Ability Scores - Should they increase?

[Lanefan]

On average, you gained +11% to each stat every level. Given you were having three stats going up, that meant you had a stat increase (on average) every 3 levels!

Cheers!

Which in a ten-level game (like what we usually end up with) isn't that big a deal.

In a 30-level game it's a problem. So, back to what's becoming my rallying cry around here: reduce the number of designed-for levels.

Corollary point: how easy/hard should it be to have a stat permanently go down? I for one really like the -1 Con. on revival after death from 0-1-2e, for example; but I can't think of any other common situations where a stat takes a permanent hit.

Lanefan

 

[Hassassin]

Which in a ten-level game (like what we usually end up with) isn't that big a deal.

In a 30-level game it's a problem. So, back to what's becoming my rallying cry around here: reduce the number of designed-for levels.

Players like leveling up. I think having 20 small steps is better than 10 large.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Quick, crazy idea.

What if ability scores had a cap. You get ability bumps, but they can't push a score past a certain point.

So if I'm a human fighter with 16 strength, I can put up to 2 points into strength, for an 18.

But if I have an 18th strength, those points have to go elsewhere, like con.


In this scenario, ability bumps actually curb specialization instead of aggravate it.

That has its own set of problems, though. It makes rolling an 18 at character creation less special. Eventually, all fighters will have an 18 strength. I'd like the fighters in the group to have a little disparity.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Corollary point: how easy/hard should it be to have a stat permanently go down? I for one really like the -1 Con. on revival after death from 0-1-2e, for example; but I can't think of any other common situations where a stat takes a permanent hit.

Assuming there are ways for the stats to go back up, you could tie other stat loss to the nasty effects that have gradually been diminished in 4E. Suffer the equivalent of "level loss" from wraiths, run the risk of being down a point of a random stat. Maybe system shock from getting unpetrified can mess up your Cha more than your Con?

I wouldn't want to play with that kind of system, because I find it just compounds the randomness of early stat generation even more, unless you get generous with the boosts. And if they are all going to cancel out, why bother?

But a stat damage system tied to a wide range of effects would be a great edition to turn on for grit, for those that wanted it. There is a shelf life for every character, and once you get knocked around enough, you wear down permanently.

 

[Oldtimer]

I also like ability score increases and implementing a +1 to *all* ability scores / x levels will keep the disparities from getting out of hand. As an adventurer it's fairly easy to rationalize improving across the board...

I also like ability increases and that exactly how I do it in my 4E clone. Works extremely well.

 

[Mark CMG]

Players like leveling up. I think having 20 small steps is better than 10 large.

Players like gaining new Facets. If those aren't tied to leveling, specifically, then leveling becomes less important.

 

[Kaodi]

That has its own set of problems, though. It makes rolling an 18 at character creation less special. Eventually, all fighters will have an 18 strength. I'd like the fighters in the group to have a little disparity.

I would say that would be a step up from a system where every fighter had the same strength from the beginning until the end...

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Unless your dice are loaded, 4d6 drop lowest is not hgoing to produce the same result all that often.

 

[Lanefan]

Players like leveling up. I think having 20 small steps is better than 10 large.

Players (at least in my experience, and including myself) like levelling up when it's an uncommon occurrence. When it happens all the time it becomes a chore, which cheapens the experience.

I prefer level-bumping to be merely a side effect of play rather than the reason for it. My current 1e-variant game is almost 4 years in and the leading PCs have just got to 7th (not continuously played, they are constantly cycling characters in and out) - I've heard no complaints yet about slow advancement.

Lanefan

 

[Incenjucar]

I'm all for reigning it in a bit, but there should still be some improvement as you level up. You should get at least one significant bump to all ability scores to show general growth, with one bump to two ability scores you can pass around either to further specialize or to even out your build.

It just gets so silly when you're trying to DM the personality of something with 45 intelligence.