New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 67
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    Is there something I'm missing that would be grossly overpowered with that change?
    I don't know about overpowered (since I've seen wizards with a random 14-16 str before and it didn't make them a melee powerhouse), but what happens to the non-gish wizard that previously had a decent Dex for defense? Do they now have a decent Physique (and, if so, what differentiates them from the gish)? From the standpoint of using attributes to capture thematic differences in the character you are playing, I think this reduces the granularity.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    Again, why would EVERY very nimble waif have this mysterious reserve of strength they suddenly call upon to lift the 1000 lb. door (or whatever), but couldn't before, while the clumsy waifs don't have this ability?
    I can think of several explanations. I believe the easiest one is "she could do it before, she just didn't know it, having never tried; after all, she had a pretty developed musculature, being able to do back flips and all that sort of things. Add to that the adrenaline of the moment, and it's perfectly understandable".

    The capacity to lift heavy objects or wield a two-handed sword as well as you do a dagger - better, even, since the unified stat means the bigger damage die is probably better unless you've got a LOT going for making that dagger amazing - is there if you've got unified Str and Dex, and "role playing" that you don't have it means, no, you don't "adrenaline surge" to massive strength in those clutch moments, but rather that you pretend you fail on checks you should be succeeding.
    Well, regardless, if they're trying the checks, they are going to succeed at them.



    "The strong guy" and "the nimble guy" are two distinct archetypes
    Agreed


    and need distinct mechanics to represent them
    This is the point of this thought experiment. To check whether this is true; or, to be more precise, whether they can be represented by other mechanics than the ability score. Perhaps you can just represent them by giving the "strong guy" Athletics, Heavy Armor, and a Maul and the "nimble guy" Acrobatics, Light Armor and a Rapier? Just not having proficiency in Athletics (if you want your character to be more nimble than strong) will go a long way.

    "Role playing" that you don't have the mechanical abilities your sheet says you do is akin to deciding that, no, your warlock doesn't recover spells on a short rest because his patron is stingy. You can do it, but your really RPing a delusional character who thinks they lack an ability they have. Or you're otherwise ignoring or breaking the rules. Doing so "for RP" to make yourself weaker is not much better than doing so "for RP" to make yourself stronger. I'm sure some DMs and tables will be okay with it, just as some are okay with breaking the rules "for RP" even if it makes you stronger in clutch situations, but if you're having to effectively house rule a weakness into your character because of a proposed change, that proposed change might be the problem.
    I don't know about your sheets, but I believe the official sheets don't even have a "maximum encumbrance" field.

    And I think it's pretty bad form to tell other players what their characters can do (unless they are newbies, and even then it'd be polite to wait for them to ask for your help). Specially if, the way a character is described, the other characters would have no idea that she's actually capable of doing that stuff.
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 11:35 AM.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    I can think of several explanations. I believe the easiest one is "she could do it before, she just didn't know it, having never tried; after all, she had a pretty developed musculature, being able to do back flips and all that sort of things. Add to that the adrenaline of the moment, and it's perfectly understandable".
    Sure. For some. But all?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    Well, regardless, if they're trying the checks, they are going to succeed at them.
    And that's the problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    This is the point of this thought experiment. To check whether this is true; or, to be more precise, whether they can be represented by other mechanics than the ability score. Perhaps you can just represent them by giving the "strong guy" Athletics, Heavy Armor, and a Maul and the "nimble guy" Acrobatics, Light Armor and a Rapier? Just not having proficiency in Athletics (if you want your character to be more nimble than strong) will go a long way.
    Technically, you could remove ability scores entirely and use other mechanics to represent what they do. Ability scores do two major things: 1) They provide an insight into The Character in terms of what their raw capabilities are, independent of personality or specialized training or unique skills. Whether this is valuable or not is an open question, I think. 2) They provide a fallback/default place to look to answer the question, "Can you do X?" when there isn't a feat, feature, or spell that definitively says you can. They provide a varied base for resolution of capability that is lost if you have only a level-based bonus (or no bonus at all and just roll a die/flip a coin).

