I was going to do a Spellcasting Poll to continue the conversation and gather more information following the Warlock Poll thread. The flaw is without a perspective to ground the poll I have too many questions I could include in the poll and my personal biases keep flavoring the questions and possible answers. I believe a more open discussion is needed before I could create a poll that incapsulates the ideas of most of the people replying on these threads allowing them to honestly have a good options to vote.
Do you think that the casting stats are well defined in the PHB or DMG? What is the actual difference from between casting with Int or Wis or Cha?
Do you believe the the Classes all have their appropriate casting stat(s) based on your understanding of the casting stats?
Which Casting Stat(s) would you assign each Class?
Would another class having a stat that differs from your assignment make you dislike the class? Which one(s)? Why?
What other general spell casting questions would you like polled?
Do you think that the casting stats are well defined in the PHB or DMG? What is the actual difference from between casting with Int or Wis or Cha?
Not necessarily well defined, as it's not really spelled out anywhere, but I'd say you can pick up what each of the stats mean. Intelligence means the spellcasting is formulaic, either based on remembering things or just ingenuity. Wisdom is defined best in the book, though not necessarily very well, as meaning connection and attunement to the world around you, including nature and deities. Charisma varies, but it can be confidence, ability to play instruments well, or just the force of will needed to fashion magical power into the shape you desire.
Do you believe the the Classes all have their appropriate casting stat(s) based on your understanding of the casting stats?
Mostly.
Which Casting Stat(s) would you assign each Class?
The same as 2014, except with Warlocks. I think Warlocks would be more interesting as Intelligence casters, since I prefer the fantasy of patrons giving forbidden knowledge instead of just casting through the Warlock, and I think it would highlight Warlock's place as a seeker of arcane secrets, which I've seen ignored much more often than not.
Would another class having a stat that differs from your assignment make you dislike the class? Which one(s)? Why?
Yes. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Wizard.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Taken from your polled thread, I would love to see all casting an option to be selected at character creation, similar to the Blood Hunter now. Each class can choose which stat they would like to invest in for their spellcasting ability. Alternatively, we could borrow from another game systems and divorce spellcasting from a specific stat and have a separate ability labeled "spellcasting ability". Either idea is pretty neat in my opinion.
I wouldn't say they're poorly defined as much as I prefer the way the Stormbringer/Elric game (and I think most of Basic RPG sort of does this as well) handled a spellcasting ability score:
Change Wisdom to Power, and everyone uses Power for spellcasting/etc.
I get reasons why they have Power spread across 3 different abilities, I just find it to be a constant mild annoyance in the design of the ability scores themselves. A single Power ability score is much more cleanly defined, IMO. The current way is sort of "well, mystical strength might be X , or Y, or Z .. but Z also means this other thing, and Y also means this other thing, oh and X also means this other thing as well". Instead, it would be:
Mystical strength is always Power. Power is always mystical strength.
Knowledge is always Intelligence. Intelligence is always knowledge.
Personality things are always Charisma. Charisma is always personality things.
I wouldn't say they're poorly defined as much as I prefer the way the Stormbringer/Elric game (and I think most of Basic RPG sort of does this as well) handled a spellcasting ability score:
Change Wisdom to Power, and everyone uses Power for spellcasting/etc.
I get reasons why they have Power spread across 3 different abilities, I just find it to be a constant mild annoyance in the design of the ability scores themselves. A single Power ability score is much more cleanly defined, IMO. The current way is sort of "well, mystical strength might be X , or Y, or Z .. but Z also means this other thing, and Y also means this other thing, oh and X also means this other thing as well". Instead, it would be:
Mystical strength is always Power. Power is always mystical strength.
Knowledge is always Intelligence. Intelligence is always knowledge.
Personality things are always Charisma. Charisma is always personality things.
(the sticky wicket is: where's Perception?)
AEDorsay is currently banned from the forums, so I think I'll honor her by saying that she actually has a complete ability score just for Perception. I mean, it makes sense, considering how valuable it is as a skill, and how it doesn't feel like it connects super well to the other stats.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I wouldn't say they're poorly defined as much as I prefer the way the Stormbringer/Elric game (and I think most of Basic RPG sort of does this as well) handled a spellcasting ability score:
Change Wisdom to Power, and everyone uses Power for spellcasting/etc.
I get reasons why they have Power spread across 3 different abilities, I just find it to be a constant mild annoyance in the design of the ability scores themselves. A single Power ability score is much more cleanly defined, IMO. The current way is sort of "well, mystical strength might be X , or Y, or Z .. but Z also means this other thing, and Y also means this other thing, oh and X also means this other thing as well". Instead, it would be:
Mystical strength is always Power. Power is always mystical strength.
Knowledge is always Intelligence. Intelligence is always knowledge.
Personality things are always Charisma. Charisma is always personality things.
(the sticky wicket is: where's Perception?)
AEDorsay is currently banned from the forums, so I think I'll honor her by saying that she actually has a complete ability score just for Perception. I mean, it makes sense, considering how valuable it is as a skill, and how it doesn't feel like it connects super well to the other stats.
I could get behind that, and it wouldn't be the first time D&D had a 7th ability score (late 1st edition, after the release of the "Unearthed Arcana" book for that edition, they added a "Comeliness" ability score that specifically meant physical attractiveness; sort of to emphasize that Charisma is absolutely not physical attractiveness ... but it was discarded for 2e).
While I’m open to this discussion going wherever I will warn that if we go down the rabbit hole of designing or using a completely different spell casting system we will never come to any conclusions about what we already have.
While I’m open to this discussion going wherever I will warn that if we go down the rabbit hole of designing or using a completely different spell casting system we will never come to any conclusions about what we already have.
Not a completely different spellcasting system, not a redesign of the current spell casting system. The spellcasting system wouldn't change at all (other than the constant reference to "your spellcasting ability" becoming needlessly generalized).
A minor change to the Ability Score list and definitions, possibly 1 new Ability Score. A minor re-organization of the primary ability scores listed for each class, and the default ability score used for certain skills. None of the actual mechanics would change (how you do X wont change, but which ability score/modifier you use for X might).
I wouldn't say they're poorly defined as much as I prefer the way the Stormbringer/Elric game (and I think most of Basic RPG sort of does this as well) handled a spellcasting ability score:
Change Wisdom to Power, and everyone uses Power for spellcasting/etc.
I get reasons why they have Power spread across 3 different abilities, I just find it to be a constant mild annoyance in the design of the ability scores themselves. A single Power ability score is much more cleanly defined, IMO. The current way is sort of "well, mystical strength might be X , or Y, or Z .. but Z also means this other thing, and Y also means this other thing, oh and X also means this other thing as well". Instead, it would be:
Mystical strength is always Power. Power is always mystical strength.
Knowledge is always Intelligence. Intelligence is always knowledge.
Personality things are always Charisma. Charisma is always personality things.
(the sticky wicket is: where's Perception?)
this would make many class concepts fail. Wizards are tied to being intelligent, This would either make wizards in general non intelligent, or it would make them have to increase two stats. (if they retained some benefit for intelligence)
Where is insight as well? A druid is not defined by intelligence(they may be raised by animals), nor personality(they may be hermits)
the stats aren't just about their offensive potential, they are supposed to represent the archetypes/tropes of the class.
I wouldn't say they're poorly defined as much as I prefer the way the Stormbringer/Elric game (and I think most of Basic RPG sort of does this as well) handled a spellcasting ability score:
Change Wisdom to Power, and everyone uses Power for spellcasting/etc.
I get reasons why they have Power spread across 3 different abilities, I just find it to be a constant mild annoyance in the design of the ability scores themselves. A single Power ability score is much more cleanly defined, IMO. The current way is sort of "well, mystical strength might be X , or Y, or Z .. but Z also means this other thing, and Y also means this other thing, oh and X also means this other thing as well". Instead, it would be:
Mystical strength is always Power. Power is always mystical strength.
Knowledge is always Intelligence. Intelligence is always knowledge.
Personality things are always Charisma. Charisma is always personality things.
(the sticky wicket is: where's Perception?)
this would make many class concepts fail. Wizards are tied to being intelligent, This would either make wizards in general non intelligent, or it would make them have to increase two stats. (if they retained some benefit for intelligence)
They _concept_ would still be intact, the mechanical representation of that concept might change a little. For example, it would imply some amount of MAD: they would need Intelligence to reflect their academic emphasis (and academic/book learning method of to magic), and Power to reflect their potency with magic. Nothing says they would in general become non intelligent. As I said, in addition to the academic emphasis of a Wizard, it could be reflected in their spells by giving them a bonus to the number of spells they can prepare.
Where is insight as well? A druid is not defined by intelligence(they may be raised by animals), nor personality(they may be hermits)
If we have a Perception stat, then Power and Perception.
the stats aren't just about their offensive potential, they are supposed to represent the archetypes/tropes of the class.
