dexterity => Agility + Coordination? Comments?

[Wolfen Priest]

I posted this in another thread, but no one seemed to take any notice, but it's something I've been considering for a while now...

The one thing I most appreciated about the 2e Skills & Powers Supplements was the 'breakdown' of the abilities, which, more often than not, did make a lot of sense. The one in particular, which I was honestly quite surprised not to find in 3e, was the breakdown of Dexterity into (a) balance, and (b) aim.

Personally, I would like to see Dexterity broken down into two abilities (I consider more aptly named): Agility, and Coordination.

Take someone like Babe Ruth. One of the greatest baseball players of all time. He could hit a baseball better than almost any given set of 216 people, if not more, right? However, do you think he could walk a tightrope? I doubt it. Ever watch those bowhunting guys shoot a bow? Simply amazing accuracy. Often, (from what I've seen) they are very heavy, and don't seem like they would be particularly difficult to hit in a 'melee' fight. IOW, they are great with a bow, but are not physically graceful or agile.

Now, look at a guy like Jackie Chan. Nimble, quick, with a very low 'Armor Class,' right? Yet, he's really no good at baseball, basketball, and those kinds of activities. I really doubt he would get any bonus whatsoever for a ranged attack. If you care to quibble with this point, then consider that such a person is certainly possible, right?

I'm so convinced that these two 'abilites' are different (even more so than the other S&P ones like intuition and willpower, for example) that I've been very tempted to change the rules myself, except that it would obviously involve a lot of tinkering.

As an example, the skill Hide may require Agility (as I call it), but what about picking a lock? Is that really Coordination? Is that even dexterity-related at all, or more related to Wisdom or perhaps even intelligence? Soon a person could find him/herself totally overwhelmed with so many questions and house-rules based on such a simple thing as this, really, that one finds it really isn't worth it, for a game that is barely able to 'mimic' reality in the first place.

Many other systems (Everquest and Palladium to name two) break down D&D's "Dexterity" into subgroups like this.

What do you people think of this idea? Just how difficult would this be to accomplish in your opinion, in terms of assigning the new ability modifiers to skills, prerequisites for feats, and so on? Do you think it would add anything to the game? Has anyone else done anything like this in their game(s)?

 

[hong]

1) This should be in House Rules.

2) Please to remember Hong's Third Law, and remember that d20 is not a ruleset meant to simulate reality.

 

[Wolfen Priest]

Gee... Thanks for the valuable input.

 

[Vaxalon]

Take someone like Babe Ruth. One of the greatest baseball players of all time. ....

Yes, a very skilled athlete.

Now, look at a guy like Jackie Chan. ...

Yes, a very able martial artist.

I'm so convinced that these two 'abilites' are different ...

Yes, they are. One is a skill (profession: Hitter) and one is an ability (dexterity).

I've been very tempted to change the rules myself...

Why, given that the rules handle this situation so well as it stands? There are so many other places where they break down.

As an example, the skill Hide may require Agility (as I call it)

Are you attaching an ability score requirement to a skill? That's a pretty foul trick.

Soon a person could find him/herself totally overwhelmed with so many questions and house-rules based on such a simple thing as this, really, that one finds it really isn't worth it, for a game that is barely able to 'mimic' reality in the first place.

There you go. You answered your own question.

 

[Wolfen Priest]

Re: Re: dexterity => Agility + Coordination? Comments?

Are you attaching an ability score requirement to a skill? That's a pretty foul trick.

I'm not saying there would be an ability score requirement. I'm saying that you would apply your Agility modifier to that skill.

As far as the rules holding up really well to this, I obviously disagree. In fact, I really don't see how shooting a bow and arrow accurately is related in any way imaginable to how well you dodge incoming melee (or ranged) attacks. They are two totally separate physical manifestations, every bit as different as Strength and Constitution, in fact.

The whole premise of my argument is that something like hitting a baseball (which you call Profession: Hitter), is still based on the same ability that doing backflips is based on. To me, that truly makes no sense. And further, I don't think separating these abilities will affect game balance very much. Your PC will simply have 7 abilities, rather than six.