    I think (2) is too valuable to give up by getting rid of attributes entirely. I think we should be very cautious about merging or adding attributes unless you have a statement about the game and people in it you want to make. L5R uses its "rings" and their associated mental and physical attributes to make a statement about the metaphysics of the setting. White Wolf wanted more granularity, and eventually codified 3 attributes per major category of physical, social, and mental (though they didn't do the best job, in my mind, with social, since whether Charisma or Manipulation is called for is entirely in the stunt you pull to do the action, which isn't a good delineation in my mind). BESM went for 3 stats, Body/Mind/Soul, and then notably has defects for Body that let you split out being weaker at strength based stuff or dex based stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    I don't know about your sheets, but I believe the official sheets don't even have a "maximum encumbrance" field.
    No, but they have a space for "Strength" and the rules for how much you can carry are in the PHB, and are based on STrength. Merge Str and Dex and now you have anybody who is agile being able to carry a lot of weight.

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    And I think it's pretty bad form to tell other players what their characters can do (unless they are newbies, and even then it'd be polite to wait for them to ask for your help). Specially if, the way a character is described, the other characters would have no idea that she's actually capable of doing that stuff.
    Perhaps not, but it is also rude to deliberately make a character that holds back the party.

    It's one thing if you're trading off things, but if all you're doing is deciding, "Nah, my PC failed that save vs. being used against the party despite having a bonus that actually would mean the d20 roll succeeded," is kind-of rude, too.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post




    No, but they have a space for "Strength" and the rules for how much you can carry are in the PHB, and are based on STrength. Merge Str and Dex and now you have anybody who is agile being able to carry a lot of weight.
    If that's the main problem that this rule would bring, I don't think it's a big deal. It's definitely not more of a big deal than small characters having the same carrying capacity as medium characters, or, for that matter, most small races not having a Str cap. Personally I think it's just weird to accept one but draw a line at the other.
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 12:14 PM.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    If that's the main problem that this rule would bring, I don't think it's a big deal. It's definitely not more of a big deal than small characters having the same carrying capacity as medium characters. Personally I think it's just weird to accept one but draw a line at the other.
    Small characters have halved carrying capacity, IIRC.

    And it's not the only problem. It's just the most obvious one. "I'm an agile waif, so I can't wield this greatsword that there's actually no reason I can't wield, and, in fact, if I do wield it, I do just as well as the strongman, who also does just as well with my light throwing daggers as I do," is the bigger one. You're reducing the archetypes available, and forcing mergers of them, and then telling players, "Well, if you want an archetype I have force-fed into another archetype, just pretend you're not good at things you are objectively good at."
    Last edited by Segev; 2022-08-10 at 12:17 PM. Reason: Better phrasing to make my point

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    Small characters have halved carrying capacity, IIRC.
    You're mistaken. They can't grapple Large creatures, and have disadvantage with Heavy weapons, but in other regards a 20Str Halfling is just the same as a 20Str Human, including even how far they can jump, which is absolutely hilarious once you visualize it.

    And it's not the only problem. It's just the most obvious one. "I'm an agile waif, so I can't wield this greatsword that there's actually no reason I can't wield, and, in fact, if I do wield it, I do just as well as the strongman, who also does just as well with my light throwing daggers as I do," is the bigger one.
    Strong men can throw or wield daggers as well as nimble waifs already; they can't fire a long bow as well, though (and that's an almost universally recognized problem, which this suggestion would solve).

    You're reducing the archetypes available, and forcing mergers of them, and then telling players, "Well, if you want an archetype I have force-fed into another archetype, just pretend you're not good at things you are objectively good at."
    I'm not reducing archetypes, I'm using different mechanics to express them (while simultaneously enablingarchetypes, like the traditional Action Hero, that current mechanics are simply not very good at implementing); and I'd put the last sentence as "just don't do things that you think your character wouldn't do", which is what I'd say for pretty much any character decision, actually. Whether they'd be good at doing what they don't do is not that important if they don't actually do it.

