Horwath
Legend
That is really close to mine:Strength, Finesse, Will, Instincts.
Strength, Dexterity, Willpower, Cunning.
That is really close to mine:Strength, Finesse, Will, Instincts.
I am a big fan for the Four Abilities. I prefer to call them "Aptitudes", as these are groups of things that a character will tend to be good at even without training.Although tagged 5E, this could be applied to earlier editions I sure. The basic premise is this:
Many times I've seen people lament the six ability scores, thinking only four would really be needed. A common idea is combining Strength and Constitution, as well as Intelligence and possibly Wisdom.
While thinking about this today, it occured to me if someone went this route, which ability scores would you tie in to each class for use in spellcasting?
As an example, let's say you changed the six ability score to four in this manner:
Then the 5E spellcasting classes would have to pick from just these four:
- Charisma (same)
- Dexterity (same)
- Might (was Str & Con)
- Savvy (was Intelligence and Wisdom)
And of course we have Paladin and Ranger to consider as well.
- Bard - Charisma
- Cleric - Savvy
- Druid- Savvy
- Sorcerer - Charisma (or Might?)
- Warlock- Charisma
- Wizard- Savvy
So, what FOUR ability scores would you create/use, and which would the spellcasters use for spellcasting?
In my soon to be released fantasy heartbreaker I have Prowess, Agility, Cunning and Wit. ( Wanted each to have a unique letter, though I do like Finesse)If I had to pick 4 stats, I would go with Prowess (the fighty/athletic parts of Str and Dex), Finesse (The skill parts of Dex and Int), Will (the willpower parts of Wis and Cha) and Wits (the remainder of Int ans Cha).
Cunning and Wit are pretty similar, but not completely.In my soon to be released fantasy heartbreaker I have Prowess, Agility, Cunning and Wit. ( Wanted each to have a unique letter, though I do like Finesse)
I am a big fan for the Four Abilities. I prefer to call them "Aptitudes", as these are groups of things that a character will tend to be good at even without training.
From a bottom-up approach, looking at what players actually do during a typical gaming session, thus what the aptitudes NEED to be, there are actually Eight Aptitudes. But they pair well into Four.
Strength (Brute Force + Health)
Dexterity (Precision + Mobility)
Charisma (Sociability + Willpower)
Intelligence (Knowledge + Perception)
The d20 system is less useful for combining several stats. 5e bounded accuracy discourages adding several numbers together.Hey @Yaarel this is quite good a system
my only complaint is that you ( probably ) won't marry two stats ( or even 2 attributes ) to produce sub-abilities ( or skills ) ( like Str x Dex ===> Acrobatics , Str x Con ===> Fighting ( or the like ) )
Ah. I'm Using the old English version of cunning:Cunning and Wit are pretty similar, but not completely.
That is why I prefer Cunning and Willpower
I'd flip this.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.