Which is not contradicted by having a Power attribute that replaces the spellcasting aspects of INT, WIS, and CHA.
What skills is 'power' tied to?
For the default system? None. What skill is Constitution associated with?
For the flexible system? It could be used with Arcana or Religion or Nature when identifying a spell (especially one that is in the act of casting).
While I’m open to this discussion going wherever I will warn that if we go down the rabbit hole of designing or using a completely different spell casting system we will never come to any conclusions about what we already have.
Not a completely different spellcasting system, not a redesign of the current spell casting system. The spellcasting system wouldn't change at all (other than the constant reference to "your spellcasting ability" becoming needlessly generalized).
A minor change to the Ability Score list and definitions, possibly 1 new Ability Score. A minor re-organization of the primary ability scores listed for each class, and the default ability score used for certain skills. None of the actual mechanics would change (how you do X wont change, but which ability score/modifier you use for X might).
I was in a group that tried to homebrew rules to adapt the RWBY anime to 5e, and adding a 7th stat for “Aura” (the magic in the show, essentially) did severely stagnate ability distribution. Too much was dependent on it not to emphasize it when designing a character and it didn’t contribute to other areas, so the net result was a loss in general effectiveness. Part of the point of tying casting to the current stats is to allow for it to then translate into skills and saves to boost character performance. And yes, I’m aware people will claim CHA casters will then be pigeonholed as a face as a consequence. I’m not interested in relitigating that debate yet again. Skill-wise I that might just be a limitation we’re stuck with, in the same way there’s far more DEX skills than STR and no CON skills at all. Now, pulling some more saves against things like Charm over to CHA might help clarify its sphere in relation to spellcasting, but my point is that my experience suggests a 7th stat for all casting would ultimately be detrimental to caster diversification of play, as it relates to tangible mechanics.
The stats aren't really that well defined. First thing I did when making my own RP system was "merging" charisma and wisdom into Willpower, and adding Perception as its own thing.
So you either study magic and learn it through effort (Intellect) or else magic comes naturally to you or you manifest it through faith in a deity (Willpower).
More on topic, I'd really want more Intelligence casters in the game. Artificer really needs to be made core; it doesn't have to be full on Steampunk on release, but not being in the PHB makes it really DOA for future content, as we've learned previously. Warlock very tiny bit makes more sense as Intelligence than Charisma, but arguments could be made for all three, I suppose. Bard works as Intelligence or Charisma, but not Wisdom, really. The amount of "just imagine" needed to explain a Wisdom bard would also explain an Intelligence paladin.
ALSO too few casters study magic and have spellbooks. There should be more spellbooks around.
The stats aren't really that well defined. First thing I did when making my own RP system was "merging" charisma and wisdom into Willpower, and adding Perception as its own thing.
I actually dislike Charisma in General, it's means some classes are specifically better at talking than others in a very odd way. I don't mind characters being better but classes is kind of just strange. I also don't mind classes having their own unique things, like Bards playing music or rogues picking pockets but Charisma is sort of almost all encompassing in the whole party face department. The idea that the bard has a +12 in Persuasion & Bluff, the Paladin has a +9, the Rogue has a +2 and the Cleric has a -1 because of how those classes generally spec and play... just feels off.
I think an ability which doesn't auto dominate the talk with other parts in it's place would be better.
The stats aren't really that well defined. First thing I did when making my own RP system was "merging" charisma and wisdom into Willpower, and adding Perception as its own thing.
I actually dislike Charisma in General, it's means some classes are specifically better at talking than others in a very odd way. I don't mind characters being better but classes is kind of just strange. I also don't mind classes having their own unique things, like Bards playing music or rogues picking pockets but Charisma is sort of almost all encompassing in the whole party face department. The idea that the bard has a +12 in Persuasion & Bluff, the Paladin has a +9, the Rogue has a +2 and the Cleric has a -1 because of how those classes generally spec and play... just feels off.
I think an ability which doesn't auto dominate the talk with other parts in it's place would be better.
I despise the idea of a "talk" stat. "Talk" should be contextual. Are you bluffing in a poker game, and trying not to show your tells? Obviously an effort of will. Spinning a Keyser Soze style yarn that leads nowhere? A feat of intelligence. Feinting in combat? Dexterity.
Do you think that the casting stats are well defined in the PHB or DMG? What is the actual difference from between casting with Int or Wis or Cha?
