Flatter Ability Score Bonuses - Page 2




What's on your mind?

+ Log in or register to post
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48
  1. #11
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,677

    Ignore Crazy Jerome
    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.

 

  • #12
    Registered User
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    Janaxstrus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Quad Cities
    Posts
    446

    Ignore Janaxstrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Viking Bastard View Post
    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

  • #13
    Registered User
    Waghalter (Lvl 7)

    Szatany's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Gdansk, Poland
    Posts
    945

    Ignore Szatany
    Quote Originally Posted by satori01 View Post
    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.
    we are only humans

  • #14
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)



    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    2,477

    Ignore Minigiant
    @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.
    My beard is hairy.

  • #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Viking Bastard View Post
    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.

  • #16
    Registered User
    Spellbinder (Lvl 16)

    Doug McCrae's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    6,046

    Ignore Doug McCrae
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Steely_Dan View Post
    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
    Last edited by Doug McCrae; Wednesday, 2nd May, 2012 at 07:26 PM.

  • #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug McCrae View Post
    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).

  • #18
    Registered User
    Spellbinder (Lvl 16)

    Doug McCrae's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    6,046

    Ignore Doug McCrae
    My communities:

    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.

  • #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Szatany View Post
    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!
    Last edited by satori01; Thursday, 3rd May, 2012 at 03:30 AM.

  • #20
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)

    Rampaging Lawn Gnome's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bowdoinham, ME
    Posts
    20

    Ignore Rampaging Lawn Gnome
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Viking Bastard View Post
    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-hor...-mechanic.html

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Removing Set Ability Score Bonuses from Races
      By babinro in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 23
      Last Post: Wednesday, 11th November, 2009, 08:37 AM
    2. bonuses to ability score won't stack?
      By aboyd in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 5
      Last Post: Sunday, 3rd August, 2008, 11:11 PM
    3. Ability Score Bonuses: +2 General vs. +2/+2 Specific
      By Malacoda in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 14
      Last Post: Saturday, 28th June, 2008, 06:33 AM
    4. Ability Score Bonuses
      By Nonlethal Force in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 9
      Last Post: Tuesday, 23rd May, 2006, 02:53 PM
    5. Ability-score damage and enhancement bonuses
      By Nareau in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 6
      Last Post: Wednesday, 17th September, 2003, 04:54 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •