Fix the Ability Score Disparity


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

This is a HUGE one:

Currently in Pathfinder and Starfinder there is a disparity within the ability scores.

Strength - (some) Melee Attacks, (some) Melee Damage, Encumbrance, CMB, CMD, Swim, and Climb.

Dexterity - (some) Melee Attacks, (some) Melee Damage, Ranged Attacks, Armor Class, CMD, Reflex Saves, Initiative, Acrobatics, Sleight of Hand, Disable Device, and Stealth.

Constitution - HP and Fortitude Saves.

Intelligence - Skill Points per level, a LOT of skills, and Bonus Languages.

Wisdom - Will Saves and a lot of key skills.

Charisma - Some key skills.

-----

So we know some of this changed, such as initiative, but Dexterity still seems disproportionately powerful, while Charisma is disproportionately weak.

I would like to see Pathfinder 2nd Edition take a look at this.

Here are my suggestions:

1. Do not allow any form of Dexterity to damage save for potentially for rogues.

2. Consider allowing characters to use Wisdom or Charisma for Will Saves. Charisma would represent a character's force of personality asserting itself.

3. Strip some of the uses for Dexterity out of the system.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The issue with this at a cursory glance js that some classes that are very MAD need that Dex or they'll have low scores in everything. I reckon if you wanna debuff Dex, they need to make sure to keep a class reliant on a 1 ability at a time,lest we get more Monks who need Strength for Damage, Dex to dodge, Con for HP and Wisdom for Ki.

Dark Archive

Move back to a more AD&D style attribute system, where most benefits don't kick until 14 in the ability. Minimise the overall effect of ability scores throughout?

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The current issue with Abilities scores is the disparity with how they work in combat. Out of combat, they are all pretty even (except for Strength and Constitution) really. But in combat, Dexterity far outstrips any of the other ability scores and Strength is a close second. Thus why all the angst over Dexterity builds being nerfed as it allows someone to create a Single Ability Dependent (SAD) melee combatant that is better than the typically Multiple Ability Dependent (MAD) classes. I think this is really the basis for the caster/melee disparity that is perceived, is that many caster classes are, for all intents and purposes, SAD classes that only need to focus on a single ability score for everything they do well. Why worry about all that much Dexterity (you can go 12 or at most 14 and be quite fine) when everything is touch attacks and typically as the CR increases the Touch AC decreases. So focusing everything on save or suck/die DCs really makes classes with the overpowered Hex mechanic super, super powerful.

So what I'd like to see:

  • All classes are forced to be MAD or every class can be SAD. One or the other. Not some classes are SAD (typically casters) while melee are MAD (except for Dexterity builds).

  • Every ability has some play in combat. A Strength Build will have completely different abilities than a Dexterity Build or a Charisma Build. Each can do some effective things in combat, but those things aren't just different names for the same ability. (e.g. Deadly Aim or Piranha Strike instead of Power Attack; or Dex to Damage just being a thing in lieu of Strength to Damage) They should be separate and distinct things that happen in combat, that make that character useful in combat, but they should affect combat in distinctly different ways. Perhaps Dex should be used to hit and Strength to damage and armor penetration while charisma is used to catch the enemy off guard.

  • It sounds like PF2 is going toward some similar system to the Automatic Bonus Progression, although comments on "we really look forward to your reaction when you see what your +1 sword can do" leads me to believe it won't be that completely. But removing stat bonuses from magic items will help this as well.

  • make Ability Modifier a type of bonus. So a Dex bonus doesn't stack with a Strength bonus, doesn't stack with a Charisma bonus, because they are all Ability Modifier bonuses. Unless stated otherwise that is, like where CMD says you get both bonuses. This reduces the effectiveness of stacking Dexterity, Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom bonuses to AC for some builds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Derry L. Zimeye wrote:
The issue with this at a cursory glance js that some classes that are very MAD need that Dex or they'll have low scores in everything. I reckon if you wanna debuff Dex, they need to make sure to keep a class reliant on a 1 ability at a time,lest we get more Monks who need Strength for Damage, Dex to dodge, Con for HP and Wisdom for Ki.

I want all classes to be MAD. The fix i'd enjoy is one of bounded accuracy allowing folks to do this without having to hyper optimize. Ive seen the everyone only needs two stats thing, and it was greatly disappointing. YMMV.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
1. Do not allow any form of Dexterity to damage save for potentially for rogues.

Completely and utterly disagree. *Lots* of players want to play nimble PCs, and telling everyone "You have to play a rogue to do that" would be really horrible game design.