    The big two-handed weapons are not even that good without GWM, Rapier+Duelling+Shield is probably better overall. So there are perfectly valid mechanical reasons why your "nimble waif" character is not attacking with a Maul, it's not like you're crippling your character when you do so. And a Feat is a considerable opportunity cost, so there are very good reasons not to take any feat that you think doesn't fit your character well.
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 12:37 PM.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    I'm not reducing archetypes, I'm using different mechanics to express them; and I'd put the last sentence as "just don't do things that you think your character wouldn't do", which is what I'd say for pretty much any character decision, actually. Whether they'd be good at doing what they don't do is not that important if they don't actually do it.
    In response to the bold... You are. Pretty much everyone in this thread is explaining how what you're doing reduces it, and you're just insisting without counterarguments that they're wrong.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    In response to the bold... You are. Pretty much everyone in this thread is explaining how what you're doing reduces it, and you're just insisting without counterarguments that they're wrong.
    Because people in this thread are not engaging with my point. Say I want to play a nimble waif. I use leather armor, a Rapier, get proficiency in Acrobatics, Stealth and Sleight of Hand (but not Athletics), and go around trying to do Acrobatic stunts. I choose feats that enhance that archetype. I play a Rogue Swashbuckler. How is it that my character is NOT a nimble waif? Because I could carry a lot of stuff (even if I don't)?
    With the same argument, you could claim I cannot believably play a small character with high Str, because it's unbelievable that a 3' guy that weighs 40 pounds can carry around, tirelessly, 300 pounds, and it's absolutely ridiculous that he can jump for 20'. If you can believe that, you can believe that a "nimble waif" (who, remember, has actually a well developed musculature, whatever her Str score, or she wouldn't be able to do stuff that she already does in the game as it is now) can carry more stuff than she gives herself credit for.

    Or what if I want to make a hulking giant? I use Plate Mail, carry a Maul, get proficiency in Athletics (but not Stealth or Acrobatics) and go around making a lot of noise. I get the GWM feat. I choose the Fighter Rune Knight class. I choose an Orc as my race. How is it that I'm not a hulking giant? Because I can competently fire a bow with which I've been trained (which I should be able to, anyhow)?

    So, what, exactly, is the archetype that I'm losing?
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 12:52 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    In response to the bold... You are. Pretty much everyone in this thread is explaining how what you're doing reduces it, and you're just insisting without counterarguments that they're wrong.
    Agreed. Some people want to be Guts, some people want to be Serpico. You might be able to be Guts while being a master of stealth and thievery, but you really can't be Serpico and be this yolked-out chad who breaks down doors with his fists.
    Make Martials Cool Again.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    Because people in this thread are not engaging with my point. Say I want to play a nimble waif. I use leather armor, a Rapier, get proficiency in Acrobatics, Stealth and Sleight of Hand (but not Athletics), and go around trying to do Acrobatic stunts. I choose feats that enhance that archetype. I play a Rogue Swashbuckler. How is it that my character is NOT a nimble waif? Because I could carry a lot of stuff (even if I don't)?
    With the same argument, you could claim I cannot believably play a small character with high Str, because it's unbelievable that a 3' guy that weighs 40 pounds can carry around, tirelessly, 300 pounds, and it's absolutely ridiculous that he can jump for 20'. If you can believe that, you can believe that a "nimble waif" (who, remember, has actually a well developed musculature, whatever her Str score, or she wouldn't be able to do stuff that she already does in the game as it is now) can carry more stuff than she gives herself credit for.

    Or what if I want to make a hulking giant? I use Plate Mail, carry a Maul, get proficiency in Athletics (but not Stealth or Acrobatics) and go around making a lot of noise. I get the GWM feat. I choose the Fighter Rune Knight class. I choose an Orc as my race. How is it that I'm not a hulking giant? Because I can competently fire a bow with which I've been trained (which I should be able to, anyhow)?

    So, what, exactly, is the archetype that I'm losing?
    Because the nimble waif can still carry 300 pounds of gear without breaking a sweat, and manage 600 pounds with difficulty.
    A strong but small PC is superheroic in their realm of expertise. No, it doesn't make sense from a realism point of view, but it fits the fantasy.

    When the rules explicitly say "You can do X," and you just choose not to, it's at a bare minimum inelegant. And honestly, to me? It's bad, generally speaking. Not always, but usually.

    Spoiler: An Exception I Can Think Of
    Show
    Country Bumpkin Cleric.

    Wisdom 20, and so +5 to Insight. No proficiency, because they're a bit naïve, but they've got the raw stats. When the party visits a city, they choose to roll with disadvantage or just outright say "I rolled a 1" without actually rolling when falling for tourist traps.