Obviously, I do realise it will take a decent amount of work. The Agility modifier will affect your PC's AC, while the Coordination modifier will affect your PC's ranged attacks. But other than that, all I would have to do is adjust every Dex skill to apply to either Agility or Coordination, and change some feat requirements. There are certainly more tedious rules changes than these.

 

[Vaxalon]

Re: Re: Re: dexterity => Agility + Coordination? Comments?

I'm not saying there would be an ability score requirement. I'm saying that you would apply your Agility modifier to that skill.

Upon review, I realize that I misunderstood your proposal.

.... In fact, I really don't see how shooting a bow and arrow accurately is related in any way imaginable to how well you dodge incoming melee (or ranged) attacks. They are two totally separate physical manifestations, every bit as different as Strength and Constitution, in fact.

Both of them are involved with moving your body. See? They are not totally separate.

The whole premise of my argument is that something like hitting a baseball (which you call Profession: Hitter), is still based on the same ability that doing backflips is based on.

Why is that a problem? Since one is a skill and one is an ability, a person can be good at hitting the baseball (a WISDOM-based skill) and still be totally clumsy (low DEXTERITY).

To me, that truly makes no sense. .

You said it, not me.

And further, I don't think separating these abilities will affect game balance very much. Your PC will simply have 7 abilities, rather than six.

Yes, it will affect game balance, and it won't be trivial. It will foul up classes like monks and paladins which are more stat-dependent.

Obviously, I do realise it will take a decent amount of work. The Agility modifier will affect your PC's AC, while the Coordination modifier will affect your PC's ranged attacks. But other than that, all I would have to do is adjust every Dex skill to apply to either Agility or Coordination, and change some feat requirements. There are certainly more tedious rules changes than these.

It will also require a change to magic items and spells that benefit dexterity, and will require editing every single monster in the game, to evaluate which attributes it's supposed to have. If you don't assign the same value to both, you'll need to edit the cascade to reflect the change.

It will also require changing the way point-buy attribute assignment works.

It will also require going over every published adventure you ever use.

As with most house rules, the benefits must be carefully weighed against the costs... and in this case they don't seem to me to be worth it.

 

[Wolfen Priest]

Re: Re: Re: Re: dexterity => Agility + Coordination? Comments?

Both of them are involved with moving your body. See? They are not totally separate.

Perhaps not, but I still see them as about as related as Constitution and Strength. A bigger, stronger individual is tougher, and also harder to bring down. I'm saying Agility and Coordination are as different as these two other abilities, already identified.

Why is that a problem? Since one is a skill and one is an ability, a person can be good at hitting the baseball (a WISDOM-based skill) and still be totally clumsy (low DEXTERITY).

I just think hitting a baseball should be based on something other than Wisdom. Let's pretend, for a moment, that D&D is actually trying at least somewhat to simulate reality, at least generally (otherwise why aren't we just playing chess?). In that example, a priest or shaman would be better at baseball than someone with great coordination and/or athleticism, which is obviously ludicrous.

Yes, it will affect game balance, and it won't be trivial. It will foul up classes like monks and paladins which are more stat-dependent.

I'm convinced that the monk is already shredded because of this. In the case of paladins, and clerics who are also somewhat stat-dependant, I think Dexterity (as it is) is pretty unimportant anyway.

As with most house rules, the benefits must be carefully weighed against the costs... and in this case they don't seem to me to be worth it.

You're probably right, but maybe this could be taken into consideration for the 4.0 edition? I definitely think it's worth discussing. I mean they have INT and WIS broken into 2 categories, for Gosh sakes, yet they lump a good bit of crap into one stat and call it "dexterity."

The same stat that helps you pick a lock helps you ride a horse. Huh?

 

[Vaxalon]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: dexterity => Agility + Coordination? Comments?

A bigger, stronger individual is tougher...

No, he isn't... not necessarily.

