|
I realize I am new to this board and don't have a reputation or garner much cachet around here but it's a bald-faced lie to claim that no one ever role plays their low Strength the way that Remy is suggesting people need to roleplay their low Int score.
Your examples have nothing to do with roleplaying. You are just compensating for the mechanical penalties of dumping strength, similar to the way someone with with low int would need to compensate for having terrible skills.
Also, calling someone a liar is not very nice.
I lowered my Str to 9 so I could bump my Int to 18 and all I've done with the bonus extract slot I got from my high Int is memorize an extract to cover for my dumped Str. Considering that I only dumped my Str to 9, I'd be much worse off if I dumped it to 7.
Would you? Ant haul is a fairly powerful spell, and I suspect that an ensorcelled strength of 7 would still give you what you need. (Light load of 69 pounds, vs. 90 for strength 9).
That's part of the "why 7" issue.
I realize I am new to this board and don't have a reputation or garner much cachet around here but it's a bald-faced lie to claim that no one ever role plays their low Strength the way that Remy is suggesting people need to roleplay their low Int score.Your examples have nothing to do with roleplaying. You are just compensating for the mechanical penalties of dumping strength, similar to the way someone with with low int would need to compensate for having terrible skills.
Also, calling someone a liar is not very nice.
Do you need transcripts of my game nights? This is the easiest communication of how a low Str score is roleplayed: I struggle to carry and lift what I want to on a daily basis in our game. On the one occasion I got dispelled, I was totally knackered and passed off a good deal of my gear to the Halfling fighter in our group. Talk about embarassing! I still catch flack from my team-mates for that one. If in-character teasing is not roleplaying, then I have been doing it wrong for 30 years now.
What sort of comparable example is there for those who dump their Int score? Do they sacrifice +1 attack and damage from their high Str score to ensure that they can still engage in the problem solving and tactic-planning sessions that they want to? I think not. Even if they do, then your issue is with the folks being dishonest about the reality of how low Int scores play out; the statement that no one roleplays their low Str score is still not true.
Lying is not a nice thing. If you don't want to be called a liar, don't lie. Or better yet, avoid hyperbolic statements to lend credence to your arguments. Words like always and never can paint you into uncomfortable corners :)
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Similarly, standard arrays for PCs (15 14 13 12 10 8) or NPCs (11 11 11 10 10 10) are just shorthand ways of generating characters, not changing the assumption of the 3d6 bell curve.This is the part that I disagree with. If the stat arrays for all of the NPCs you ever meet end up being those figures... how can you possible make a case that 3d6 is the norm?
3d6 is not the norm. It doesn't represent the PCs, it doesn't represent the NPCs. It doesn't represent anyone.
Each ability score generally ranges from 3 to 18
DM: Okay guys, in this campaign I really want the PCs to be heroes. You are going to roll your ability scores, in order, but the roll will be 1d6+12. Cool, huh?
Remy: Sir, sir! Does this mean that the minimum inelligence for a human in this game world is 13, and anyone with Int12 needs someone to constantly whisper 'Breathe in...breathe out...' in their ear or they will suffocate?
DM: I don't have the time to roll up every NPC in the world, so I'll assume a stat of 10 in any ability for an unimportant NPC, unless there is a reason to do otherwise.
Remy: So every NPC in the world is a clone? Any PC with an ability score of 9 is a freak of nature?
I've heard the expression 'Someone is wrong on the internet!' before, but never knew who that 'someone' was. I do now. It's you, Remy. It's you.
|
First assumption: The DC of something 'everyone can do' in a non-stressful environment. (Very easy task) is DC 10.
So, anyone can chew food right? That means that if you have a 7STR you need to make checks to chew food, right?[yes, I know this has been mentioned] Well, no, because that would be ridiculous.
So, a 7STR means that you don't need to make checks to chew food, but a 7INT means you do have to make checks to know what grass or a dog is? Because you did sayIdentify ‘common’ plants or animals. What is grass? Less than 50%. What is a dog? Less than 50%.