PF's strength comes from "sure, you can do that!" Limiting people's character builds, especially via something as concept-critical as dex-to-damage, should be avoided as much as possible.

I also just disagree that all of the ability scores must be equally important. As long as there's no one score "every character must max this" and no one score where "every character should dump this", then I don't think it's a big issue.

Anyway, a lot of what made Dex so good in 1E is that it modifies your initiative. In 2E your initiative will apparently be a Perception roll most of the time, so that already devalues Dex a good bit.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes.

Fix MAD and SAD. Make all Classes dependent on the same number of Abilities. Maybe all combat-types need THREE of the Ability Scores while all casting-types also need THREE of the Ability Scores while all 'odd'-types also need THREE of the Ability Scores. .... Or they all need four Ability Scores. Or they all need two Ability Scores.

No more, this Class needs one; this Class needs three; this Class needs five.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
W E Ray wrote:

Yes.

Fix MAD and SAD. Make all Classes dependent on the same number of Abilities. Maybe all combat-types need THREE of the Ability Scores while all casting-types also need THREE of the Ability Scores while all 'odd'-types also need THREE of the Ability Scores. .... Or they all need four Ability Scores. Or they all need two Ability Scores.

No more, this Class needs one; this Class needs three; this Class needs five.

No.

This is sacrificing customization on the altar of balance.

What if I want to play a wizard who is extremely smart, but not that wise or charismatic or strong or nimble or hardy?

What if I want to play a brute who uses pure muscle to tear through dungeons, without backing it up with a big brain or people skills?

Putting in arbitrary design restraints instead of using more nuanced approaches to class balance is a recipe for blandness. At that point we're not even comparing to 5E, we're comparing to *shudder* 4E.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I’d love for things to be tweaked such that all attributes do something for all classes.

As is, Con, Dex, and Wis do something for all classes because pretty much everyone wants better saves, AC, and HP. And by making Int yield more skill points, Int also became a stat that does something for all classes.

The big exceptions are Str and Cha, which do virtually nothing for a lot of classes. And, for this reason, are the most heavily dumped stats.

It would be great if these were tweaked to provide something desirable for everyone.

EDIT: This would do a lot of things: disincentivize min-maxing, make MAD classes more attractive, and make it more mechanically justifiable to do things like play a charismatic fighter or a strong wizard. All of these are things that I think would make the game more fun.


I think it would be useful if there were more significant penalties for ability scores dumped to 8 or less.


I'd like to see options for different classes to get different stats to things, as that is one of the things that I think 5e actually does well and desnt lead to excessive simplification.

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
I think it would be useful if there were more significant penalties for ability scores dumped to 8 or less.

Or like in Starfinder, offer zero incentive to dump a stat below 10.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sayt wrote:
I'd like to see options for different classes to get different stats to things, as that is one of the things that I think 5e actually does well and desnt lead to excessive simplification.

It's really easy to end up removing any meaningful distinction between ability scores this way, ending up in de facto 4E-land.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tallow wrote:
pjrogers wrote:
I think it would be useful if there were more significant penalties for ability scores dumped to 8 or less.
Or like in Starfinder, offer zero incentive to dump a stat below 10.

I'd like to see incentive to have weaknesses--real ones, not "who cares if I dump Strength, I kill things with my mind" weaknesses.

Scarab Sages

blahpers wrote:
Tallow wrote:
pjrogers wrote:
I think it would be useful if there were more significant penalties for ability scores dumped to 8 or less.
Or like in Starfinder, offer zero incentive to dump a stat below 10.
I'd like to see incentive to have weaknesses--real ones, not "who cares if I dump Strength, I kill things with my mind" weaknesses.

Agreed. Perhaps taking a flaw for each additional -1 in modifier you take? I mean Raistlin had a real flaw for his dumped Constitution.


I would really like to see Charisma get more use. Because its the greatest dump stat until you stack so many feats and class features together that everything runs off of it.

There as a mention by one of the creators that during original pathfinder creation they were going to take an approach similar to 4th where saves were calculated off of the higher of 2 stats.
Reflex was Dex or Int
Fort was Str or Con
Will was Wis or Cha

It has the effect of taking a little power away from dex and raising Charisma a little bit out of being the universal dump stat.

Now i don't know if i'd go so far as 4th and then extend that to past saves (They had classes with Str or Dex to hit, Dex or Int to AC, Con or Cha to Hp, and i think wisdom was in there somehwere). But it would at least make the stat less of a punishment for the charisma classes.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Soo you want people to optimize with flaws added?People will still dump stats regardless of the flaw and when being a MAD class become the better choice.Did you forget about the hatred core rogue take?Now you want everyone else feel the same way?İs that it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
It's really easy to end up removing any meaningful distinction between ability scores this way, ending up in de facto 4E-land.

