D&D 5E Why Are Ability Scores Necessary?

[TwoSix]

Once one is going to freely map everything onto two values, what is the motive form more than two values? Aren't those essentially "spells" and "actions"?

To my mind, the motive is that "remapping" (specifically in the 5e paradigm) is a simple to apply house rule that impacts exactly one character, actually changing the stats is a broad rewrite of the system that I don't feel is worth the effort.

I have no issue with the D&D 6-stat paradigm, certainly not enough to change it for the sake of change. There's simply a number of character concepts I have trouble realizing because they need such a broad spectrum of stats. I mean, I could simply be less efficacious with my 4-5 stat dependent character, but why do that when I can simply house rule instead?

 

[Umbran]

There's simply a number of character concepts I have trouble realizing...

Yeah. There is a point when we realize that no finite, comprehensible system does everything we can imagine. Each system has bounds and limitations, and that means not all character concepts that are thematically appropriate are necessarily mechanically appropriate for the system.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Out of curiosity, what about AC? Is that also swappable? I (and most DM's I've played with) have had no problem with stat-swapping for particular concepts, although we haven't tried adopting that as general rule to support multi-classes. When we do stat-swap, we generally move AC calculation to move along with attack, as long as one of the stats being targeted isn't Charisma. The general approach is that there are two stats you really want to prioritize (attack and spellcasting), and a tertiary you'd like to raise but is OK with staying at a 14 (assuming point-buy).

I’m not sure if I’d change AC as well or not. If I did, it would be tied to your weapon attack stat.

To my mind, the motive is that "remapping" (specifically in the 5e paradigm) is a simple to apply house rule that impacts exactly one character, actually changing the stats is a broad rewrite of the system that I don't feel is worth the effort.

I have no issue with the D&D 6-stat paradigm, certainly not enough to change it for the sake of change. There's simply a number of character concepts I have trouble realizing because they need such a broad spectrum of stats. I mean, I could simply be less efficacious with my 4-5 stat dependent character, but why do that when I can simply house rule instead?

Exactly.
I may still also create a resource pool for each stat where you can spend a point to add to a roll with that stat, and get them back with a long rest. Probably Action Points equal to the modifier.

 

[Dausuul]

Probably you just abstract the ability scores instead, to physical, mental, and interaction, or something.

I would not be interested in this. A large part of my objection to ability scores is mechanical: They add complexity, steepen the learning curve, and introduce balance headaches, and all this for (IMO) very little benefit. Reducing the number of ability scores, unless the new number is "zero," does nothing to address this problem.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I would not be interested in this. A large part of my objection to ability scores is mechanical: They add complexity, steepen the learning curve, and introduce balance headaches, and all this for (IMO) very little benefit. Reducing the number of ability scores, unless the new number is "zero," does nothing to address this problem.

Okay.

I obviously disagree.

 

[clearstream]

I would not be interested in this. A large part of my objection to ability scores is mechanical: They add complexity, steepen the learning curve, and introduce balance headaches, and all this for (IMO) very little benefit. Reducing the number of ability scores, unless the new number is "zero," does nothing to address this problem.

I see them as reducing complexity, helping the learning curve, and improving balance.

The learning curve is helped by clearly signalling to players what they are likely to be good at. I observe it as being the first thing that many players really understand - "Oh, I have a high strength number, I guess my character is strong" - and the associated mechanics on the whole deliver on that understanding.

Balance is improved by first understanding what balance even is in a multiplayer game. Good balance is usually discussed in terms of ensuring multiple strategies are viable. Making different scores valuable in different ways leads to multiple viable strategies.

Complexity is reduced because a small collection of variables contain and cohere parameters across a wide range of mechanics. The extreme alternative - containing the variables inside each mechanic - would be horribly complex. Not to mention really hard for new players to understand, as they could not conclude that because they are good at Dexterity-based things, they are good at Dexterity-based things: they'd have to read every mechanic individually.

D&D ability scores have survived decades and editions because they do a good job at low cost along those sorts of dimensions: they sustain better playability.