Neither claim is more ridiculous than the other[assuming you are playing a character who lives in a region where grass and dogs are relatively common and is part of a race that actually chews food and it isn't a taboo to eat anything but soup]. They are just 2 ridiculous claims.
|
|
Or better yet, avoid hyperbolic statements to lend credence to your arguments. Words like always and never can paint you into uncomfortable corners :)
Dropping your Alchemist's strength from 10 to 9 dropped the medium weight load threshold by a whopping 3 pounds. In real world terms that is a barely noticeable difference, and a 9 score is no more remarkable than a 11. I suggest you take your own advice to avoid hyperbole to lend credence to your arguments.
Hardly anyone considers a 13 score to be supremely good, but then a 7 is a hopeless cripple. I just don't follow the logic there.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remy, I think I know what your problem is.
You assume people are mocking you whenever they disagree, for one.
In some cases, we are. In others, we're just pointing out the logical conclusion of your assertions.
Secondly, you assume the mocking is because people don't understand the point you're trying to make. That's a bit arrogant on your part, first off. I'm a bit of an a**$#%% and even I usually give people credit that they can follow my argument (and if that proves not to be the case, I'll simply break it down further).
Anyway, this assumption is also false. We're mocking you BECAUSE we understand your argument, obviously a bit better than YOU do, and are pointing out the high levels of silly that appear when your idea is put into place (DC 10 is the DC for common everyday things anyone can do...something that is blatantly false within the rules as well).
As a sidebar, I'll give you a little tip. Overreacting about a bit of teasing is a good way to get more people to join in, and it will escalate. People, much like sharks, can smell blood, and you thrashing around in the waters doesn't help matters much. It just makes you a more amusing target.
Hardly anyone considers a 13 score to be supremely good, but then a 7 is a hopeless cripple. I just don't follow the logic there.
"Hardly anyone", perhaps, but there is ONE of those people in this thread that pretty much everyone is collectively arguing against.
At no point have I agreed with Remy. I stated my position that there is a progression from normal to not normal between the Int scores of 10 and 3 that is difficult to describe and quite subjective. During that post I questioned the extremity of Remy's position, incidentally.
I have said that I feel the penalties for low Int have less mechanical representation within the game than there is for other stats. I told an anecdote of how I regret lowering Str on the Alchemist I'm playing and I mentioned that I find low stats a challenge to roleplay personally.
Disagreeing with the way Roberta is arguing with Remy is not the same thing as agreeing with Remy.
Hmmm... How about forcing everyone's stats into an 8 point range?
You want a pre racial 18? Then the lowest stat you can buy is a 10.
You want to buy down to an 8? Then your highest stat is now limited to a 16.
You want to buy down to a 7? Now your highest stat is limited to a 15.
I think it was Rynjin that mentioned a much better solution to this "problem". Simply use a 25 point buy if you want people to buy stats.
I liked the solution of offering additional points to buy attributes you have no use of.
For Fighters it'd be Int or Charisma.
So this kept coming up in another thread but I never got a good answer and it was slightly off-topic anyway. Many many people say that they would disallow stats to be dumped down to 7 under a point-buy system. If you're one of those people - why? What's so bad about dumping to 7 vs dumping to 8? I await your reply.
My hand-wave response to people whining about anything in Pathfinder is "Go play 1st or 2nd edition AD&D"
This especially pertains to ability scores where you were LUCKY to get a 7 as your "dump score" and not end up with a 3-5. (in fact you were lucky to have a 13 in your primary score)When I upgrade my games to the next generation (as I did w/ 3.5 to PF) I generally include all the rules. If a Fighter wants to dump his Int and Wis down to 7 so he can have his maximum starting Str and Con, well, I don't care.
But in the end, its just my personal observation and opinion on the matter, as it is everyone else's and YMMV. I'm sure an opponent of stat dumping could spend a weekend on a fiery diatribe on the evils of it and compare those who do it to infamous dictators and/or special needs folks or spoiled brats... and that's fine too.
The point isn't really to force people not to dump, but to give them the option to have a well rounded, but still as powerful as a min-maxed 15-20 PB character.
I could care less about dumping existing, but something like an 18 (post-racial), three 14's, a 12, and a 7 makes for a more well rounded character, that's more fun to play, than a bunch of the alternative PB values with dumping.
|
|
My opinion is that Remy example are a bit extreme.
Int has been the most used ability score for example in this thread but has not been the only one used, just the most disputed. The mental stats are hardest the quantify outside of the minor ingame mechanics already in place.
There has been arguments that a 7 int isnt that far off the average. I posted an example that shows somewhat that int 7 is just as close to a low stat, 4 int, as it is to an average 10 int.
Admittedly what is considered average is also in question. Page 15 of CRB says average is 10 but the npc arrays have one 8 in them. So what is average?
10 is the average stat.
However, nobody is perfectly average.
|
|
I think most people on this thread dont mind low stats. The question is, when you have a low stats, how do you play it? Do you just handwave the RP part of low stat or do you RP the low stat in some way.
Question, what part of each mental ability discription has game mechanics and what part doesnt. My opinion on is that (as an example, int discription has learn and reason but only learn has game mechanics, skill points) the ability discription of mental..damn lost my train of-though.
|
|
I posted this before in this thread, pretty sure not everyone will agree, but my opinion on an int 7 is that Tom Hanks 'Forrest Gump' is a good example. He can function in everyday society but is noticeably below average, his responces are rote 'stupid is as stupid does' or slower in response as he needs a minute to come up with a reply.
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.
I think most people on this thread dont mind low stats. The question is, when you have a low stats, how do you play it? Do you just handwave the RP part of low stat or do you RP the low stat in some way.
Question, what part of each mental ability discription has game mechanics and what part doesnt. My opinion on is that (as an example, int discription has learn and reason but only learn has game mechanics, skill points) the ability discription of mental..damn lost my train of-though.
The problem with that is there are already penalties associated with the stat. And a 7 int is as detrimental as a 14 int is beneficial.
That 3rd level 7 int fighter can totally be fluent in three different languages. A Maze spell is a death sentence for him.
Then you remember that that stat array is just a shorthand of generating NPCs and that really it varies from 3 to 18.
With the previous hyperbole, An Ancient Blue Dragon constantly falls over itself with it's dex of 8.
I posted this before in this thread, pretty sure not everyone will agree, but my opinion on an int 7 is that Tom Hanks 'Forrest Gump' is a good example. He can funtion in everyday society but is noticeably below average, his responces are rote 'stupid is as stupid does' or slower in response as he needs a minute to come up with a reply.
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.
I disagree. I believe the Village Idiot is a solid representation with Catch Off Guard replaced with Run.
|
|
I think most people on this thread dont mind low stats. The question is, when you have a low stats, how do you play it? Do you just handwave the RP part of low stat or do you RP the low stat in some way.
Question, what part of each mental ability discription has game mechanics and what part doesnt. My opinion on is that (as an example, int discription has learn and reason but only learn has game mechanics, skill points) the ability discription of mental..damn lost my train of-though.
The problem with that is there are already penalties associated with the stat. And a 7 int is as detrimental as a 14 int is beneficial.
That 3rd level 7 int fighter can totally be fluent in three different languages. A Maze spell is a death sentence for him.
Then you remember that that stat array is just a shorthand of generating NPCs and that really it varies from 3 to 18.
With the previous hyperbole, An Ancient Blue Dragon constantly falls over itself with it's dex of 8.
Moving on the ground that dragon is kind of awkward, not non-funtional but not agile.
And the 'game mechanics is already penalty enough no need for an RP penalty' is the usual response.
Why is that a bad response?
Lying is not a nice thing. If you don't want to be called a liar, don't lie. Or better yet, avoid hyperbolic statements to lend credence to your arguments. Words like always and never can paint you into uncomfortable corners :)
She may have made an incorrect generalization, but that is not the same as lying. Everyone on this board makes an incorrect generalization from time to time, even when they try not to.
Lying is when you try to intentionally mislead someone. What proof do you have that Roberta tried to mislead anyone?
And a 7 int is as detrimental as a 14 int is beneficial.
This is simply not true.
First, there is a floor effect in skill points. Skill points per level cannot go below 1 per level, 2 per level for a human, and favored class bonus atop that. My human fighter with intelligence 14 gets 4 points per level. With intelligence 10, 2 points per level. With intelligence 7, still 2 points per level.
Second, my human fighter with intelligence 14 has access to substantially more feats (e.g., combat expertise and its dependents, such as improved trip) than he would with intelligence 10. The fighter with intelligence 7 has access to no fewer feats.
No no, I see what Remy is saying.
It adds a lot of suspense to daily life.
"Can my 7 Str Wizard make all of his daily checks to chew his food?" for example.
Brilliant.
I find that this argument was convenientely avoided by people that say that int 7 is utterly crippling.
Because lets face it, encumbrance is nothing for a wizard and the more the level the wizard have the less an issue the encumbrace is.
Does the str 7 wizard have to roll a check to see if he can draw her metamagic rod of empower? Does the wizard need to roll to stand up from the prone position?
I skipped most of the post. Provide a link and I will give a reply, even if it is agreeing with him.
|
|
I disagree. I believe the Village Idiot is a solid representation with Catch Off Guard replaced with Run.I posted this before in this thread, pretty sure not everyone will agree, but my opinion on an int 7 is that Tom Hanks 'Forrest Gump' is a good example. He can funtion in everyday society but is noticeably below average, his responces are rote 'stupid is as stupid does' or slower in response as he needs a minute to come up with a reply.
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.
This is a good representation of an int 7?
While I agree its representation of ways the 'Village Idiot' csn be different per individual NPC its not representative of a functional PC with a low int.
Dropping your Alchemist's strength from 10 to 9 dropped the medium weight load threshold by a whopping 3 pounds. In real world terms that is a barely noticeable difference, and a 9 score is no more remarkable than a 11. I suggest you take your own advice to avoid hyperbole to lend credence to your arguments.
Hardly anyone considers a 13 score to be supremely good, but then a 7 is a hopeless cripple. I just don't follow the logic there.
Not that I think either 9 or 7 is a huge crippling disability, but to be fair, if we assume the populace is built on either 3d6 rolls or the basic NPC array, the human average is 10.83 (10.5 rolled average +.33 avg from stat bonus). So a 9 is 1.83 from the average while an 11 is just 0.17 from the average. A 9 is as far from the average as a 12.66 is.
And if we look at adjustments, the penalty from having a 9 is twice as large as that of having an 11.
So yeah, a 9 is as far off average as 12.66 is. A 7 is as far off average as a 14.66.
It might seem nitpicky but I felt since the difference ends up affecting the adjustments involved, it's worth noting.
And a 7 int is as detrimental as a 14 int is beneficial.This is simply not true.
First, there is a floor effect in skill points. Skill points per level cannot go below 1 per level, 2 per level for a human, and favored class bonus atop that. My human fighter with intelligence 14 gets 4 points per level. With intelligence 10, 2 points per level. With intelligence 7, still 2 points per level.
Second, my human fighter with intelligence 14 has access to substantially more feats (e.g., combat expertise and its dependents, such as improved trip) than he would with intelligence 10. The fighter with intelligence 7 has access to no fewer feats.
Conceptually. There isn't a difference in game between a guy with a 14 or 15. Only an odd number into even or vice versa. If we're talking purely outside of game mechanics, the 14 Int is as beneficial to that person as the 7 is detrimental. My argument there was more about the extrapolated penalties beyond what the game already gives you.
As for your second comparison, it's fairly obvious that the Fighter with 7 intelligence does have less access to his feat choice. He can't take Combat Expertise or the feats that come after that.
I disagree. I believe the Village Idiot is a solid representation with Catch Off Guard replaced with Run.I posted this before in this thread, pretty sure not everyone will agree, but my opinion on an int 7 is that Tom Hanks 'Forrest Gump' is a good example. He can funtion in everyday society but is noticeably below average, his responces are rote 'stupid is as stupid does' or slower in response as he needs a minute to come up with a reply.
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.
This is a good representation of an int 7?
While I agree its representation of ways the 'Village Idiot' csn be different per individual NPC its not representative of a functional PC low a low int.
A good representation of Forrest Gump.
The Village Idiot gets by in life. He has a place in society. He can eke out an existence through his Cha score well enough. He can replace his climb skill with a Profession and take skill focus.
A 7 Int is more capable than all this.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.
Just be yourself.
Sorry mate, couldn't resist. : )
The thing is, although there are 'wrong' ways, there are enough 'right' ways that it shouldn't be a problem finding a way that is both 'right' and fun.
One problem I have (not with you! This is a general point) is the 'Int7 fighter doesn't know what grass is' foolishness. According to the probabilities of the 3d6 bell curve, 1 in 6 people have an Int of 7 or less. Do 1 in 6 people you know have trouble recognising a dog? Where do you live?
Conceptually. There isn't a difference in game between a guy with a 14 or 15. Only an odd number into even or vice versa. If we're talking purely outside of game mechanics, the 14 Int is as beneficial to that person as the 7 is detrimental. My argument there was more about the extrapolated penalties beyond what the game already gives you.
And a 7 int is as detrimental as a 14 int is beneficial.This is simply not true.
But we've already established that the skill penalties are largely irrelevant for a fighter-type. How often will a fighter be rolling a Spellcraft check?
As for your second comparison, it's fairly obvious that the Fighter with 7 intelligence does have less access to his feat choice. He can't take Combat Expertise or the feats that come after that.
But neither can the fighter with 10 intelligence.
The fighter spends 4 attribute points to get from 10 to 14 and gains 2 skill points per level, access to a substantially larger feat pool, and a few skill bonuses that are essentially useless. That's not a bad swap; it opens up some concepts such as a ranged trip build, that are very viable and interesting.
The fighter gains 4 attributes to get from 10 to 7, and loses.... some irrelevant skill penalties. This doesn't seem to close off any concepts, and in fact, will make the fighter more effective at his role because he can take additional attack bonuses (through Strength or Dexterity) or additional hit points (through Constitution).
The effect is that a fighter with intelligence 10 is actually less effective than the fighter with either 14 intelligence or the fighter with 7 intelligence, unless there are additional penalties that are imposed outside of the skill system to dropping your intelligence to 7. Penalties, as you phrased it, "beyond what the game already gives you."
|
|
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.Just be yourself.
Sorry mate, couldn't resist. : )
The thing is, although there are 'wrong' ways, there are enough 'right' ways that it shouldn't be a problem finding a way that is both 'right' and fun.
One problem I have (not with you! This is a general point) is the 'Int7 fighter doesn't know what grass is' foolishness. According to the probabilities of the 3d6 bell curve, 1 in 6 people have an Int of 7 or less. Do 1 in 6 people you know have trouble recognising a dog? Where do you live?
As I said, Remy's arguements a bit extreme. I believe he was under the assumption that 7 was lowest ability score possible not lowest possible starting ability.
|
|
I disagree. I believe the Village Idiot is a solid representation with Catch Off Guard replaced with Run.I posted this before in this thread, pretty sure not everyone will agree, but my opinion on an int 7 is that Tom Hanks 'Forrest Gump' is a good example. He can funtion in everyday society but is noticeably below average, his responces are rote 'stupid is as stupid does' or slower in response as he needs a minute to come up with a reply.
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.
This is a good representation of an int 7?
While I agree its representation of ways the 'Village Idiot' csn be different per individual NPC its not representative of a functional PC low a low int.
A good representation of Forrest Gump.
The Village Idiot gets by in life. He has a place in society. He can eke out an existence through his Cha score well enough. He can replace his climb skill with a Profession and take skill focus.
A 7 Int is more capable than all this.
Ok so what do you think a 'Rainman' would be stat wise.
A good representation of Forrest Gump.The Village Idiot gets by in life. He has a place in society. He can eke out an existence through his Cha score well enough. He can replace his climb skill with a Profession and take skill focus.
A 7 Int is more capable than all this.
How is the village idiot a good representation of Forrest Gump? Forrest Gump seems fully capable of functioning in society, manages plenty of different jobs and is not forced to rely on begging. Furthermore, the village idiot entry states that it could also be used to represent an idiot savant - and while that is a very dated term, "idiot" in "idiot savant" refers to serious intellectual disability.
I'd easily place Forrest Gump around 7.
4 is the intelligence of chokers, which are described as having "just-better-than-animalistic intelligence". Ogres and ettins are int 6.
But we've already established that the skill penalties are largely irrelevant for a fighter-type. How often will a fighter be rolling a Spellcraft check?
