Flatter Ability Score Bonuses

Crazy Jerome · May 2, 2012

I'll repeat my earlier suggestion, that actually makes the score usefully distinct from the modifier, as a simple means of scaling:

Score(Mod)
1 (+0)
2-3 (+1)
4-6 (+2)
7-10 (+3)
11-15 (+4)
16-21 (+5)
...

Or start the mods at +1, if you prefer. It really doesn't matter much on that end, since only monsters would ever have a score that low. It works ok for rolling stats, since the vast majority of the rolls will be in the 7-15 range, and only one off. Point buy is dirt simple. One point gets you one point of score. The chart can be extended as high as you want. "Normal" is around +3 or +4, which gives a nice psychological boost.

More esoteric, you now have one thing that scales more rapidly than the other. So if you base encumbrance directly off of Str score, but melee hit/damage off of Str mod, big creatures can carry somewhat realistic amounts (without funky math) while not overwhelming smaller creatures (acknowledging a key unreal aspect of D&D). I suspect that other such distinctions can be readily found for the other abilities, if there is a handy mechanical means to represent them.

Janaxstrus · May 2, 2012

Viking Bastard said:
I'd rather go for higher Ability mods (and flatten everything else).

As in Modifier = Ability Score - 10.

Have a 15 in Strength? That's your Passive Score. Your "Dynamic" Score would then be d20 + 5.

I like the simplicity of that method. Not sure how it would work in play without some hard caps on bonuses. Seems like it might be easy to get huge bonuses and throw the math out of whack

Szatany · May 2, 2012

satori01 said:
I would like to see an ability point spread like this:

18-20= +2
17-13 =+1
12-7= 0
6-4= -1
3= -2

I would like that too, with the exception of ability/skill checks. A kingdom's strongest man (STR 18) should not be a 10% better than an average joe (STR 10) at arm wrestling or climbing.
Ability and skill checks should use ability value-10 = modifier rule.

Minigiant · May 2, 2012

@tlanl

I was thinking about this too.

Perhaps there could be a 2 Tiered approach for all abilities.

Strength gives +0 at 10-11, +1 at 12-13, and +2 at 14+. Higher values of strength just increase carrying capacity.

But for Fighters, Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians and people with the Slayer theme and Half Orcs, they can get higher bonus to hit and damage for 16+ Strength.

People trained in a skill can use Strength at the full (Ability-10)/2 bonus.

Only Rangers, Monks, Rogues, Elves, and Bards can add more than +2 from their Dex to light armor.

Only Bards, Paladins, and Halflings can add more than +2 from Charisma to a fear based saving throw.

Etc.

Steely_Dan · May 2, 2012

Viking Bastard said:
I'd rather go for higher Ability mods (and flatten everything else).

As in Modifier = Ability Score - 10.

Have a 15 in Strength? That's your Passive Score. Your "Dynamic" Score would then be d20 + 5.

I've experimented with this in 4th ed:

1-Remove the 1/2 level malarkey from all character's and monster's attacks, defences, and skills.

2-Remove +X items/Inherent Bonuses

3-Use the actual ability score itself for defences of all characters and monsters (so if you have an 18 Str and a 15 Con, you have a Fort 18)

The math works out okay so far.

Doug McCrae · May 2, 2012

Steely_Dan said:
Seems quite pre-3rd Ed D&D to me.

I'm not sure about that. 18/00 strength was a heck of a lot better than 15 or less. That was actually the case in the first session of a 2e AD&D campaign I played in. There was a fighter with 18/00 strength and full plate (one of Stan's, from his infamous folder) while no one else in the party had any strength bonus at all. For a longsword against S-M, we'd be averaging 4.5 damage, while Stan's PC was doing 10.5, about two-and-a-half times as much.

That holds for all the principal characteristics in AD&D. 18 gets you a lot more than 14 or less. Often it's the difference between a +4 modifier and none at all.

It's far more true of B/X or BECMI D&D, with its

Code:

13-15 +1
16-17 +2
18    +3

Steely_Dan · May 2, 2012

Doug McCrae said:
I'm not sure about that. 18/00 strength was a heck of a lot better than 15 or less.

In BECMI, Str breaks down as:

3) -3
4-5) -2
6-8) -1
9-12) +0
13-15) +1
16-17) +2
18) +3

As for AD&D, it was odd, you'd get jack for Str until 16 (+1 to damage), 17 gave you +1 to hit and damage, then 18 gave you +1/+2 (the percentile thing was unlike any other ability score).

Doug McCrae · May 2, 2012

Comparing the editions in terms of the steepness of the attributes curve, I'd say:

STEEPEST
AD&D 1e and 2e
3e/4e
B/X and BECMI
OP's system
LEAST STEEP

So the OP's system is not particularly old school or new school, but it is closest to that of B/X and BECMI.

satori01 · May 3, 2012

Szatany said:
I would like that too, with the exception of ability/skill checks. A kingdom's strongest man (STR 18) should not be a 10% better than an average joe (STR 10) at arm wrestling or climbing.
Ability and skill checks should use ability value-10 = modifier rule.

Ability and skill checks, (the same thing it is rumored in 5e) should use
THE WHOLE ABILITY SCORE. If you make "skills " opposed or DC based checks, the guy with 18 Str will crush the guy with 10 Str in an opposed arm wrestling check.

As has been pointed out, when you control the math to the degree that happens in 4E, (and Bounded Accuracy in 5E means controlled math), the mathematics DEMAND, you put your highest score in you prime attribute for the accuracy boost. This is why you need flatter and smaller boost for The "Plus to hit" portion.

Ability Score Minus 10, not allowing for inherent Magic items, like Gauntlets of Ogre Strength is something I think you can avoid when "the plus" part is minimized, but the whole score goes to ability/skills check.

Suddenly inherent magic items are less about enhancing to hit, bonuses spells, dmg and the like, but more about expanding you play options.
Take the 1E style Gauntlets of Ogre Str, where the item changes your Str score to a ridiculously high number. The Wizard that puts the Gauntlets on does not become an overpowered melee machine capable of dealing more dmg with his dagger than his Magic Missle. No instead, he gets better at climbing, jumping, wrestling, etc. A lot better. In fact the half Orc ranger that ate his Twinkie and beat him in arm wrestling better look out!

Rampaging Lawn Gnome · May 3, 2012

Viking Bastard said:
I'd rather go for higher Ability mods (and flatten everything else).

As in Modifier = Ability Score - 10.

Have a 15 in Strength? That's your Passive Score. Your "Dynamic" Score would then be d20 + 5.

I'm liking this idea. I haven't looked at the math, but here's a thread discussing the topic:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-ho...n-d-d/317623-my-theory-5es-core-mechanic.html