Quote from: S'mon;1108481Maybe it's just my game, but I find that front line fighters who dump STR for DEX are really regretting it when they're rolling -1 on Athletics checks vs being grappled, shoved, knocked prone et al.

Yeah it's not without it's trade offs.  Although the smart play would be to not entirely dump Str.

If the GMs uses grapples and shoves they can suffer.
Conversely if you go sword and board and the GM uses minis and interesting terrain than Shield Master is a good feat to have which also benefits more from Strength.

Of course you can also take a level of rogue, and make up for lower Strength by getting expertise in Athletics (Plus the other benefits of taking a level in Rogue).

I'm not saying it's so good as too be a no brainer - it's just very strong and...something that doesn't feel intentional.

Quote from: TJS;1108486I'm not saying it's so good as too be a no brainer - it's just very strong and...something that doesn't feel intentional.

I agree; and I definitely find the stats aren't well balanced against each other, which means Point Buy doesn't work well, you get a ton of STR 8 & INT 8 PCs in 5e (and a ton of DEX 14 & CON 14). These days I prefer roll-in-order, but replace one stat with a 15 so the players can always have a good number in their class's primary attribute.

Edit re intention: Well one of the two starting Fighter equipment packages has leather armour, so they must expect many Fighters to be DEX based.

I've been avoiding tinkering with 5E, confining myself to the things absolutely necessary to produce the campaign I want.  Partly it is natural conservatism with rule changes, and partly that I don't want to spend my game design time tinkering with a WotC product instead of something more long-term useful.  Also that once I unleash that genie, it's difficult to get back in the bottle.

All that said, I've been really tempted more than once to drop every Hit Die by one level.  Pretty easy since wizards start at 1d6 now.  Then have the Str mod affect hit points, same as Con does.  That devalues Con a little, but I could live with it, I think.  If nothing else, it means that anyone using Str as a drop stat better think long and hard about shifting some of those points into Con to compensate.  Plus, the drop in Hit Die size makes the recovery a bit more difficult.  (Since I'm using the optional rule to only allow natural healing with Hit Die, even more so for my game.)

It's not nearly as effective a solution as revamping the ability scores and skill system from the ground up, but a lot easier one.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1108505I've been avoiding tinkering with 5E, confining myself to the things absolutely necessary to produce the campaign I want.  Partly it is natural conservatism with rule changes, and partly that I don't want to spend my game design time tinkering with a WotC product instead of something more long-term useful.  Also that once I unleash that genie, it's difficult to get back in the bottle.

All that said, I've been really tempted more than once to drop every Hit Die by one level.  Pretty easy since wizards start at 1d6 now.  Then have the Str mod affect hit points, same as Con does.  That devalues Con a little, but I could live with it, I think.  If nothing else, it means that anyone using Str as a drop stat better think long and hard about shifting some of those points into Con to compensate.  Plus, the drop in Hit Die size makes the recovery a bit more difficult.  (Since I'm using the optional rule to only allow natural healing with Hit Die, even more so for my game.)

It's not nearly as effective a solution as revamping the ability scores and skill system from the ground up, but a lot easier one.

Hm, this is making me think about adding the STR score to PC hit points. In my Thule game I had full CON score instead of bonus added to starting hp as a way to create robust PCs out the gate, but adding STR score would solve several issues - it would make STR no longer a dump stat, and it would deal with the simulationist issue that IRL resilience is tied to muscle mass whereas in D&D they're unrelated.

So eg a PC would have STR + (hd+CON bonus)xlevel. A STR 16 Fighter-1 (d10 hd) with CON 12 (+1) would have 16+10+1 = 27 hp.

Quote from: S'mon;1108510Hm, this is making me think about adding the STR score to PC hit points. In my Thule game I had full CON score instead of bonus added to starting hp as a way to create robust PCs out the gate, but adding STR score would solve several issues - it would make STR no longer a dump stat, and it would deal with the simulationist issue that IRL resilience is tied to muscle mass whereas in D&D they're unrelated.

So eg a PC would have STR + (hd+CON bonus)xlevel. A STR 16 Fighter-1 (d10 hd) with CON 12 (+1) would have 16+10+1 = 27 hp.

Interesting idea.

Another take might be to say - you get max starting class HP, +Str and Con. And that's IT - outside of magic items/spells etc. Or a standard progression across all classes?

The issue is coming up with a similar schema for Monsters... that reduces HP bloat that kind of currently exists. But I think if done right it would solve that issue while keeping things very dangerous.

Or another idea would be doing the HP/VP route - with Crits bypassing Vitality.

Having 27hp at 1st level, sounds like 4th Edition levels of resilience?  That might be fine as long as you kept a lid on any further HP accumulation; but at levels 1-3, traditional foes would no longer challenge the PCs.

AXIOM.
"Between Bloat or Trim: the better Player Munchkin answer is Bloat, the better GM Design answer is trim." -- opaopajr

"...in bed! " -- Confucius' avenging ghost

Quote from: Opaopajr;1108542AXIOM.
"Between Bloat or Trim: the better Player Munchkin answer is Bloat, the better GM Design answer is trim." -- opaopajr

"...in bed! " -- Confucius' avenging ghost

Brilliant!!!!

it's totally true.

Quote from: Razor 007;1108533Having 27hp at 1st level, sounds like 4th Edition levels of resilience?  That might be fine as long as you kept a lid on any further HP accumulation; but at levels 1-3, traditional foes would no longer challenge the PCs.

But what if that's ALL they ever get?

And then you create a system to scale monsters (like in FC) along a HD-flat HP scale? That would eliminate the whole CR issue that has plagued noob GM's since 3.x. It would make 5e lean and mean.

Optional Rules - everyone gets a flat 2HP per level.

Quote from: tenbones;1108546But what if that's ALL they ever get?

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/177622/The-Heros-Journey-Fantasy-Roleplaying-Swords--Wizardry

Not exactly an original idea, but I really like how The Hero's Journey does hit points. You start off with two or three hit dice over the first couple levels, then you get one or two per level. Keeps the grittiness and chance of death high while still allowing "epic adventures". Hit point inflation is the #1 reason I dislike modern versions of D&D. "Combat takes too long!" Yeah, try running combat against an ancient red dragon in AD&D or B/X with high level characters and see if it takes longer than four or five rounds...

Quote from: S'mon;1108510Hm, this is making me think about adding the STR score to PC hit points. In my Thule game I had full CON score instead of bonus added to starting hp as a way to create robust PCs out the gate, but adding STR score would solve several issues - it would make STR no longer a dump stat, and it would deal with the simulationist issue that IRL resilience is tied to muscle mass whereas in D&D they're unrelated.

So eg a PC would have STR + (hd+CON bonus)xlevel. A STR 16 Fighter-1 (d10 hd) with CON 12 (+1) would have 16+10+1 = 27 hp.

One interesting system took Hit Points as both physical (muscle mass, fatigue) and non-physical (skill, luck) to the logical extreme and just made the starting value the sum of the PC's ability modifiers (it wasn't a d20-based system though so taking this directly to 5e with its modifier is (stat-10)/2 rounded down wouldn't be the cleanest fit though unless you counted the half modifiers somehow... say HP = (sum of all ability scores - 60) / 2).

A similar but more restrained approach would be to simply use the best ability score as the modifier.

The system is so ramshackle overall that I almost think you'd be better served just starting over from first principles instead of adding more duct tape, spit and bailing wire to 5e.

Quote from: Brad;1108548https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/177622/The-Heros-Journey-Fantasy-Roleplaying-Swords--Wizardry

Not exactly an original idea, but I really like how The Hero's Journey does hit points. You start off with two or three hit dice over the first couple levels, then you get one or two per level. Keeps the grittiness and chance of death high while still allowing "epic adventures". Hit point inflation is the #1 reason I dislike modern versions of D&D. "Combat takes too long!" Yeah, try running combat against an ancient red dragon in AD&D or B/X with high level characters and see if it takes longer than four or five rounds...

yeah... that's pretty attractive.

It's on my bucket list to do my 10-lvl D&D Fantasy heartbreaker... it'll happen. Stuff like this really strikes at that nerve and fires me up for it.

Quote from: Chris24601;1108549The system is so ramshackle overall that I almost think you'd be better served just starting over from first principles instead of adding more duct tape, spit and bailing wire to 5e.

And this is precisely why I wish they took their queues from FantasyCraft when designing 5e. They didn't need to copy it - they just needed to wire things together in balance with one another at the core. Then build their sub-systems from that core as modules. This would have served *everyone* better.

It might be a fun thread to do that as an examination... FantasyCraft-5e.

Quote from: tenbones;1108546But what if that's ALL they ever get?

And then you create a system to scale monsters (like in FC) along a HD-flat HP scale? That would eliminate the whole CR issue that has plagued noob GM's since 3.x. It would make 5e lean and mean.

Optional Rules - everyone gets a flat 2HP per level.

If I'm going that route on a 5E framework, don't give any extra hit points per level.  (Might have feat-like options to pick up a few.)  Instead, let the 5E "hit dice" for recovery thing continue to scale.

So Fighter with 16 Str and 14 Con, starts with Str + Con + 1d10 hit points (31 to 40).  Or for a slightly better scale, subtract 10 from the formula answer.  Same fighter has 1d10+2 Hit Die for recovery.  Add a Hit Die every odd level instead of every level.  Set recovery options to rests as normal to fit the campaign.  

In one fight, a higher level character can't take much more punishment than a 1st level.  But he hits more accurately and dishes it out a little better.   After he rests, he can do it again, maybe even two or three times, whereas the first level guy can semi-recover one time.  Higher level resilience is thus defined at the adventure level, not as much the fight level.  

The real problem isn't so much the monsters as the magic.  You'd have to either severely cap or almost rewrite the magic.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1108560If I'm going that route on a 5E framework, don't give any extra hit points per level.  (Might have feat-like options to pick up a few.)  Instead, let the 5E "hit dice" for recovery thing continue to scale.

So Fighter with 16 Str and 14 Con, starts with Str + Con + 1d10 hit points (31 to 40).  Or for a slightly better scale, subtract 10 from the formula answer.  Same fighter has 1d10+2 Hit Die for recovery.  Add a Hit Die every odd level instead of every level.  Set recovery options to rests as normal to fit the campaign.  

In one fight, a higher level character can't take much more punishment than a 1st level.  But he hits more accurately and dishes it out a little better.   After he rests, he can do it again, maybe even two or three times, whereas the first level guy can semi-recover one time.  Higher level resilience is thus defined at the adventure level, not as much the fight level.  

The real problem isn't so much the monsters as the magic.  You'd have to either severely cap or almost rewrite the magic.

That's pretty strong. I very much like your sensibilities on this. I agree that magic would need a re-write. But I've felt that way about D&D for years. I know it can be done.

Another thing I'd do to help "even things out" - Make Magic a skill-check to roll. This is balanced by splitting the derived stat bonuses across more stats in Magic. FC's idea is Int bonus determines the bonus to your spellcasting check which has a skill associated with it (DC based on the level of the spell), Wisdom bonus determines the number of spells you can know and what you start with initially, Charisma bonus is the penalty to any saving throws vs. your spells. This makes casters have more skin in the game like non-casters.

It also keeps casters from dumpstatting. Reworking the magic system as a whole this allows you to plug and play things like Schools and Specialization into the classes. It also lets you have multiple magical systems interacting with the same core principles. You can have Spellpoint and Effect based magic right alongside Vancian spellcasting. It can be completely modular, integrated, or segregated to the needs of your setting.

A few simple effect formulas allows many spells to scale appropriately in direct mechanical cohesion with non-casters. Vancian spells can be built on this same chassis. There's some details that need to be determined still, but it could be done.