As for your second comparison, it's fairly obvious that the Fighter with 7 intelligence does have less access to his feat choice. He can't take Combat Expertise or the feats that come after that.But neither can the fighter with 10 intelligence.
The fighter spends 4 attribute points to get from 10 to 14 and gains 2 skill points per level, access to a substantially larger feat pool, and a few skill bonuses that are essentially useless. That's not a bad swap; it opens up some concepts such as a ranged trip build, that are very viable and interesting.
The fighter gains 4 attributes to get from 10 to 7, and loses.... some irrelevant skill penalties. This doesn't seem to close off any concepts, and in fact, will make the fighter more effective at his role because he can take additional attack bonuses (through Strength or Dexterity) or additional hit points (through Constitution).
The effect is that a fighter with intelligence 10 is actually less effective than the fighter with either 14 intelligence or the fighter with 7 intelligence, unless there are additional penalties that are imposed outside of the skill system to dropping your intelligence to 7. Penalties, as you phrased it, "beyond what the game already gives you."
The Fighter with 10 intelligence has an extra skill point over the one with a 7 or if the 7 spends his FCB on a skill points, more HP or more skill points.
4 Attribute points doesn't get you a 14. That costs 5.
Fighter #1
Str 16
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 7
Wis 12
Cha 12
Nicely balanced spread, lacks skill points, but has a bonus to charisma just for fun. He could bump an odd score up, but ultimately that is pointless in the long run since he'll bump up his Strength every 4 levels.
Fighter #2
Str 16
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 10
Cha 10
Also a balanced spread. Has more skill points than #1
Fighter #3
Str 16
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 10
AC is a bit lower. 1 more Skill point than everyone else. Has access to Combat Expertise and those feats.
So whats the problem? Fighter #1 has a +1 Will Save over the others and wisdom based checks. His Charisma score might be handy in chatting up a bar maid but is ultimately worthless.
This comes down to
A)All classes should be MAD to a degree and be penalized more heavily for lowering a stat.
B)Embrace the fact that some classes don't need a stat and in a party based game, should increase the effectiveness of his other scores.
I realize the Fighter is actually kinda cool since he has two dump stats. It gives him a slight ability score advantage when compared to the other much better than him full BAB classes.
A good representation of Forrest Gump.The Village Idiot gets by in life. He has a place in society. He can eke out an existence through his Cha score well enough. He can replace his climb skill with a Profession and take skill focus.
A 7 Int is more capable than all this.
How is the village idiot a good representation of Forrest Gump? Forrest Gump seems fully capable of functioning in society, manages plenty of different jobs and is not forced to rely on begging. Furthermore, the village idiot entry states that it could also be used to represent an idiot savant - and while that is a very dated term, "idiot" in "idiot savant" refers to serious intellectual disability.
As is the Village Idiot. You can replace Climb with Profession(Baker) and Catch off Guard with Skill Focus(Profession(Baker)). Replace Endurance with one of skills that gives him a bonus to professions and he does really well for himself.
Dude can bake well enough to get by in life. He is not forced to beg.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure how to RP low wis or cha.Just be yourself.
Sorry mate, couldn't resist. : )
The thing is, although there are 'wrong' ways, there are enough 'right' ways that it shouldn't be a problem finding a way that is both 'right' and fun.
One problem I have (not with you! This is a general point) is the 'Int7 fighter doesn't know what grass is' foolishness. According to the probabilities of the 3d6 bell curve, 1 in 6 people have an Int of 7 or less. Do 1 in 6 people you know have trouble recognising a dog? Where do you live?
<2 thumbs up>
That is exactly the point I was making when I said the average person has an 8, and if you are one of races with a built in penalty then a large part of the population has a 6. I was not even rolling stats because npc's don't get to roll, but it works out the same way.
No no, I see what Remy is saying.
It adds a lot of suspense to daily life.
"Can my 7 Str Wizard make all of his daily checks to chew his food?" for example.
Brilliant.
I find that this argument was convenientely avoided by people that say that int 7 is utterly crippling.
Because lets face it, encumbrance is nothing for a wizard and the more the level the wizard have the less an issue the encumbrace is.
Does the str 7 wizard have to roll a check to see if he can draw her metamagic rod of empower? Does the wizard need to roll to stand up from the prone position?
