like a tactical fighter picks less strength based stuff and more warlordy abilities. Example 3: Some guy might want to play a stupid wizard. They simply skip taking any lore related abilities so they obviously don't [B]know[/B] much, but they are competent at spellcasting (because spellcasting is a default thing that wizards are good at [B]regardless of whatever other choices they made[/B]) Example 4: A socially inept and clumsy bard is certainly possible. Just avoid picking things that enable that kind of play. The bard is defined by his ability to use bardic magic and play bardic instruments and sing, not by social competence. This means that you are now liberated from ability scores entirely. You don't need to consider things like how certain ability scores synergise with others, or how some ability scores are only useful for certain classes etc. etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification