Should each ability scores get it's own table?

[Blackwarder]

I really liked it, when playing 2e, that each ability score had it own table and each table was different from the others in its progression, so my question to you is, what do you think about the current ability score table in the PT?

Personally, beside it being functional I find it a bit bland, I love the concept that your character abilities will get central stage but I feel that each should get some more oomph and be more interesting.

What do I mean by oomph? Well for example have the encumbered weight threshold advance in a non linear way, disassociate range attack bonuse from Dex defense bonus, none linear followers progression with charisma, that sort of things.

Warder

 

[howandwhy99]

Here's the great thing about modules. You can use one that alters the game slightly. Maybe even just per player too.

That means the core game ability score progressions are the same. And the more detailed skill game progressions are the same, but all these skills get to be bumped up by the player per PC.

And you can go the other way and have matrix-based design with each score representing multiple different subsystems off the same parabolic die roll expression. It will be more complicated than a single modifier ratio for everything, but it will be more useful in the design of each subsystem too. And the ratio will remain the same regardless.

Or you could go another way. Perhaps dropping the core skill system (ability score rolls) and a possible matrix game? The scores could be resource totals spent to perform predetermined (or not) actions. Or they could be dropped altogether for some other system integrated with the other stats of the game. Who knows?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

It's more detailed, but I think the elegance of consolidating these things was one of the best features of 3.X-- and one of the biggest elements of 3.X I want to keep.

 

[Ahnehnois]

It's more detailed, but I think the elegance of consolidating these things was one of the best features of 3.X-- and one of the biggest elements of 3.X I want to keep.

Agree 100%. As with much of the 2e-3e transition, something may have been lost, but so much more was gained.

***

On a related note, however, I would like to see the return of another 2e element; divided ability scores. I don't know enough about 2e rules to name it, but the concept was that each ability score was divided into two subscores, and, after doing your main point buy/rolling, you could reduce one to raise the other. For example, if you had 16 Con, you might decide you want 18 Toughness and 14 Endurance, or something to that effect.

I'd like to see an option for that again.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

There's a mathematical part of me that loves the idea of individual ability score tables, class-based xp progressions and the non linear house:rent ratio in monopoly. I love working out the patterns and the thinking behind them against the blandness of a standard progression. If it's something that gets in the way of running the game at the table then it's not so good, but if it's something that is all in the prep of a character, I'm much more tolerant. I'd say yes in an advanced module.

What I would like to see is Ability Score feats. You get an ability score feat for each ability that has a value 13+; and this feat allows you to specialise in some facet of that ability (such as being a little quicker, hardier, better looking, improved in a particular skill or whatever). The aim is to provide incentive not to max out one stat above all others and to provide a way to make slightly lower scores more satisfying for the player.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Remathilis]

One of the best things about 3e was the getting ability score mods in check. They dropped the bonus amount from 15 (or more for Str) to 12, and set the bonuses even so that an 18 Con for a non-warrior wasn't wasted.

I much prefers BECMI's bonus list, but 3e+'s is one of the best changes since upward AC...

 

[Blood & Bones]

Agree 100%. As with much of the 2e-3e transition, something may have been lost, but so much more was gained.

***

On a related note, however, I would like to see the return of another 2e element; divided ability scores. I don't know enough about 2e rules to name it, but the concept was that each ability score was divided into two subscores, and, after doing your main point buy/rolling, you could reduce one to raise the other. For example, if you had 16 Con, you might decide you want 18 Toughness and 14 Endurance, or something to that effect.

I'd like to see an option for that again.

That was apart of the Player's Option series... I thought it led to too much min-maxing, but then again, I was the one doing the min-maxing, so I didn't fight it too hard.

 

[Ahnehnois]

That was apart of the Player's Option series... I thought it led to too much min-maxing, but then again, I was the one doing the min-maxing, so I didn't fight it too hard.

I don't doubt that. It's solved to some extent by making all 6 (12?) ability scores more useful for all characters.

But then again, that's why it's an option.

 

[Blood & Bones]

One of the best things about 3e was the getting ability score mods in check. They dropped the bonus amount from 15 (or more for Str) to 12, and set the bonuses even so that an 18 Con for a non-warrior wasn't wasted.

I much prefers BECMI's bonus list, but 3e+'s is one of the best changes since upward AC...

I agree... With all this talk of going old school and flatting the math out, you'd think the designers would embrace BECMI's bonus chart. *shrugs*

 

[ren1999]

Absolutely.
If each ability is going to be the most important aspect of a character by which all rolls are based, then each one should have a very meaningful table that sells the player into investing those ability level-up points in a particular ability.

2E had some really cool and workable principles for abilities.