Might want to read some of the earlier threads. To say that encumbrance is nothing to a wizard because of spells and equipment is totally missing the point. Using resources to overcome a deficit is not the same thing as saying a deficit shouldn't/doesn't exist.
|
|
Dropping your Alchemist's strength from 10 to 9 dropped the medium weight load threshold by a whopping 3 pounds. In real world terms that is a barely noticeable difference, and a 9 score is no more remarkable than a 11. I suggest you take your own advice to avoid hyperbole to lend credence to your arguments.
Hardly anyone considers a 13 score to be supremely good, but then a 7 is a hopeless cripple. I just don't follow the logic there.
Not that I think either 9 or 7 is a huge crippling disability, but to be fair, if we assume the populace is built on either 3d6 rolls or the basic NPC array, the human average is 10.83 (10.5 rolled average +.33 avg from stat bonus). So a 9 is 1.83 from the average while an 11 is just 0.17 from the average. A 9 is as far from the average as a 12.66 is.
And if we look at adjustments, the penalty from having a 9 is twice as large as that of having an 11.
So yeah, a 9 is as far off average as 12.66 is. A 7 is as far off average as a 14.66.
It might seem nitpicky but I felt since the difference ends up affecting the adjustments involved, it's worth noting.
I understand the math. An average ability score is stated to be 10 in the Core Rulebook, so that is what I used even though the various methods used to generate them deviate from that.
Might want to read some of the earlier threads. To say that encumbrance is nothing to a wizard because of spells and equipment is totally missing the point. Using resources to overcome a deficit is not the same thing as saying a deficit shouldn't/doesn't exist.
there's two responses.
1) is that its nothing to a wizard because a wizard doesn't need to carry anything. He needs a spell pouch and he's good to go.
2) That "using resources" is not binary. There is a vast difference between trying to make up for doing more damage than forest gump by buying an exponentially higher priced higher + to your weapon and just plunking down a fixed 1k for your pearl of power so that you have the same number of spells AND more carrying capacity than someone with a 15 strength.
Might want to read some of the earlier threads. To say that encumbrance is nothing to a wizard because of spells and equipment is totally missing the point. Using resources to overcome a deficit is not the same thing as saying a deficit shouldn't/doesn't exist.there's two responses.
1) is that its nothing to a wizard because a wizard doesn't need to carry anything. He needs a spell pouch and he's good to go.
2) That "using resources" is not binary. There is a vast difference between trying to make up for doing more damage than forest gump by buying an exponentially higher priced higher + to your weapon and just plunking down a fixed 1k for your pearl of power so that you have the same number of spells AND more carrying capacity than someone with a 15 strength.
Those are both good responses, neither of which address the player who dumps his fighter's Int and Cha to 7 and then plays as if those scores are not below average. I agree that the 7s don't make him a totally socially inept moron, but he is below average in those areas.
Putting a 7 in a stat then using an in-game method to compensate for it is not the same a putting a 7 in a stat then playing as if it's not a bit of a hindrance.
It is already a hindrance. In the checks.Those are both good responses, neither of which address the player who dumps his fighter's Int and Cha to 7 and then plays as if those scores are not below average. I agree that the 7s don't make him a totally socially inept moron, but he is below average in those areas.
Putting a 7 in a stat then using an in-game method to compensate for it is not the same a putting a 7 in a stat then playing as if it's not a bit of a hindrance.
No one is contesting the mechanics. No one ever has. Most people are countering that people are not role playing or describing their character in accordance with the stats on their sheet.
Repeat: No one is saying that the stat does not give a penalty. It's being said that people want to pretend that they are smarter, more charismatic, stronger or whatever than they really are.
|
|
It is already a hindrance. In the checks.Those are both good responses, neither of which address the player who dumps his fighter's Int and Cha to 7 and then plays as if those scores are not below average. I agree that the 7s don't make him a totally socially inept moron, but he is below average in those areas.
Putting a 7 in a stat then using an in-game method to compensate for it is not the same a putting a 7 in a stat then playing as if it's not a bit of a hindrance.
how is it a hindrance for a fighter who dump int and cha to 7 if he never has to make a roll, letting the int and cha based build make those rolls?