Ability diversity was not 4e's problem. 4e's problem was that it pidgeonholed classes excessively.

Ability score divesity can be used to differentiate classes and make them interestingly and meaningfully distinct from each other.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sayt wrote:
I'd like to see options for different classes to get different stats to things, as that is one of the things that I think 5e actually does well and desnt lead to excessive simplification.

If I enjoyed that kind of system, I would already be playing 5.0 instead of Pathfinder.

I feel the same is true of most the other people here.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just dont understand why you guys want to punish people.Why not add options for players.Add things that can make a fighter player want to go for charisma in any build.Punishing players is never the right option.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you read my response, you'll note I was doing exactly that Lausth.


Tallow wrote:
make Ability Modifier a type of bonus. So a Dex bonus doesn't stack with a Strength bonus, doesn't stack with a Charisma bonus, because they are all Ability Modifier bonuses. Unless stated otherwise that is, like where CMD says you get both bonuses. This reduces the effectiveness of stacking Dexterity, Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom bonuses to AC for some builds.

I REALLY like this idea.

But best of all would be if PG2 didn't have different types of bonuses; its one of the biggest complications in PF today. They just need to find another way to do it, like only allowing one bonus of any kind to each thing.


MAD classes are more interesting and balanced than SAD ones. Just Maxing 1 god stat and ignoring all others is what makes builds get lame and uncreative. (Not to mention overpowered)

I personally don't like how in 5e you can have a Warlock that uses CHA for casting spells, attack rolls, damage rolls and some abilities. (Shooting Star Bards in PF are close). Makes the builds become really un-interesting.

But when you're MAD like PF Monk, you might see STR, DEX and even INT builds, if not some other jank I've never heard of before. That is what PF is all about!

Dark Archive

Tallow wrote:
If you read my response, you'll note I was doing exactly that Lausth.

You suggested a punishment for players.I suggested a reward for players.Our proposals are diametrically opposed to each other.No you didnt do that exactly.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lausth wrote:
Tallow wrote:
If you read my response, you'll note I was doing exactly that Lausth.
You suggested a punishment for players.I suggested a reward for players.Our proposals are diametrically opposed to each other.No you didnt do that exactly.

My initial post in this thread most certainly did not suggest punishment. The Last statement was just brainstorming.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
RumpinRufus wrote:
What if I want to play a wizard who is extremely smart, but not that wise or charismatic or strong or nimble or hardy?

Why is this a valid choice that should be supported by game mechanics in a way that "I want to play a fighter who is extremely strong, but not that wise, or charismatic, or smart, or nimble, or hardy" is not?

Like sure, you can play that fighter but it would be a weak character, so why should the "deficient in 5 attributes" wizard be fine?


PossibleCabbage wrote:
RumpinRufus wrote:
What if I want to play a wizard who is extremely smart, but not that wise or charismatic or strong or nimble or hardy?

Why is this a valid choice that should be supported by game mechanics in a way that "I want to play a fighter who is extremely strong, but not that wise, or charismatic, or smart, or nimble, or hardy" is not?

Like sure, you can play that fighter but it would be a weak character, so why should the "deficient in 5 attributes" wizard be fine?

I think an Int-based fighter should be supported by the rules, at least to the extent that verisimilitude allows. I always wanted to make a functional Kirin Style fighter or something similarly Int-based, but it always just seemed too weak.

But anyway, "verisimilitude" is the real answer to your question. Common sense suggests that a fighter should at least be either strong or dexterous. But common sense does not suggest that wizards must be charismatic. Classes abilities that are shoehorned into using non-obvious stats for balance reasons makes it feel like a game, which throws away the main strength of TTRPGs, which is creating an experience which feels like real life.

Besides, it's not like there's not other ways to balance classes.

Edit: I seem to have misread your post... I'll blame sleep deprivation... time for me to go to bed.


If the only change to ability scores is "Dex never applies to damage," that would be enough for me.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
TheFlyingPhoton wrote:
If the only change to ability scores is "Dex never applies to damage," that would be enough for me.

That would be TERRIBLE. So many iconic figures in history and fiction would become impossible to build. Gone would be the Arya Starks. That single change might be bad enough for me not to play the game.

Dark Archive

RumpinRufus wrote:
TheFlyingPhoton wrote:
If the only change to ability scores is "Dex never applies to damage," that would be enough for me.
That would be TERRIBLE. So many iconic figures in history and fiction would become impossible to build. Gone would be the Arya Starks. That single change might be bad enough for me not to play the game.