    The reason I'm okay with this? Couple of points, but mainly that this is probably fun for the table. If it's not, then it's worth talking to the player OOC about it, but most tables I've been it will find it funny, believable, and enjoyable.

    Notably, this is not a life or death scenario.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    Because the nimble waif can still carry 300 pounds of gear without breaking a sweat, and manage 600 pounds with difficulty.
    A strong but small PC is superheroic in their realm of expertise. No, it doesn't make sense from a realism point of view, but it fits the fantasy.

    When the rules explicitly say "You can do X," and you just choose not to, it's at a bare minimum inelegant. And honestly, to me? It's bad, generally speaking. Not always, but usually.

    Spoiler: An Exception I Can Think Of
    Show
    Country Bumpkin Cleric.

    Wisdom 20, and so +5 to Insight. No proficiency, because they're a bit naïve, but they've got the raw stats. When the party visits a city, they choose to roll with disadvantage or just outright say "I rolled a 1" without actually rolling when falling for tourist traps.

    The reason I'm okay with this? Couple of points, but mainly that this is probably fun for the table. If it's not, then it's worth talking to the player OOC about it, but most tables I've been it will find it funny, believable, and enjoyable.

    Notably, this is not a life or death scenario.
    As far as I'm aware, most PCs don't go around carrying their maximum capacity (assuming their DM cares in the first place), even if they can¹. They actually don't do a lot of things that they could do, as a matter of fact (and so does everyone, all the time).

    But what if it's a life-or-death situation? Then, if you want, you can choose to let your Waif try to do it (she will probably suceed), and it's trivial to explain that in-game, since it's a life-or-death situation, specially once you remember that, having what would be in the original rules a high Dex, she's already somewhat fit.


    1-IIRC, in BECMI (which did care a lot about it), all characters had the same carrying capacity, regardless of their strength. I honestly don't think 5e would change at all if that was the rule
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 01:14 PM.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Let's put it this way. You claim you're not reducing archetypes. Okay.

    I create a class that gets full casting, knows every spell printed, had Extra Attack and additional Extra Attacks at every level the Fighter gets them, gets Fighter ASIs, and gets one subclass from every class in the game.

    You can, of course, choose not to use most of those features! You can play your "I only wield arcane magic from the wizard list out of my spellbook" wizard despite being of this class! But all the options are still there, if ever you choose to take them, and refusing to use them is your character in character choosing not to do things he's perfectly capable of doing.

    As opposed to your character actually only having the powers of a wizard.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    Because people in this thread are not engaging with my point. Say I want to play a nimble waif. I use leather armor, a Rapier, get proficiency in Acrobatics, Stealth and Sleight of Hand (but not Athletics), and go around trying to do Acrobatic stunts. I choose feats that enhance that archetype. I play a Rogue Swashbuckler. How is it that my character is NOT a nimble waif? Because I could carry a lot of stuff (even if I don't)?
    Say I want to play a nimble waif. I use leather armor, a Rapier, get proficiency in Acrobatics, Stealth and Sleight of Hand (but not Athletics), and go around trying to do Acrobatic stunts. I choose feats that enhance that archetype. I play a Rogue Swashbuckler. And every time I make a Physique(Strength) check I reinvent the Strength attribute by applying a ad-hoc penalty to my Physique check to fix it being too high for the characterization of my nimble waif character?

    How is it that my character is NOT a nimble waif using the Physique attribute? Because I had to reinvent the Strength attribute to fix the thematics. Physique gets 0 credit for characters that result in me reinventing Str/Dex.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2022-08-10 at 03:07 PM.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Say I want to play a nimble waif. I use leather armor, a Rapier, get proficiency in Acrobatics, Stealth and Sleight of Hand (but not Athletics), and go around trying to do Acrobatic stunts. I choose feats that enhance that archetype. I play a Rogue Swashbuckler. And every time I make a Physique(Strength) check I reinvent the Strength attribute by applying a ad-hoc penalty to my Physique check to fix it being too high for the characterization of my nimble waif character?

    How is it that my character is NOT a nimble waif using the Physique attribute? Because I had to reinvent the Strength attribute to fix the thematics. Physique gets 0 credit for characters that result in me reinventing Str/Dex.

