All 18s, All The Time

[keterys]

Except his solution lets him use all of the existing infrastructure, where the other stuff... doesn't.

I do think you could just get away with giving, say, 3 18s, 1 16, 1 12, 1 8, with +1 to 3 stats at each bump, and get most of the same effect but a little more variation.

 

[eamon]

You could also just remove the stat bonus from attack+defense calculations.

It's generally still wise to have a high primary stat due for damage - but replacing replacing the stat component makes a few other things easier too, oh, like dealing with weapon expertise.

Rather than have 0.5*level + stat modifer, have something like +0.75*level +3 instead (or, if you will, start at +3, rise by +1 on every level except multiples of 4 plus 1, i.e. 1,5,9,13,17,21,25,29), and ban weapon/implement expertises and the epic defenses feats, and remove the masterwork component from armors (masterwork components which add something other than AC could be reintroduced but would need to be rebalanced). Racial stat bonuses should still affect attacks and defenses, but that's simple to calculate.

For added diversity, you could mandate that your primary stat's associated defense gets a +1, while your non-associated stat takes a -2 or so.


This system would involve less complex calculations than the current system (fewer factors involved) but retain stats for subtler things like damage and skill bonuses.

 

[keterys]

I went with 5 + 1/2 level, +1 extra at 5, 11, 15, 21, 25... similar results though.

Doesn't work with the character builder that well, of course. Every time they level, I tell them to redo their attack bonus.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

A take might be to use the All 18 for your character statistics, but write regular numbers next to them on your sheet.
These numbers are purely descriptive and have no mechanical effect, but if you think an absent-minded Wizard needs a Wisdom of 8, here you have it.

I wonder how a game without any ability score modifiers should look like. The ability scores still need to have some game impact, but my goal would be to avoid them being necessary for your attacks or defenses. They would impact choices, not translate into direct power. Of course, that means ability scores would just be used for prerequisites, and I am not necessarily a fan of that either. Especially because it is very easy to make high-stat prerequisites feats/powers/talents/moxie be stronger.

Maybe an approach would be that ability scores only determine how many feats/powers related to an ability you can pick? So if you play a Fighter with Str18 you can pick a lot of strength related powers. But if you do only have a Strength of 13, you need to branch out, maybe even having to learn some magical tricks. One might even be able to keep something like combat roles in the game - you would have to offer powers for every role for every ability. (Which shouldn't be too hard.)

And of course, no matter how terrible your abiltiy scores are, you should never be unable to pick a new feat or power at all. Your choices would just be more limited.

Now, you can roll 3d6 in order, 4d6 drop lowest, all 18s, 25 point buy, pick your stats...

Another possible take could be that magical and ability score modifiers don't stack. A Longword +4 is nice if you have a Strength of 15, but irrelevant if you have a Strength of 18. But you would probably need to move away from traditional magical items. Maybe don't have the +x weapon at all, but just say a magical weapon grants you a +5 bonus to attack and damage that doesn't stack with your ability bonus.

 

[Garthanos]

Another possible take could be that magical and ability score modifiers don't stack. A Longword +4 is nice if you have a Strength of 15, but irrelevant if you have a Strength of 18. But you would probably need to move away from traditional magical items. Maybe don't have the +x weapon at all, but just say a magical weapon grants you a +5 bonus to attack and damage that doesn't stack with your ability bonus.

This idea almost sounds like it belongs in the threads about reducing item dependence from heros.
A related idea I think, a magic item that is itself skilled ... it changes your effective level for computing level gained attack bonus. A level 6 skilled blade only gives you benefit if you are less than level 6.

 

[Jack Colby]

Heh, I just had the same thought the other day. I do agree it would work, and would eliminate some hassle in this edition of D&D. I'd play a game run this way.

In my own game, I won't be doing it, though. My group still rolls for stats, and uses them to suggest a character or character traits, rather than coming up with all that then trying to fit stats to it as envisioned beforehand. Ability score rolling is inspirational, so, no, I won't do all 18's, even though it works.

And as far as sacred cows go, I think ability scores are Numero Uno on the list. I don't think I would consider the game D&D anymore without them, and without the range of numbers associated with them.

I will add, however, that in original D&D, the ability scores mattered very little (mechanically) and could easily have been ignored. They were a roleplaying aid and determined which classes you were eligible for, that is all (unless the DM considered them in ways that weren't specified in the rules when you tried different actions). They didn't really factor into the game like we are used to today. I see the all 18's idea as a similar situation.

It might be fun to try defining characters by actual character traits (perhaps even randomly rolled) instead of by basic physical and mental capabilities.

 

[77IM]

Another compromise is that your ability scores still modify skills as normal, and are still used for ability checks, but attack/damage/defense/hp are calculated as 18s. (Other games, like M&M, do something similar, where your attack and defense are independent of your abilities, but your skills are tied to your abilities.)

It works because ability and skill checks don't impact combat very much, and in those cases where they do (rogues with Stealth, for example) you can assign the score you want without worrying about whether it will unbalance your basic combat aptitude.

-- 77IM

 

[Rolflyn]

How about all 16s instead?

 

[77IM]

How about all 16s instead?

Plus Racial bonuses, that's probably better balanced against the default encounter level. In my experience, few players using point-buy purchase 18s because they are so dang expensive (16 points) that the rest of your stats are nowhere close to 18. OTOH, a pair of 16s, or 16/14/14, is pretty common and, if your racial mods are in the right place, leads to an 18 for your attack/damage and at least 1 of your defenses (maybe 2 or 3, in the case of someone like a halfling rogue with Dex 18/Cha 18 that can add to AC, Reflex and Will).

-- 77IM

 

[Scott_S]

Eh... I'd have to go with the "just have your players pick stats" method, too.

I've done that before, and I've found that players don't want to be good at everything. What they want, in general, is to be good at something. They want to be a master swordsman, or a past-master of fire magic, or the world's best tennis player.

Given the opportunity, they'll choose stats that suit them for the goal they're after, and then pursue that goal during the game. But they'll also choose weaknesses they feel appropriate. The dashing, roguish swashbucker will pick high dexterity, intelligence, and charisma (maybe even all 18s, but probably not -- my players tend to choose one 18 when I do this, rarely two), but a low wisdom, and probably an average-ish strength and constitution.

They'll likely end up with a build "worth" more points than the standard, but not egregiously so. In terms of bonuses, they might end up +3 or +4 ahead.