Cervantes wrote:I've got another question for 6e: How do you change the six primary attributes?
As I see it, there are roughly 4ish main functions that attributes serve:
1) Bonuses to various derived stats that are actually used in the system. The biggest ones are: saves (CON, DEX, WIS), AC (DEX), attack (STR/DEX), and spell DCs (casting stat).
2) Following on closely from #1, one of the six stats will basically be the "competence" stat for your character, most visible in SAD classes where one stat governs your spell DCs (INT, WIS, CHA) or attack bonus (STR, DEX). If you're a Wizard, you ain't worth shit if you're not an INT monkey, etc.
3) Bonuses to other shit that isn't nearly so important: damage (STR), bonus spells (casting stat), skill checks (various), skill points per level (INT), HP per level (CON).
4) Alternative KO condition in the form of ability damage.
Depending on how you choose to structure your 6e system, some or all of these functions can be reassigned elsewhere.
#2 is especially onerous, because it results in extremely samey characters - it's just not a defensible life choice to play a Wizard with anything but maxxed INT, a Sorcerer with less than max CHA, etc. For all such characters, the most important thing you must buy with your GP is the "+[biggest possible] [dongle] of [stat]." Fuck that shit; if you want to encourage character diversity, you have to allow characters that play against type to still pull their weight. Note that I'm not talking about highly optimized builds that are designed around One Weird Trick that uses a different key stat somehow.
This is the kind of Wizard I want to play sometime.
If you were to assign a "Competence" stat as something whose value is tied only to character level (or pull the assumed steady increase in casting attributes out of the level-over-level progressions for saves, AC, and the like) you could do away with designated SAD classes and, with a little more work, MAD ones too.
Once you eliminate that most important function of attributes in 3.5 - that is, their role in the [save vs spell DC] and [attack vs AC] progressions - you can do pretty much whatever the fuck you want with the rest of your system. Suddenly, players have the freedom to play a bookish Fighter or a meathead Wizard without shooting their party in the foot.
Me, I like the idea of having four stats: Strength, Dexterity, Perception, Charisma. You could even represent them with little icons showing an arm, a hand, an eye, and a smiling mouth. But really that's going to depend on what your game is really about. If you're making
Muhammad Ali: The Boxing, then you might care about the potential for distinction between strength and endurance, while someone making
Zorro: The Swashbuckling might care about the shades of difference between one's manual dexterity and bodily agility.
In the general case, though, I've never much cared for "Intelligence" as a character stat. Players are going to RP they way they want and will think of things when they think of things; it's possible but often a table-disrupting pain in the ass for a player to play a character dumber than they are and it's flat impossible for a player to play a character smarter than they are. Let's just skip the shit and leave abstract notions of "Intelligence" at the door - when you need to represent a learned character, give them ranks in knowledge skill(s) or whatever.