I think Intelligence and Wisdom are well defined; Intelligence is all about memorisation and magical formulae, Wisdom is more intuitive or guided (channelling another's power). Charisma is the least well defined score though I think it's clear what the intention is on most classes that use it, i.e- Bard is performative, Sorcerer is innate.
Do you believe the the Classes all have their appropriate casting stat(s) based on your understanding of the casting stats?
I think most are correct (or at least have the most appropriate score), but I think Paladin and Warlock are weak fits for Charisma.
Which Casting Stat(s) would you assign each Class?
If I had to choose only one each, I'd change Paladin to Wisdom and Warlock to Intelligence, but there's reasonable justification for both to have a choice (such as WIS/CHA for Paladin, and INT/CHA for Warlock).
Would another class having a stat that differs from your assignment make you dislike the class? Which one(s)? Why?
It doesn't bother me all that much that Paladin and Warlock are currently Charisma based, and if they remained unchanged from 5e I'm hardly going to start spitting blood or anything. It would bother me more if other classes were changed as while I don't think they're all perfect, they feel like they have the most appropriate scores as they are now.
I can see the arguments for Sorcerer to become Constitution, but with CON being hit-points and concentration I don't see that being viable, it would need big downsides to counteract how much less score dependent it would make them, for me that feels like a non-starter so Charisma is fine with that in mind.
What other general spell casting questions would you like polled?
If you're thinking in terms of what poll questions might be useful, the subject does get very complicated very quickly. I was giving some thought to what questions might be useful to ask (and whether the UA forum is the right place, general might be more appropriate). The list I've come up with so far is something like:
Do you think spellcasting ability scores need to be changed? (required)
No
Yes, specific classes need changes
Yes, all classes should have a choice of any mental score (INT/WIS/CHA)
Yes, all casting should use a mixture of the three mental scores (INT/WIS/CHA)
Yes, other (please reply)
If you think specific classes need changes, please choose (multiple choice, optional) (list of classes, no other options)
If you think all casting should be based on all three mental scores, what should each do (multiple choice, optional)?
Basically the idea is that depending on the answer to the first question you fill out only one of the other questions. But this feels like a complex set of questions that still don't really cover all that much, it's just covering some of the options that have been talked about already but in a way that might get some useful numbers behind them in terms of support/preference.
And I'm not even sure if the first question should be one choice or multiple, as some people might be happy with any of several options.
Plus this is excluding even more radical changes to spellcasting; allowing any class to pick its score is somewhat radical, splitting different aspects of casting across all three scores is even more radical, but both should be reasonably compatible with existing 5e content with minor tweaks (e.g- features that use a specific score but should be changed to "spellcasting ability"). But there have been other ideas like completely changing the ability scores (do we really need three different mental scores?) etc.
It might make more sense to have separate threads for different options, for example; one dedicated to choosing the most appropriate casting score(s) for each class, with one poll per class (and multiple choices on each)? Another for discussing every class getting flexible casting (as magical races do), and another for changing each score to being a specific aspect of spellcasting?
Either that or it might be worth looking at other options for running a survey, like the platform the UA feedbacks surveys themselves have been using; these seem to have the ability to exclude questions based on earlier answers. But I'm not sure if that specific platform allows for public results or not.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I think most are correct (or at least have the most appropriate score), but I think Paladin and Warlock are weak fits for Charisma
Paladin and Warlock fit the archaic definition of Charisma (barer of divine gift). The one that D&D doesn't actually claim to use, despite it probably being the reason the Paladin had a high CHA requirement back when the class was first created.
The odd-ball is Sorcerer, unless you squint and say that "divine spark" can somehow relate to "generational bloodline", and then make that divine spark be more generic to any powerful magical source (like draconic bloodline, etc.). If it's literally "divine spark", then the Divine Soul Sorcerer fits the archaic definition of Charisma, if it is an inheritable spark. Otherwise ... Sorcerous magic seems completely unrelated to any definition of Charisma.
The stats aren't really that well defined. First thing I did when making my own RP system was "merging" charisma and wisdom into Willpower, and adding Perception as its own thing.
Yeah, if I was creating an entirely new system from scratch (or heavily revamping d20), I would start with Ability Scores that are sort of like the SPECIAL system, sort of. SPECIAL specifically lacks a willpower/mysticism ability score.
I think most are correct (or at least have the most appropriate score), but I think Paladin and Warlock are weak fits for Charisma
Paladin and Warlock fit the archaic definition of Charisma (barer of divine gift). The one that D&D doesn't actually claim to use, despite it probably being the reason the Paladin had a high CHA requirement back when the class was first created.
The odd-ball is Sorcerer, unless you squint and say that "divine spark" can somehow relate to "generational bloodline", and then make that divine spark be more generic to any powerful magical source (like draconic bloodline, etc.). If it's literally "divine spark", then the Divine Soul Sorcerer fits the archaic definition of Charisma, if it is an inheritable spark. Otherwise ... Sorcerous magic seems completely unrelated to any definition of Charisma.
sorcerer got chr by process of elimination. They needed a mental stat, it can't be int, because its a caster for people who aren't interested in scholar. It can't be wis, because the concept isn't linked to being wise, many suggested themes would probably have them be unwise, out of control, still learning. They are born with innate power, and charisma seems like an innate thing, force of personality. Things just seem to go your way because of desire/fate. All three Chr users are tied to the concept of force of will that the world seems to conform to.
it doesnt line up with the common use of convincing people, but it does line up with I can do these things because I will it. Confidence is also part of charisma. Also since a sorcerer basically gets its powers from birth or fate, it does kinda tie into 'divine' gift thing. Even if you weren't born with power, if fates had you exposed to a radioactive spider, and you survive and get power, people would generally describe you as favored by the gods.
Meanwhile wizards are just hardworking nerds, and druids and clerics are divine beggars. For paladins, sorcerers, and warlocks, some powerful force is just fascinated with them for some reason. I kinda thought charisma would better if it was instead like faith, or strength of beliefs or something, but from the aspect of just being chosen, which makes things go your way, and people sort of inherently sense that /attracted to you/caught in your fate it makes sense.
but yeah charisma is the stat that seems the least intuitive for any use outside persuasion.
The stats aren't really that well defined. First thing I did when making my own RP system was "merging" charisma and wisdom into Willpower, and adding Perception as its own thing.
So you either study magic and learn it through effort (Intellect) or else magic comes naturally to you or you manifest it through faith in a deity (Willpower).
More on topic, I'd really want more Intelligence casters in the game. Artificer really needs to be made core; it doesn't have to be full on Steampunk on release, but not being in the PHB makes it really DOA for future content, as we've learned previously. Warlock very tiny bit makes more sense as Intelligence than Charisma, but arguments could be made for all three, I suppose. Bard works as Intelligence or Charisma, but not Wisdom, really. The amount of "just imagine" needed to explain a Wisdom bard would also explain an Intelligence paladin.
ALSO too few casters study magic and have spellbooks. There should be more spellbooks around.
I don't think wisdom ties that well into willpower, outside of being a fuel for a type of magic. An old wise man, doesnt seem tied to willpower.
as far as Artificer, I agree, classes are core functionality. Its very odd to just have 1 class out there somewhere else, as part of two books.
Do you think that the casting stats are well defined in the PHB or DMG? What is the actual difference from between casting with Int or Wis or Cha?
The Six Sacred Scores are about as well defined in the PHB/DMG as they can be. They've long been a mediocre-at-best fit for the needs of the game, but they're a sacred cow so we're stuck with them.
As casting stats, specifically, they are not defined at all and serve very poorly in that regard. There is no difference between casting with any of the given stats, all spellcasting is mechanically identical and until that changes there's no reason to differentiate between casting stats.
Do you believe the the Classes all have their appropriate casting stat(s) based on your understanding of the casting stats?
I am increasingly of the opinion that the idea of a "Casting Stat" itself is the core problem. That your abilities as a spellcaster are tied solely to something that fundamentally has no bearing whatsoever on your magic, and because of that your character is always shoehorned into one of a small number of nichey, narrow, shitty overplayed tropes with absolutely zero room for creativity or fresh takes.
Which Casting Stat(s) would you assign each Class?
I wouldn't. I would likely reconfigure the system to try and function solely off proficiency bonus, or otherwise divorce spellcasting from individual Sacred Scores.
Would another class having a stat that differs from your assignment make you dislike the class? Which one(s)? Why?
No. Because I'm fed up with every casting class being shoehorned into the same dumb stupid lame tropes every single time because they're all forced to assume the same bloody stat spreads.
What other general spell casting questions would you like polled?
Anything I'd like to know would likely be considered irrelevant to anyone still married to the Six Sacred Scores. So nah, guess not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I was going to do a Spellcasting Poll to continue the conversation and gather more information following the Warlock Poll thread. The flaw is without a perspective to ground the poll I have too many questions I could include in the poll and my personal biases keep flavoring the questions and possible answers. I believe a more open discussion is needed before I could create a poll that incapsulates the ideas of most of the people replying on these threads allowing them to honestly have a good options to vote.
Do you think that the casting stats are well defined in the PHB or DMG? What is the actual difference from between casting with Int or Wis or Cha?
Do you believe the the Classes all have their appropriate casting stat(s) based on your understanding of the casting stats?
Which Casting Stat(s) would you assign each Class?
Would another class having a stat that differs from your assignment make you dislike the class? Which one(s)? Why?
What other general spell casting questions would you like polled?
Not necessarily well defined, as it's not really spelled out anywhere, but I'd say you can pick up what each of the stats mean. Intelligence means the spellcasting is formulaic, either based on remembering things or just ingenuity. Wisdom is defined best in the book, though not necessarily very well, as meaning connection and attunement to the world around you, including nature and deities. Charisma varies, but it can be confidence, ability to play instruments well, or just the force of will needed to fashion magical power into the shape you desire.
Mostly.
The same as 2014, except with Warlocks. I think Warlocks would be more interesting as Intelligence casters, since I prefer the fantasy of patrons giving forbidden knowledge instead of just casting through the Warlock, and I think it would highlight Warlock's place as a seeker of arcane secrets, which I've seen ignored much more often than not.
Yes. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Wizard.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Taken from your polled thread, I would love to see all casting an option to be selected at character creation, similar to the Blood Hunter now. Each class can choose which stat they would like to invest in for their spellcasting ability. Alternatively, we could borrow from another game systems and divorce spellcasting from a specific stat and have a separate ability labeled "spellcasting ability". Either idea is pretty neat in my opinion.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I wouldn't say they're poorly defined as much as I prefer the way the Stormbringer/Elric game (and I think most of Basic RPG sort of does this as well) handled a spellcasting ability score:
Change Wisdom to Power, and everyone uses Power for spellcasting/etc.
I get reasons why they have Power spread across 3 different abilities, I just find it to be a constant mild annoyance in the design of the ability scores themselves. A single Power ability score is much more cleanly defined, IMO. The current way is sort of "well, mystical strength might be X , or Y, or Z .. but Z also means this other thing, and Y also means this other thing, oh and X also means this other thing as well". Instead, it would be:
AEDorsay is currently banned from the forums, so I think I'll honor her by saying that she actually has a complete ability score just for Perception. I mean, it makes sense, considering how valuable it is as a skill, and how it doesn't feel like it connects super well to the other stats.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I could get behind that, and it wouldn't be the first time D&D had a 7th ability score (late 1st edition, after the release of the "Unearthed Arcana" book for that edition, they added a "Comeliness" ability score that specifically meant physical attractiveness; sort of to emphasize that Charisma is absolutely not physical attractiveness ... but it was discarded for 2e).
While I’m open to this discussion going wherever I will warn that if we go down the rabbit hole of designing or using a completely different spell casting system we will never come to any conclusions about what we already have.
Not a completely different spellcasting system, not a redesign of the current spell casting system. The spellcasting system wouldn't change at all (other than the constant reference to "your spellcasting ability" becoming needlessly generalized).
A minor change to the Ability Score list and definitions, possibly 1 new Ability Score. A minor re-organization of the primary ability scores listed for each class, and the default ability score used for certain skills. None of the actual mechanics would change (how you do X wont change, but which ability score/modifier you use for X might).
this would make many class concepts fail. Wizards are tied to being intelligent, This would either make wizards in general non intelligent, or it would make them have to increase two stats. (if they retained some benefit for intelligence)
Where is insight as well? A druid is not defined by intelligence(they may be raised by animals), nor personality(they may be hermits)
the stats aren't just about their offensive potential, they are supposed to represent the archetypes/tropes of the class.
What skills is 'power' tied to?
They _concept_ would still be intact, the mechanical representation of that concept might change a little. For example, it would imply some amount of MAD: they would need Intelligence to reflect their academic emphasis (and academic/book learning method of to magic), and Power to reflect their potency with magic. Nothing says they would in general become non intelligent. As I said, in addition to the academic emphasis of a Wizard, it could be reflected in their spells by giving them a bonus to the number of spells they can prepare.
If we have a Perception stat, then Power and Perception.
Which is not contradicted by having a Power attribute that replaces the spellcasting aspects of INT, WIS, and CHA.
