-Rob D.

For example, I could choose to play a “dragonborn” dwarf. What would that mean? It means that my dwarf has +2 STR/+2 CHA and a “breath weapon”, among other things. I re-skin the breath weapon as an alchemical preparation that he always carries with him. Uses the same stats as the dragonborn breath weapon racial feature.

It’s also important to note that a PC built this way only has access to his “racial” feats. So my dwarf can’t take Dwarven Weapon Proficiency (or whatever it’s called), but can take Empowered Breath Weapon. I include this restriction only to keep the DM’s balancing headaches to a minimum.

But then I’d set up some counterbalancing stuff to help out the classic “struggling wizard” and “atypical class/race mix” characters. Feats, possibly, or else alternate class builds. “Stubborn dilligence. Wizard; Int 15 or less. If your first action in a turn is an Int-based wizard attack power and it fails to hit any target, you may use a minor action to reroll the power’s attack(s).” “Clutz luck. Rogue; Dex 11 or less. When rolling a rogue Dex-based attack power, roll 1d10+10 along with your 1d20. The 1d20 governs *only* whether you score a natural 1 or a natural 20. The result of the 1d10+10 is your attack roll on the die.”

That could be a really fun mini-supplement to design. “Pigs Fly: the book of misfits.” Do one class-feature alternate for each class. The warlock with second thoughts about this whole pact thing; the paladin for whom choosing paladin was, itself, fundamentally a low-Wis judgment error due to a low-Cha self-confidence issue. Powerful enough to actually make them playable, given that they’re suffering from fundamental build issues otherwise. (Obviously you’d have to build in safeguards against stat-compensating stuff like the Martial Training feat, and suggest at most either one per party, or all misfits for a comedy game, but it could still be a fun set of sub-classes.)

Other than needing to tweak humans, I don’t see any issue with allowing players to choose their stat bonuses. I’d probably just require an explanation as to why those particular stats are higher. Maybe a nice middle ground might be to allow only 1 stat to be swapped rather than both, but mechanically, I don’t see any issue with it.

The first argument in that case is, of course, that if that’s what he wants to do he should just play a rogue, but I’m not sure how much weight that really carries. Is that really any more valid than saying “he should play a race with some strength”?

On a purely practical level there’s a bit more to this. Classes with 2 stats are problematic, and the color is not always easy to align: I can easily imagine a DEX based fighter but it’s a lot harder to conceive of a STR based wizard (though perhaps not impossible).

I’m finding this a really interesting thought experiment because it really pushes the boundaries between the color and the mechanics that underlie stats. 4E has made them much more abstract, and I wonder how abstract they really can be without things breaking entirely.

-Rob D.

PS – Hell, on some level there’s a part of me that just wants to decouple stats from powers entirely, just give everyone a +4 and call it a day, then let their stat distribution be the driver behind skills and such. But that is possibly all the way into crazytalk land.

While I do think it’s not a terrible idea to allow a player to change their bonus or primary attack power class score for specific character concepts, I would prefer to let the races speak for themselves in what class they’re ‘good at’, and allow weirder character concepts to take the mechanical penalties associated. Some races just aren’t as good at being certain classes, and that’s fine with me.

The deva wizard issue (and similar situations predating PH2 previews) has made me consider something else as well. When conceptualizing races, I sometimes see multiple ability scores being a good fit, and choosing which two can many times be a judgment call. One thing that I think should help guide people designing such races is to consider what classes exist that you think the race should be ‘good at’. When in doubt, put the race’s ability bonuses into the scores that complement that class. On the same note, think about what classes the race /shouldn’t/ be good at, and avoid placing the bonuses into that class’s relevant ability score.

~ Andrew

Those threads should shift from what races and classes mix well to what two character concepts mix well, which feats compliment each other in neat ways. 4e, more than any other edition of D&D, takes the term -never split up the party- and burned it into the front covers of the books.

Those are the threads, I’d like to see, threads about optimizing parties.

I think that’s the thing — while all stats are equally important, with Con retaining an edge over the others, all stats are not equally important for each class. So there is a mechanical impact at the class level, and perhaps it’s balanced somewhat against the racial abilities?