Ability scores - How intrinsic are they to D&D?

[Gronin]

Repeating myself briefly from the 4E forum discussion, I agree with this part. This is why I advocated removing ability scores from affecting attack chance, but enhancing their effects on other aspects of the game. Damage is obvious, but it might take some creative changes to really make that pay off the way it needs to.

But on the other side, I think that ability scores ought to be relatively modest at start (showing raw talent) and then improved only in relation to what the characters are. That is, a melee fighter should get occasional boosts to Str because he is a fighter who uses heavy weapons, not use free increases to buy Str because Str gives him something too good to ignore as a fighter. If he fights with a rapier most of the time, he'll get the chance to buy Dex up instead, perhaps.

That kind of cause and effect switch between ability scores and class would be a signficant departure from tradition. So that gives me pause. That mostly removes the last vestige of the original "rolled high Str randomly--so I'll be a fighter". But I'd say that with the popularity of point buy in 3E, we are pretty much there anyway.

If finessed right, it might even bring back some of that tradition. If your starting ability scores aren't so determinative of what you can effectively play, people might tolerate random rolls for them. So what that you start with a 12 Str and a 15 Int. Your fighter will get regular chances to boost Str, hit just as accurately though not quite as hard, and presumably have some niche benefits from that 15 Int that will accompany it.

Maybe it was just us. But our Basic D&D games used random roles (3d6, assign in order). Basic had relatively little determinative effect from ability scores on class. You probably wanted something on the good side of 10 in your main stat, but otherwise you could deal. And we had more varied abilities with class choices.

Not sure how easy it is to get ahold of anymore but there was a game (still one of my favourites) called Powers and Perils by Avalon Hill which I think would give you a great deal of what you seem to want. Attributes and skills improve over time as you use them (and only if you use them). Your attributes also have a starting point and a potential maximum. If you are interested you can check it out here Powers and Perils - Index

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

For example, Galen Bradwarden, the wizard's apprentice and protagonist, in Dragonslayer?

Yep!

 

[TwinBahamut]

It is probably somewhat irrational, but the six ability scores are something I'd consider to be absolutely essential to the identity of D&D, along with classes, levels, and d20-based attack rolls. It simply would not be the same game without them, and there are not many elements of D&D I would say that for at all.

That said, great tabletop RPGs can easily be made without ability score systems. It might very well be that removing them could make for a better game. After all, it has been something of an annoying truth for D&D that ability scores are a place where you are presented with some of the game's worst choices, where a player is forced to choose between being effective and interesting. Removing some of those choices might even improve the rules, but for D&D to keep its identity, it would probably be better to keep the ability scores and fix some of the problems associated with them, rather than scrap them entirely.

For better or worse, D&D might very well be stuck with the six ability scores and all their flaws, and I don't think many fans would have it any other way.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I never cease to be puzzled by gamers who say words to the effect of, 'D&D would be so much better if it stopped being D&D!'

Pretty much everything that gamers ask for can be found in other roleplaying games, but some gamers insist that D&D be changed to fit their vision, rather than finding a game which already suits their needs.

Bizarre, and a little sad.

Can't XP you right now.

 

[The Shaman]

Personally, I want my D'Artagnan to be just as capable of dealing damage as my Conan.

There are a whole bunch of really good reasons why Dark Ages warriors didn't wield rapier-like weapons.

 

[The Shaman]

Can't XP you right now.

It's the thought that counts.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Not sure how easy it is to get ahold of anymore but there was a game (still one of my favourites) called Powers and Perils by Avalon Hill which I think would give you a great deal of what you seem to want. Attributes and skills improve over time as you use them (and only if you use them). Your attributes also have a starting point and a potential maximum. If you are interested you can check it out here Powers and Perils - Index

Tried it when it was new. Didn't much like it, but for other reasons which I have long since forgotten.

Like I said, I'd be hesitant to try something that radical with D&D. There are plenty of things I'm interested in as hypotheticals that I'd be much more conservative with were I really in charge. The edges of where you can push certain D&D mechanics and still be true to its roots are one of those. Heck, half the time when I'm talking theoretical for D&D, in the back of my mind I'm really thinking if that will work in a homebrew system.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

There are a whole bunch of really good reasons why Dark Ages warriors didn't wield rapier-like weapons.

Not all of them apply to fantasy, however. And whatever the number that do, even less apply to cinematic fantasy. It's pertinent, but not telling.

 

[The Shaman]

It's also bizarre and a little sad to go in the other direction and to take any suggestion for the next edition as an attack.

There are some days this site is just crying out for a roll-eyes smiley.

"Go play GURPS!" or "Go play Rolemaster!" isn't productive either, especially since any game is a combination of so many different ideas and not any one rule.

What isn't productive is rejecting D&D for being D&D and not GURPS or Rolemaster or Burning Wheel.

 

[saskganesh]

There are some days this site is just crying out for a roll-eyes smiley. What isn't productive is rejecting D&D for being D&D and not GURPS or Rolemaster or Burning Wheel.

I don't understand the example as Rolemaster has 10 stats.

6 obviously wasn't enough!