D&D 1E AD&D (yes, 2e too) players and referees, what do you think of rolling under for ability and NWP checks?

[Lanefan]

I love it. It makes each ability score - and each point in those scores - have a use and function.

 

[Lanefan]

Now that's a thought, using a d30 in AD&D. Now I have to find that thing...unless I used it as an improvised sling bullet again...

If you live on a hill, look at the bottom of that hill, because that's where it probably rolled to.

 

[James Gasik]

If you live on a hill, look at the bottom of that hill, because that's where it probably rolled to.

I'm surprised it's not permanently indented into someone's skull- I have an oversized d20 I occasionally threaten people with (in jest, naturally) at the gaming table!

 

[Micah Sweet]

We did it all the time, for years. Like @Lanefan said, it made every point of an ability score potentially valuable, and (for us, at least) it seemed intuitive. I'd still prefer to handle checks that way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Now that's a thought, using a d30 in AD&D. Now I have to find that thing...unless I used it as an improvised sling bullet again...

I have several d30s rolling around in my collection. Love to get more out of them than just DCC.

 

[James Gasik]

I have several d30s rolling around in my collection. Love to get more out of them than just DCC.

I have dim memories of something called the 30-sided adventure, which is the whole reason I even owned a d30.

 

[cbwjm]

I'm fine with roll under for ability and skill checks, but I do think the consolidation of skills, ability checks, etc into the d20 system was a great change.

 

[Celebrim]

I'm OK with it. The last thing I'll demand of the system is a single resolution method for everything.

The biggest problem with the system is that it tends to imply that those skills are siloed off to just those people who have those NWP rather than that having a NWP just makes you better at doing something that anyone could attempt.

The second biggest problem with the system was that unlike just about everything else in D&D, you didn't get more skilled at what you did over time and the third biggest problem was that D&D had otherwise pretty low reliance on ability scores and if you were using NWPs in a meaningful manner now that wasn't true anymore.

And there are a ton of minor issues as well, in that some NWPs work like a trained only skill and other ones work more like a feat and give you a bonus in something else like surprise or initiative or fighting with two weapons or whatever. There is no uniformity or balance in the system, and worse the thief was written in as the worst class as far as NWPs go continuing the "thieves aren't allowed to have nice things" design paradigm.

So that means straight up, the 3e version of this with skills is just flat out a better system even from a OSR perspective. There isn't really a compelling reason to cling to the older model. And that's a huge reason why I just can't bring myself to go back to a 1e inspired game. By the time I got through house ruling 1e to where it would play how I wanted, it would look a lot like 3e anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm OK with it. The last thing I'll demand of the system is a single resolution method for everything.

The biggest problem with the system is that it tends to imply that those skills are siloed off to just those people who have those NWP rather than that having a NWP just makes you better at doing something that anyone could attempt.

The second biggest problem with the system was that unlike just about everything else in D&D, you didn't get more skilled at what you did over time and the third biggest problem was that D&D had otherwise pretty low reliance on ability scores and if you were using NWPs in a meaningful manner now that wasn't true anymore.

And there are a ton of minor issues as well, in that some NWPs work like a trained only skill and other ones work more like a feat and give you a bonus in something else like surprise or initiative or fighting with two weapons or whatever. There is no uniformity or balance in the system, and worse the thief was written in as the worst class as far as NWPs go continuing the "thieves aren't allowed to have nice things" design paradigm.

So that means straight up, the 3e version of this with skills is just flat out a better system even from a OSR perspective. There isn't really a compelling reason to cling to the older model. And that's a huge reason why I just can't bring myself to go back to a 1e inspired game. By the time I got through house ruling 1e to where it would play how I wanted, it would look a lot like 3e anyway.

3e is a better skill system for you. If it were better for everybody no one would play games based on earlier skill systems, and we know that's not true.

 

[Mannahnin]

I used it, a bunch after the introduction of NWPs as their often go to mechanic and then sometimes as a standalone mechanic.

I don't particularly care for it. It makes the ability scores hugely impactful on success rates, amplifying the reverse bell curve nature of stat bonuses in AD&D so that an 18 stat fails one out of ten times while a 10 fails one out of every two times as the baseline success rate for tasks. This exacerbates a big issue in AD&D design in the combat power arena and extending it to noncombat stuff as well.

It also makes 3d6 in order hugely incompetent compared to an Unearthed Arcana human rolls character and means random stat generation creates even more competency imbalances between characters from the get go.

My ideal would be for most people to be able to do most things and not be siloed in by build (either stats or full 3e type stat, class, skill point, feats, magic type of complex build).

I prefer 5e's d20 +ability modifier plus possible proficiency plus possible other bonuses and or advantage in a bound accuracy.

I would much prefer modest stat benefits (say B/X's +3 for an 18) against a bound accuracy target number and mostly resolving things in a more diceless fashion based on what makes sense at the moment.

All of this.

I've played and enjoyed systems which use roll-under checks, but I prefer to see some tweaks if we're doing that.

In the last OD&D game I played in, we used 3d6 down the line (with point swapping to PR) for ability scores, and as such the DM had ability checks be on 3d6, or 2d6 for easy tasks, 4d6 for hard ones.

The Nightmares Underneath uses roll-under checks for some tasks, but it also allows you to increase ability scores as you level, so character competence DOES increase, unlike in AD&D.

In the last old school game I ran with 3d6 ability generation, my Five Torches Deep & B/X mashup, we used d20+ modifier resolution (plus proficiency modifier if applicable), as that's the core mechanic for that system. But that system also comes with a baseline DC of 11. Anything higher than that is exceptional.

Now that's a thought, using a d30 in AD&D. Now I have to find that thing...unless I used it as an improvised sling bullet again...

That reminds me that Jeff Rients (of seminal OSR blog Jeff's Game Blog) established a table house rule back in 2006 that once per session each player could choose to use Jeff's big purple d30 instead of ANY one other die before rolling. Could be a d20 for an important attack or save, or could even be a d4 from a Magic Missile or a d6 arrow for the damage roll to try to kill an enemy in one shot!