    No. You just roll the check as is, no penalty necessary (as that would indeed defeat the whole purpose), and try to come up with a description that fits what you picture for your character. Houdini was not particularly strong, but he could still escape bonds quite well (to use an example of a mechanic that's usually done with Str).
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 03:12 PM.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    No. You just roll the check as is, no penalty necessary (as that would indeed defeat the whole purpose), and try to come up with a description that fits what you picture for your character. Houdini was not particularly strong, but he could still escape bonds quite well (to use an example of a mechanic that's usually done with Str).
    That does not work. If I roll the check as is, the result will be higher than fits my character. Either you are removing my character by forcing them to pass a check they should fail OR I am reinventing Str/Dex in order to have the mechanics of the check accurately reflect my nimble waif.


    It is okay to admit that merging Str/Dex means not being allowed to have characters with mechanical differences between Str/Dex unless they undo the merge by reinventing Str/Dex.

    There are pros and cons to merging/splitting attributes. We can recognize both.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2022-08-10 at 03:37 PM.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    That does not work. If I roll the check as is, the result will be higher than fits my character. Either you are removing my character by forcing them to pass a check they should fail OR I am reinventing Str/Dex in order to have the mechanics of the check accurately reflect my nimble waif.


    It is okay to admit that merging Str/Dex means not being allowed to have characters with mechanical differences between Str/Dex unless they undo the merge by reinventing Str/Dex.

    There are pros and cons to merging/splitting attributes. We can recognize both.
    Which is why Houdini couldn't escape bonds; see, he wasn't buff enough. I guess the magic was making everyone believe that he could escape the bonds, when in fact he drowned to death every time he pulled his stunts. Quite a powerful illusionist indeed!
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 03:40 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    Which is why Houdini couldn't escape bonds; see, he wasn't buff enough. I guess the magic was making everyone believe that he could escape the bonds, when in fact he drowned to death every time he pulled his stunts. Quite a powerful illusionist indeed!
    We are not talking about Houdini. We are talking about my nimble waif making a physique check they should fail but you want to force them to pass.

    The lumbering giant walking across a narrow ledge but falls off and has to catch themselves.
    The nimble waif that is knocked down by a rampaging bull.

    Our character's ability to fail at what they are not good at is as important as their ability to succeed at what they are good at. In order to play these characters the player would have to penalize the thematically inappropriate checks to fix the mechanical disparity between character concept and merged Physique attribute. However doing so is reinventing Str/Dex, so the real question is Physique XOR these characters.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2022-08-10 at 04:20 PM.

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    We are not talking about Houdini. We are talking about my nimble waif making a physique check they should fail but you want to force them to pass.

    The lumbering giant walking across a narrow ledge but falls off and has to catch themselves.
    The nimble waif that is knocked down by a rampaging bull.

    Our character's ability to fail at what they are not good at is as important as their ability to succeed at what they are good at.
    And I'm talking about how, in most cases, you can describe it in a way that fits how you envision your character. Your nimble waif was knocked down by the raging bull (assuming what you're describing is a successfull hit from a Bull and then a successful str save against being knocked prone from the waif), but just jumped up from the floor immediately, because she's just that nimble, and has almost supernatural core strength. The result is the exact same as the hulk withstanding the bull with sheer strength,(I.e, they are both not prone) but the description is different.

    By the way: one of the design goals of this change would be to give a relative buff to martials (because they have a greater incentive to pump either Str or Dex). Pointing out: "this makes a martial succeed in some situations he'd have failed otherwise" is the change working as intended.
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 04:26 PM.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    And I'm talking about how, in most cases, you can describe it in a way that fits how you envision your character. Your nimble waif was knocked down by the raging bull (assuming what you're describing is a successfull hit from a Bull and then a successful str save against being knocked prone from the waif), but just jumped up from the floor immediately, because she's just that nimble, and has almost supernatural core strength. The result is the exact same as the hulk withstanding the bull with sheer strength,(I.e, they are both not prone) but the description is different.

    By the way: one of the design goals of this change would be to give a relative buff to martials (because they have a greater incentive to pump either Str or Dex). Pointing out: "this makes a martial succeed in some situations he'd have failed otherwise" is the change working as intended.
    But I am talking about the other cases. There are cases where you are making a check the character is not meant to be good at and then should be able to fail. That nimble waif failed the opposed Strength check and was trampled against the cobblestones. They did not suddenly leap back up to their feet because "being nimble means never failing a strength check".