I think my prefered method to those kinds of things is that if you want to hit with dex that is fine. but anyone short of a rouge should not do damage anywhere near that of a Str build. There should be more options for dex based attacks that give effects. To me Arya is a rouge/assassin 100% but the nimble person who gets in dodges and does 6 swipes of his dagger shouldn't do 1d6+10 for every hit when the barb does 1 hit for 2d6 +15 because guess what a barb can do? It can take and deal damage that is basically it.

I think I would solve it by making feats that are "give the enemy a few points of bleed per attack" or "if you land 3 attacks in a round reduce the opponents move by half"

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But dex builds dont do the damage of STR builds already.Until later levels but then they have to do damage to survive.

Dark Archive

Lausth wrote:
But dex builds don't do the damage of STR builds already.Until later levels but then they have to do damage to survive.

I'm not sure what dex builds your speaking of but last I knew in the DPR Olympics a few of the top 5 are dex to damage builds.

My point is if a barbarian does 35 damage per round then a dex to damage build shouldn't be doing 30 because they are also getting so much more out of being dex based. If I take a cross country runner and a NFL lineman and complain that the lineman can't keep up in a long distance race I am being ridiculous. By choosing to play a dex build you are excepting that because I can do x,y, and z my x is going to be less than the person who can only do x. That is just part of the game balance. A person with only x should x the best, followed by the person with x and y, etc.

Currently, you have characters who do x,y,z, and the rest of the alphabet and only do slightly less damage than the Str builds.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually have str fighters with more than 200 dpr at level 12

EDİT:DPR is low due to a rule that we cant put aoo triggers in dpr calculations.İf we could DPR would be over 300.

Dark Archive

Just point something about high damage builds.Having enough damage to kill the boss is enough.Ability to do thousands of damage at high levels is not exactly that impresive.Doing enough damage to kill the boss and doing enough damage to kill the boss 5 times over does the same thing.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

In an effort to make MAD more common and therefore subtly tweak the dependency on Dex, I reckon if each class were to require dependency on two or more skills, one mental and one physical, it'd allow for some interesting play- for example, Sorcerers using Charisma for spells and Constitution for Bloodline powers. Naturally, this comes with its risks- not everyone wants a Barbarian who needs Charisma, or a Fighter relying on Wisdom.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Derry L. Zimeye wrote:
In an effort to make MAD more common and therefore subtly tweak the dependency on Dex, I reckon if each class were to require dependency on two or more skills, one mental and one physical, it'd allow for some interesting play- for example, Sorcerers using Charisma for spells and Constitution for Bloodline powers. Naturally, this comes with its risks- not everyone wants a Barbarian who needs Charisma, or a Fighter relying on Wisdom.

I was thinking something along those lines. Maybe tie spells per day to one and spell DC's to another. Barbarians already have this to an extent with Str and Con, Id probably say that a way to make them scale more on Con would be to take rage and have it be, instead of 4+con lv 1 and 2 every level after, 4+con and then half con rounded, not sure whether up or down yet.

Dark Archive

Lausth wrote:
Just point something about high damage builds.Having enough damage to kill the boss is enough.Ability to do thousands of damage at high levels is not exactly that impresive.Doing enough damage to kill the boss and doing enough damage to kill the boss 5 times over does the same thing.

Sure that is certainly something that happens more on strength build then on dex in my experience. Barbs very much get to maul the one thing and likely overkill it with some build in the low thousands single target. But a gunslinger who does 1800 DPR is likely splitting that 9 ways, dropping the boss and his mooks.

Dark Archive

huh 1800 DPR gunslinger....at which level?İf it is 20 it doesnt count.More than %90 percent of all pathfinder player groups dissolve around level 12.That is if they didnt already.

EDİT:We are not talking about that 20k inqusitor/gunslingr builds that can do 20k around level 12-16 right?He cant spread his damage.

EDİT2 :That builds monk version that can do more than 1k cant do it aswell.Well he can always enlarge reach weapon but so can my fighter.

Dark Archive

Lausth wrote:
huh 1800 DPR gunslinger....at which level?İf it is 20 it doesnt count.More than %90 percent of all pathfinder player groups dissolve around level 12.That is if they didnt already.

at level twelve I'd have to go check but at lv 12 i think it was around 16 attacks per round for 1d8+15ish for an average of 20ish damage per hit for a base average of 320 with no buffs or any special class things.

