Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cerebral Paladin" data-source="post: 4227873" data-attributes="member: 3448">I believe that the traditional explanation is to keep stat bonuses important in the overall context.&nbsp; Take attack rolls as an example.&nbsp; A fighter at 1st level is getting roughly half or 60% of the to-hit bonus from strength-- a +5 melee attack might be +1 BAB, +1 Weapon Focus, and +3 Str.&nbsp; Without any stat increases, at 20th level a 3e fighter would have a to-hit bonus of +30 or so-- +20 BAB, +2 or so from Weapon Focus, +5 from a magic weapon, and +3 from Str.&nbsp; In other words, the Str bonus just doesn't really matter much.&nbsp; With standard 3e scaling, the Strength bonus might be more like +8 or +9 (4 or 5 points of stat bumps, plus a strength increasing widget).&nbsp; Not the 50% at first level, but it still matters.&nbsp; A similar calculation applies to damage, where you're comparing the modifier to all of the various damage enhancing bonuses.&nbsp; Similar analyses apply to most of the other stats, with the added factor for spellcasters that the 3e default is really that spellcasters get 2 spells per day of their highest level when they first qualify for it (i.e. a 5th level wizard gets 2 third level spells, because of the Int bonus).&nbsp; That requires scaling the wizard's Int modifier.&nbsp; (Yes, there are probably some levels where most wizards don't get the extra spell, but still, the basic point holds true.)&nbsp; Con of course is broken with this sorta scaling, but that's sorta okay, because it lets you build the tank types of character that can be hard to make effective in 3e.Back to the original topic, I don't really like the stat inflation of the starting array.&nbsp; First, I would prefer a system where 4d6 drop 1 is still roughly competitive, so that DMs can reasonably give that as a choice.&nbsp; I suppose you can switch to 5d6 drop 2 or something, but then you start seeing many more 18s and such.&nbsp; Also, Piratecat has convinced me of the value of having a single low stat-- it makes a character more interesting.&nbsp; Both of my current most active PCs have a low stat (in one case an 8, in the other a 5), and it shapes their behavior in fun and interesting ways.&nbsp; Having the array set up so that characters are no worse than average in anything and much better in their good areas stomps on that a little, and that makes me sad.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cerebral Paladin, post: 4227873, member: 3448"] I believe that the traditional explanation is to keep stat bonuses important in the overall context. Take attack rolls as an example. A fighter at 1st level is getting roughly half or 60% of the to-hit bonus from strength-- a +5 melee attack might be +1 BAB, +1 Weapon Focus, and +3 Str. Without any stat increases, at 20th level a 3e fighter would have a to-hit bonus of +30 or so-- +20 BAB, +2 or so from Weapon Focus, +5 from a magic weapon, and +3 from Str. In other words, the Str bonus just doesn't really matter much. With standard 3e scaling, the Strength bonus might be more like +8 or +9 (4 or 5 points of stat bumps, plus a strength increasing widget). Not the 50% at first level, but it still matters. A similar calculation applies to damage, where you're comparing the modifier to all of the various damage enhancing bonuses. Similar analyses apply to most of the other stats, with the added factor for spellcasters that the 3e default is really that spellcasters get 2 spells per day of their highest level when they first qualify for it (i.e. a 5th level wizard gets 2 third level spells, because of the Int bonus). That requires scaling the wizard's Int modifier. (Yes, there are probably some levels where most wizards don't get the extra spell, but still, the basic point holds true.) Con of course is broken with this sorta scaling, but that's sorta okay, because it lets you build the tank types of character that can be hard to make effective in 3e. Back to the original topic, I don't really like the stat inflation of the starting array. First, I would prefer a system where 4d6 drop 1 is still roughly competitive, so that DMs can reasonably give that as a choice. I suppose you can switch to 5d6 drop 2 or something, but then you start seeing many more 18s and such. Also, Piratecat has convinced me of the value of having a single low stat-- it makes a character more interesting. Both of my current most active PCs have a low stat (in one case an 8, in the other a 5), and it shapes their behavior in fun and interesting ways. Having the array set up so that characters are no worse than average in anything and much better in their good areas stomps on that a little, and that makes me sad. [/QUOTE]

Verification