    I am also talking about characterization. You decided my nimble waif had "almost supernatural core strength" despite that being false. Your nimble waif might have supernatural core strength. Mine doesn't. Mine has below average core strength but above average flexibility and precision.

    Your nimble waif passes all their strength checks because they make none. Even if you can't imagine how this strength check could be replaced by something in character, you will go along with the assumption that somehow it worked. My nimble waif passes some strength checks and fails others. Sometimes they don't get to ignore their lower strength and they feel the impact of that characterization.

    If you merge Strength and Dexterity into Physique you delete my nimble waif. There are pros and cons to that, but your nimble waif is not the same as mine. Seeing the difference will help understand the cons of the merger and thus help accurately evaluate if this change is a good idea. (I think you are well aware of the pros already )
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2022-08-10 at 05:12 PM.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    It's interesting how the argument in the thread went from "it's not nice to your group to not attempt something that your character is perfectly capable of doing because RP" to "I want my character to fail at things"

    I don't know about you, but I want my character to succed at everything she tries. Sure, many times she won't (even if she gets to add her Physique stat to a particular roll, so I don't know what you mean by "passes all Str checks". Even a raging Barbarian fails Str checks every now and then), but I won't be sad and think "succeeding on this roll goes against how I envision my character, because she'd have failed that roll if Dex and Str were still split". I'll just be happy that she succeeded at the roll, and come up with an explanation for it that fits my character.

    This is even more true of a game like D&D, with its notoriously fickle D20, where a 20 Str Barbarian can fail to break open a door only to have the 8 Str Wizard suceed.

    I'd also say that your nimble waif wirh below average core strength probably shouldn't have a very high dex. Maybe a 14, if she's in fact exceptional in hand-eye coordination and flexibility? But that would start a whole new rabbit hole. .. anyhow, though "nimble waif" is a somewhat common archetype, I don't think "nimble waif with low core strength but still a very high Dex score" is that common of an archetype.
    Last edited by diplomancer; 2022-08-10 at 05:46 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    It's interesting how the argument in the thread went from "it's not nice to your group to not attempt something that your character is perfectly capable of doing because RP" to "I want my character to fail at things"
    It is the same elephant. We are just describing different aspects.

    It is a low Str high Dex converted into a high Physique character. Now it magically has inappropriately high Str and passes checks it should have failed, or it passes all Str checks because it never rolls any Str checks (see next quote), or it reinvents Str/Dex by applying ad-hoc penalties to restore the thematic. A catch-22 between those 3 options.

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    so I don't know what you mean by "passes all Str checks"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truth
    If a character never rolls any Str checks, then they pass all their Str checks.

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    I don't know about you, but I want my character to succeed at everything she tries.
    I would rather play the character than have them succeed. Part of the character are their flaws and weaknesses. The areas they are not as good. They will generally try things they are good at, but sometimes their weaknesses are challenged despite their efforts and intentions. (like if they tried to shoot the bull and the bull decided to introduce the waif to the road)

    If you merge Str and Dex I can't play a low Str high Dex character. Either their Str never comes up (n/a Str high Dex), or when it comes up, it reveals the character is actually a high Str character (high Str high Dex).



    PS: RE core strength:
    Dexterity is already a large umbrella but core strength sounds like ave-mid Strength or ave Con to me depending on what you mean. Maybe that was a miscommunication between us. However it is irrelevant.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2022-08-10 at 06:24 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    It's interesting how the argument in the thread went from "it's not nice to your group to not attempt something that your character is perfectly capable of doing because RP" to "I want my character to fail at things"
    This is because you refuse to acknowledge that without mechanics to back it up, your RP means virtually nothing. Its why changing a Fireball from a ball of fire to fireworks is perfectly fine, cause nothing mechanical about Fireball is changing. In this case, you're attempting to use RP to back up the idea your character is bad at Strength or Dexterity when the mechanics of your idea show the exact opposite. This utterly fails because the mechanics you came up with state you're just as good at Dex checks as you are Str checks, because they have the share the same score. It doesn't matter how much you RP or flavor it, you're still just as good Strength checks as you are Dexterity checks and vice versa.