For the default system? None. What skill is Constitution associated with?
For the flexible system? It could be used with Arcana or Religion or Nature when identifying a spell (especially one that is in the act of casting).
I was in a group that tried to homebrew rules to adapt the RWBY anime to 5e, and adding a 7th stat for “Aura” (the magic in the show, essentially) did severely stagnate ability distribution. Too much was dependent on it not to emphasize it when designing a character and it didn’t contribute to other areas, so the net result was a loss in general effectiveness. Part of the point of tying casting to the current stats is to allow for it to then translate into skills and saves to boost character performance. And yes, I’m aware people will claim CHA casters will then be pigeonholed as a face as a consequence. I’m not interested in relitigating that debate yet again. Skill-wise I that might just be a limitation we’re stuck with, in the same way there’s far more DEX skills than STR and no CON skills at all. Now, pulling some more saves against things like Charm over to CHA might help clarify its sphere in relation to spellcasting, but my point is that my experience suggests a 7th stat for all casting would ultimately be detrimental to caster diversification of play, as it relates to tangible mechanics.
The stats aren't really that well defined. First thing I did when making my own RP system was "merging" charisma and wisdom into Willpower, and adding Perception as its own thing.
So you either study magic and learn it through effort (Intellect) or else magic comes naturally to you or you manifest it through faith in a deity (Willpower).
More on topic, I'd really want more Intelligence casters in the game. Artificer really needs to be made core; it doesn't have to be full on Steampunk on release, but not being in the PHB makes it really DOA for future content, as we've learned previously.
Warlock very tiny bit makes more sense as Intelligence than Charisma, but arguments could be made for all three, I suppose.
Bard works as Intelligence or Charisma, but not Wisdom, really. The amount of "just imagine" needed to explain a Wisdom bard would also explain an Intelligence paladin.
ALSO too few casters study magic and have spellbooks. There should be more spellbooks around.
I actually dislike Charisma in General, it's means some classes are specifically better at talking than others in a very odd way. I don't mind characters being better but classes is kind of just strange. I also don't mind classes having their own unique things, like Bards playing music or rogues picking pockets but Charisma is sort of almost all encompassing in the whole party face department. The idea that the bard has a +12 in Persuasion & Bluff, the Paladin has a +9, the Rogue has a +2 and the Cleric has a -1 because of how those classes generally spec and play... just feels off.
I think an ability which doesn't auto dominate the talk with other parts in it's place would be better.
I despise the idea of a "talk" stat. "Talk" should be contextual. Are you bluffing in a poker game, and trying not to show your tells? Obviously an effort of will. Spinning a Keyser Soze style yarn that leads nowhere? A feat of intelligence. Feinting in combat? Dexterity.
I think Intelligence and Wisdom are well defined; Intelligence is all about memorisation and magical formulae, Wisdom is more intuitive or guided (channelling another's power). Charisma is the least well defined score though I think it's clear what the intention is on most classes that use it, i.e- Bard is performative, Sorcerer is innate.
I think most are correct (or at least have the most appropriate score), but I think Paladin and Warlock are weak fits for Charisma.
If I had to choose only one each, I'd change Paladin to Wisdom and Warlock to Intelligence, but there's reasonable justification for both to have a choice (such as WIS/CHA for Paladin, and INT/CHA for Warlock).
It doesn't bother me all that much that Paladin and Warlock are currently Charisma based, and if they remained unchanged from 5e I'm hardly going to start spitting blood or anything. It would bother me more if other classes were changed as while I don't think they're all perfect, they feel like they have the most appropriate scores as they are now.
I can see the arguments for Sorcerer to become Constitution, but with CON being hit-points and concentration I don't see that being viable, it would need big downsides to counteract how much less score dependent it would make them, for me that feels like a non-starter so Charisma is fine with that in mind.
If you're thinking in terms of what poll questions might be useful, the subject does get very complicated very quickly. I was giving some thought to what questions might be useful to ask (and whether the UA forum is the right place, general might be more appropriate). The list I've come up with so far is something like:
Do you think spellcasting ability scores need to be changed? (required)
If you think specific classes need changes, please choose (multiple choice, optional)
(list of classes, no other options)
If you think all casting should be based on all three mental scores, what should each do (multiple choice, optional)?
Basically the idea is that depending on the answer to the first question you fill out only one of the other questions. But this feels like a complex set of questions that still don't really cover all that much, it's just covering some of the options that have been talked about already but in a way that might get some useful numbers behind them in terms of support/preference.
And I'm not even sure if the first question should be one choice or multiple, as some people might be happy with any of several options.
Plus this is excluding even more radical changes to spellcasting; allowing any class to pick its score is somewhat radical, splitting different aspects of casting across all three scores is even more radical, but both should be reasonably compatible with existing 5e content with minor tweaks (e.g- features that use a specific score but should be changed to "spellcasting ability"). But there have been other ideas like completely changing the ability scores (do we really need three different mental scores?) etc.
It might make more sense to have separate threads for different options, for example; one dedicated to choosing the most appropriate casting score(s) for each class, with one poll per class (and multiple choices on each)? Another for discussing every class getting flexible casting (as magical races do), and another for changing each score to being a specific aspect of spellcasting?
Either that or it might be worth looking at other options for running a survey, like the platform the UA feedbacks surveys themselves have been using; these seem to have the ability to exclude questions based on earlier answers. But I'm not sure if that specific platform allows for public results or not.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Paladin and Warlock fit the archaic definition of Charisma (barer of divine gift). The one that D&D doesn't actually claim to use, despite it probably being the reason the Paladin had a high CHA requirement back when the class was first created.
The odd-ball is Sorcerer, unless you squint and say that "divine spark" can somehow relate to "generational bloodline", and then make that divine spark be more generic to any powerful magical source (like draconic bloodline, etc.). If it's literally "divine spark", then the Divine Soul Sorcerer fits the archaic definition of Charisma, if it is an inheritable spark. Otherwise ... Sorcerous magic seems completely unrelated to any definition of Charisma.
Yeah, if I was creating an entirely new system from scratch (or heavily revamping d20), I would start with Ability Scores that are sort of like the SPECIAL system, sort of. SPECIAL specifically lacks a willpower/mysticism ability score.
sorcerer got chr by process of elimination. They needed a mental stat, it can't be int, because its a caster for people who aren't interested in scholar. It can't be wis, because the concept isn't linked to being wise, many suggested themes would probably have them be unwise, out of control, still learning. They are born with innate power, and charisma seems like an innate thing, force of personality. Things just seem to go your way because of desire/fate. All three Chr users are tied to the concept of force of will that the world seems to conform to.
it doesnt line up with the common use of convincing people, but it does line up with I can do these things because I will it. Confidence is also part of charisma. Also since a sorcerer basically gets its powers from birth or fate, it does kinda tie into 'divine' gift thing. Even if you weren't born with power, if fates had you exposed to a radioactive spider, and you survive and get power, people would generally describe you as favored by the gods.
Meanwhile wizards are just hardworking nerds, and druids and clerics are divine beggars. For paladins, sorcerers, and warlocks, some powerful force is just fascinated with them for some reason. I kinda thought charisma would better if it was instead like faith, or strength of beliefs or something, but from the aspect of just being chosen, which makes things go your way, and people sort of inherently sense that /attracted to you/caught in your fate it makes sense.
but yeah charisma is the stat that seems the least intuitive for any use outside persuasion.
I don't think wisdom ties that well into willpower, outside of being a fuel for a type of magic. An old wise man, doesnt seem tied to willpower.
as far as Artificer, I agree, classes are core functionality. Its very odd to just have 1 class out there somewhere else, as part of two books.
The Six Sacred Scores are about as well defined in the PHB/DMG as they can be. They've long been a mediocre-at-best fit for the needs of the game, but they're a sacred cow so we're stuck with them.
As casting stats, specifically, they are not defined at all and serve very poorly in that regard. There is no difference between casting with any of the given stats, all spellcasting is mechanically identical and until that changes there's no reason to differentiate between casting stats.
I am increasingly of the opinion that the idea of a "Casting Stat" itself is the core problem. That your abilities as a spellcaster are tied solely to something that fundamentally has no bearing whatsoever on your magic, and because of that your character is always shoehorned into one of a small number of nichey, narrow, shitty overplayed tropes with absolutely zero room for creativity or fresh takes.
I wouldn't. I would likely reconfigure the system to try and function solely off proficiency bonus, or otherwise divorce spellcasting from individual Sacred Scores.
No. Because I'm fed up with every casting class being shoehorned into the same dumb stupid lame tropes every single time because they're all forced to assume the same bloody stat spreads.
Anything I'd like to know would likely be considered irrelevant to anyone still married to the Six Sacred Scores. So nah, guess not.
Please do not contact or message me.