Let's pretend, for a moment, that D&D is actually trying at least somewhat to simulate reality,...

Ah, there's your problem. It's not. It's trying to simulate the "reality" of heroic fiction with a little versimilitude, not realism.

otherwise why aren't we just playing chess?

Please, let's not get on a tangent of DnD vs. Chess.

In that example, a priest or shaman would be better at baseball than someone with great coordination and/or athleticism, which is obviously ludicrous.

No, because a priest or shaman wouldn't have any ranks in the skill.

I'm convinced that the monk is already shredded because of this (stat dependency). In the case of paladins, and clerics who are also somewhat stat-dependant, I think Dexterity (as it is) is pretty unimportant anyway....

So you're going to 'shred' the monk WORSE. It still has a nontrivial effect on balance.

The same stat that helps you pick a lock helps you ride a horse. Huh?

The same could be said of most other stats.

Constitution lumps together health and stamina. Someone can be very disease-resistant and have no endurance.

Intelligence lumps together linguistic, mathematical, and rote learning abilities.

Wisdom lumps together willpower, common sense, and perception.

Charisma lumps together personality, persuasiveness, and attractiveness.

How many attributes would you like, all together?

 

[Wolfen Priest]

Not too long ago there was a thread discussing the importance of the ability Comliness (sp?), in which as I recall many people voiced that they think it would be good to bring back. I wasn't much interested in the thread though, because I personally think Charisma covers that area pretty well, all told.

All I gotta say is, if comliness should be an attribute in its own right, then so should Agility and/or Coordination. Or just make it Agility and Dexterity. That would make more sense, probably.

Plus, I really don't think it would hose monks that much because they would probably put their points (in a point-buy) into agility anyway.

The only "problem" (which I don't consider a problem for reasons explained below) is that rogues would now have 2 attributes to consider in a point-buy situation, rather than one. IMXP, that would be a good thing, because every point-buy campaign I've been in had rogues with DEX >= 16, CON >= 14, INT>= 14, STR >= 14, etc. So dividing up their one really important stat, in addition to being more realistic IMHO, would also make them more interesting (and realistic) characters. They wouldn't be as 'tanky.' In fact, it would probably balance them better against monks, leaving monks the 'default 4th-string tanks.'

All in all, I just think this may simply be a case of 'let well enough alone, Wolfen Priest' which is fine; except we're talking about a house rule, basically. One that I think would make sense.

 

[Vaxalon]

Not too long ago there was a thread discussing the importance of the ability Comliness (sp?), in which as I recall many people voiced that they think it would be good to bring back.....

And as I recall, at least as many said, "What? No way, it would just be another dump stat."

Originally posted by Wolfen Priest All I gotta say is, if comliness should be an attribute in its own right, then so should Agility and/or Coordination....

I guess you didn't catch my point... that if you want to split Dexterity solely because it makes more realistic sense then the same logic applies to constitution, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma, and so therefore you should be advocating ELEVEN attributes in your houserule.

Originally posted by Wolfen Priest Plus, I really don't think it would hose monks that much because they would probably put their points (in a point-buy) into agility anyway.

You would be removing one of their more useful talents at low levels, crossbow marksmanship. It's one of their only weapons that does 1d8 damage. Yes, it would hose monks.

Originally posted by Wolfen Priest .... All in all, I just think this may simply be a case of 'let well enough alone, Wolfen Priest' which is fine; except we're talking about a house rule, basically. One that I think would make sense.

Yes, you ought to leave well enough alone, but what I take issue with is the one that splitting Dex it makes sense. The argument that it's "realistic" won't hunt. The game isn't realistic, it only aims for versimilitude.

The argument that it would create less "cookie-cutter" rogues won't hunt, either. The lack of creativity of rogues under point-buy has more to do with the player than it does with the system. Every rogue that I have seen in my game has had a different set of attributes. We have had dextrous rogues, charismatic rogues, and intelligent rogues. We even had one strong rogue.

Since we both use largely the same system, it can't be the system that is causing the problem in games you have been in.