Double barrel pistol for 2 shot off every shot.
3 from bab
3 from greater twf
1 from rapid shot
1 from haste

Then you get into things like the pistelero can add 3d6 to a shot for 1 grit. The named bullet spell adds a bunch as well.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

16 attacks per round doesnt work.So it is similar to that inqusitor build.Using aoo triggers with snap shot , outflank etc.That build is as suicidal as it gets.

EDİT:I guess that is what would ı get by listening to DPR olympics.That builds isnt op.You can kill a build like that with a single ambush.Survivability replaces damage at high levels man.That is how they balance it.

Dark Archive

Lausth wrote:

16 attacks per round doesnt work.So it is similar to that inqusitor build.Using aoo triggers with snap shot , outflank etc.That build is as suicidal as it gets.

EDİT:I guess that is what would ı get by listening to DPR olympics.That builds isnt op.You can kill a build like that with a single ambush.Survivability replaces damage at high levels man.That is how they balance it.

What about that build makes it any more subjective to an ambush then any other class. It is literally just a gunslinger using guns, it is no worse off then any other gunslinger would be. An ambush by a wizard using confusion takes out most barbarians but that doesn't mean barbarians are worthless.

Also why doesn't 16 attacks work.

prd wrote:
This pistol has two parallel barrels; each barrel can be fired independently as a separate action, or both can be shot at once with the same action

I could either go shot, one bullet, shot, other bullet, reload or shot, both bullets, reload. Sure it is a -4 but before penalties a gunslinger at lv 12 has a +22ish to hit touch. Dropping that to an average across all shots to a +8 or +9 still gives you a good chance to hit on every shot.

Dark Archive

Forget about the double barreled pistols.Sorry.They are banned in everygame ı played.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I might be wrong on this, but wasn't that build killed by a clarification that said firing both barrels together was its own standard action.

Dark Archive

I am not sure.I let gunslingers go due to being to much of a one trick pony.I know the inqusitor/gunslinger is killed by a faq or something similar.


Arcueid wrote:

I would really like to see Charisma get more use. Because its the greatest dump stat until you stack so many feats and class features together that everything runs off of it.

There as a mention by one of the creators that during original pathfinder creation they were going to take an approach similar to 4th where saves were calculated off of the higher of 2 stats.
Reflex was Dex or Int
Fort was Str or Con
Will was Wis or Cha

It has the effect of taking a little power away from dex and raising Charisma a little bit out of being the universal dump stat.

Now i don't know if i'd go so far as 4th and then extend that to past saves (They had classes with Str or Dex to hit, Dex or Int to AC, Con or Cha to Hp, and i think wisdom was in there somehwere). But it would at least make the stat less of a punishment for the charisma classes.

I kind of liked 5e's appoach, which was to do away with Fort Ref Will and instead made six saves, one for each ability score. It also made taking something low properly feel like a weakness because there will always be /something/ that goes against it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

What if we made saves based on two attributes each, instead of one?

Like your Fort save is modified by your StrMod plus your ConMod, your Reflex save is modified by your DexMod plus your IntMod, and your Will save is modified by your WisMod plus your ChaMod.

On the whole this would slightly raise everybody's saves while also discouraging "stat dumping". If people are saving too often, we can always just adjust DCs, but this effectively makes the "7 Int, Cha, and Str" character dangerous to play.


It is always interesting to see people trash CHA since in my house table it is usually one of the most desired stats.

It directly affects your looks and how NPCs react to you from the get go.

This means if you trash CHA you will be considered crappy looking, no doesnt matter if you described yourself like a hollywood actor, you dont have the stats to back it up, just like you cant say you will move a giant rock with STR 7.

Ofc, there is always that guy who dont care for the talking or interacting with NPCs and just want to bash heads XD.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lausth wrote:
I just dont understand why you guys want to punish people.Why not add options for players.Add things that can make a fighter player want to go for charisma in any build.Punishing players is never the right option.

Under current rules it is quite possible to build a SAD charisma-based fighter that works well both melee and ranged.

Side benefits: he can UMD anything and out of combat he's the party face.


I would support a 5E-style saving throw for each ability score.

You get knocked off a wall, and need to catch onto the ledge to avoid plummeting? Make a Str saving throw.

Enemy casts a spell and you need to dodge it? Make a Dex saving throw.

You get poisoned? Make a Con saving throw.

You aren't sure whether something is an illusion or not? Make an Int saving throw.

Someone is trying to distract you from your task? Make a Wis saving throw.

You need to resist a mental compulsion? Make a Cha saving throw.

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Fix the Ability Score Disparity All Messageboards