    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    I don't know about you, but I want my character to succed at everything she tries. Sure, many times she won't (even if she gets to add her Physique stat to a particular roll, so I don't know what you mean by "passes all Str checks". Even a raging Barbarian fails Str checks every now and then), but I won't be sad and think "succeeding on this roll goes against how I envision my character, because she'd have failed that roll if Dex and Str were still split". I'll just be happy that she succeeded at the roll, and come up with an explanation for it that fits my character.
    So, people do want their characters to succeed, but they also want a clear differentiation between the two. A Fighter with 20 Dexterity plays very differently from a Fighter with 20 Strength. One is likely wearing Heavy Armor and charging in with a Greatsword, the other is likely wearing Light Armor and standing in the back firing an arrow. We don't want the Fighter with 20 Dexterity to suddenly pick up a Greatsword and Heavy Armor and be just as effective as the Fighter with 20 Strength. Because at that point there's no real way to differentiate between the two.

    And while you can claim "But you can choose not to do that" or "you can RP that you don't do that" all you like, the fact of the matter is that a single physical stat would have that be the norm, and anyone who doesn't carry a Longbow and either a Greatsword or Longsword and Shield will be purposefully weakening themselves for no reason what so ever.


    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    This is even more true of a game like D&D, with its notoriously fickle D20, where a 20 Str Barbarian can fail to break open a door only to have the 8 Str Wizard suceed.
    This...doesn't actually happen as often as you might think. It can happen occasionally, but even then, its a very rare case.


    Quote Originally Posted by diplomancer View Post
    I'd also say that your nimble waif wirh below average core strength probably shouldn't have a very high dex. Maybe a 14, if she's in fact exceptional in hand-eye coordination and flexibility? But that would start a whole new rabbit hole. .. anyhow, though "nimble waif" is a somewhat common archetype, I don't think "nimble waif with low core strength but still a very high Dex score" is that common of an archetype.
    See, here's the thing, core strength doesn't actually exist all that well in DnD. Its why you can have a character with 8 Strength, 20 Dexterity, and 16 Constitution be perfectly fine. Or you can have 20 Strength, 8 Dexterity, and 16 Constition and still be perfectly fine. While it may not be a common archtype outside of DnD, whichI am not sure that's true, it is very much a common archtype in DnD.

    Actually, a good example from movies for someone who's extremely nimble but lacks strength is Inigo Montoya from Princess Bride. Throughout the movie Inigo is shown to be extremely nimble, highly skilled with a blade, but he never has any great shows of physical strength, like what you'd see from a high strength score. He's pretty good at acrobatics, as shown in his fight with The Dread Pirate Roberts, and has a high Constitution, as shown when he gets stabbed multiple times, but he's never shown to have high physical strength. Meanwhile Fezzik is the exact opposite, extremely strong and capable of great feats of strength, but lacks the dexterity Inigo has.
    Never let the fluff of a class define the personality of a character. Let Clerics be Atheist, let Barbarians be cowardly or calm, let Druids hate nature, and let Wizards know nothing about the arcane

    Fun Fact: A monk in armor loses Martial Arts, Unarmored Defense, and Unarmored Movement, but keep all of their other abilities, including subclass features, and Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks. Make a Monk in Fullplate with a Greatsword >=D


  23. - Top - End - #53
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Australia

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    I remain unconvinced that this is a good change.

    I don't think you can really RP your way out of it either.

    My big slow half-orc is still going to make his Physique saves and the midgy halfling is still going to pass Strength saves to avoid being stuck in glue...

    I think it also misunderstands what the issue is. It is not that Strength isn't good, it is that having a low strength isn't really punishing unless you actually need it (Fighter/Barb etc). Having a low strength on a Wizard should have a downside other than "need more bags of holding".

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    I suppose in this system, Inigo the player is only choosing to be quick. Fezzig's player is only choosing to be slow.

    Of course, either can always have "adrenaline" active at all times and actually be as strong and quick as they want? So what really is the point?

    Why not just have a lower strength (or Dex) then? I think there are better ways to solve whatever problem you are trying to solve.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Then you could just take it further and have Physical, Mental and Social stat and everyone would be happy.

