Splitting Attack Bonus From Stats

[hyzmarca]

Or you just make a rule that you use your highest stat. So that you could have fighters that use INT to swing their swords (representing superior tactics) and Wizards that cast spells with STR (representing the ability to bodyslam reality until it does what you want).

[MGuy]

While I agree that adventurers should be competent at tackling regular challenges they are supposed to face I do not buy in to the notion that they all have to be samey to accomplish this. I really don't mind if a sea wizard isn't as good with a sword as a swordsman because they both can simply use different methods, and modes of attack and defense, to handle the same issues. This looks like a numbers thing and there's no reason you can't have a situation where BAB is good enough to allow for everyone to hit competently at base and have attributes just add on to that. What you're wanting is for Attributes specifically not to effect BAB. Which is fine. I don't think that choice is bad or good. What I'm saying is I don't see the value in the rest of the discussion. I don't know what your numbers mean for 'your' game. You are really just making a BAB track and... that's it. I don't know what you want attributes to even do if they don't add on to things.

As far as I can tell you came up with not wanting Attribute Bonuses to attack and that's where it all stopped. There was weird idea to make it a feat or whatever too but that was shot down. I'm not sure whether you want Attributes to add to defenses, to skills, or to whatever or even if your game will have attributes do anything. I don't know what this discussion is supposed to produce.

[JonSetanta]

Adding just to attack bonuses. I had no plans for skills or whatever.

Also, the chart list doesn't supersede BAB, it adds to it. Like a stat.