    Then we can simplify skills as well

    Know stuff
    Observe stuff
    Talk to stuff
    Thiefing stuff
    Do stuff
    Heal stuff

    and then we can simplefy combat as well

    Hit stuff with magic that does 1d6 dmg that increses every odd level
    Hit stuff not with magic that does 1d6 dmg that increases every odd level

    simplify restistances as well
    Resistance to magic stuff
    Resistance to not magic stuff
    Last edited by RazorChain; 2022-08-13 at 12:11 PM.
    Optimizing vs Roleplay
    If the worlds greatest optimizer makes a character and hands it to the worlds greatest roleplayer who roleplays the character. What will happen? Will the Universe implode?

    Roleplaying vs Fun
    If roleplaying is no fun then stop doing it. Unless of course you are roleplaying at gunpoint then you should roleplay like your life depended on it.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorChain View Post
    Then you could just take it further and have Physical, Mental and Social stat and everyone would be happy.

    Then we can simplify skills as well

    Know stuff
    Observe stuff
    Talk to stuff
    Thiefing stuff
    Do stuff
    Heal stuff
    I'd go with:

    • Memory
    • Noticing
    • Conversation
    • Clandestine
    • Making


    Healing stuff would be Mental(making) or Mental(Noticing), for bandaging / treatment and for diagnosis, respectively.

    Thieving stuff would usually be Physical(Clandestine). Bard stuff would usually be Social(Conversation) or Social(Clandestine), depending on whether they're just persuading or they're lying and deceiving.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Troll in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    As a thought exercise. Why have ability scores at all?

    Just have one score called "stat" that governs everything. You can rp however you like, do whatever you like, but all creatures are equally good at everything. A trex is strong, and nimble, and intelligent.

    From a simulation perspective, something is lost here. From an archetype perspective, a lot is lost here.

    You could get rid of ability scores entirely if you change the math of proficiency, but simply combining two scores doesn't achieve anything.
    Make Martials Cool Again.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    I'd rather merge Str and Con TBH.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ortho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    Ah, yes, because as we all know, Black Widow and the Hulk are actually the exact same build!

    In all seriousness, I fail to see how homogenizing martial characters is going to benefit anyone.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wyoming
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: One stat to rule them all, or what if we merged Dex and Str?

    I've played through a variety of different RPGs, and Strength and Agility almost always remain independent short of ultra-minimalist games that have 1 stat for everything physical and 1 stat for everything mental. Those games usually reinforce concepts with skills, ie: lifting and tumbling are different skills, so the "buff" characters have more "strong-man" skills and the "agile" characters have more dexterity-related skills.

    5E doesn't have enough skills to do the latter. But D&D has never really had enough skills per stat to truly bring a character to life based solely on their skill selection.

    Which is part of the problem with some stats and not with others. They have fairly low representation in the game. Dex has fairly high representation in the game. It has a couple skills, it covers a couple tools, it applies to some important secondary stats, it covers a couple modes of combat.

    Strength...does not. It covers a couple modes of combat (default hitting and grappling), a one skill (although optionally any skill in 5E can be paired up with any stat if the DM chooses), lifting/carrying capacity (arguably something that doesn't come up in play often) and a couple tools (though again, tools don't necessarily have a default associated stat).

    Con has a similar problem. It doesn't cover any modes of combat. It has no skills (although the DM may call for Con checks in certain situations). It doesn't really have any tools*. It helps HP.

    Int is well represented in skills, with 5 of them, covers a mode of combat (spellcasting), covers some tools*,.
    Wis is well represented in skills, with 5 of them, covers a mode of combat (spellcasting) and again, covers some tools*.
    Cha, again, is well represented in skills with 4 of them, covers a mode of combat (spellcasting) and again, covers some tools*.

    Ideally, all stats should look like the mental stats. 3-5 skills, covers a mode of combat, covers some tools and applies to one secondary area of the game(AC/HP, etc...) (the mental scores mostly lack this).
    *Again, tools can in theory call for any base stat or paired skill.

    Strength needs a buff as does Con, together they'd about even out. Dex doesn't need any buffing or to cover any additional elements of the game. While I agree that a player can simply choose to "not" make rolls they feel are inappropriate to their character's concept, there certainly is a high pressure in D&D to "roll for it anyway" if you've got a good stat in it (something I dislike about the game).
    Knowledge brings the sting of disillusionment, but the pain teaches perspective.
    "You know it's all fake right?"
    "...yeah, but it makes me feel better."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •