Ability Scores - Should they increase?

[Kobold Avenger]

I'm in support of increasing ability scores. Just about every other RPG system out there allowed for the increase in ability scores, but back in 2e you needed magical items to do it, and it wasn't something I felt was fun or accounted for character growth back then. Because of the 2e thing, and how things turned out in 3e, I'm against items that increase ability scores as I'm more about deeds and inherent abilities giving PCs power rather than lots and lots of loot.

And I clearly think you should be able to increase abilities beyond the normal human range, your dealing with heroes who can become something like Hercules or heroes of myth.

But in terms of the system overall, than yes increasing abilities should become a module though one that's suggested that most campaigns have. I'm against really realistic and gritty low-magic settings, as they don't seem fun to me. But the exclusion of modules that's suggested for most games should be an option for those who want to run those types of games.

 

[RHGreen]

A solution would be to have a maximum that you work towards. This would mean there would be a cap to prevent excessive build up of one score. If you had random generation and came out with lower end scores you could, through levelling, build up to the cap.

* No excessive single scores and disparity.
* Investment in secondary/tertiary scores for more individuality.
* Gradual evening between different characters so that at some point they would be of equal strength so you don't have what you would feel is an underpowered useless character forever.
* Low intial rolls are still rubbish, but less likely to throw characters away unitl you roll loads of 18s because you have an unplayable character. It supports Zero to Hero and grittiness.

I'll leave the exact mechanics to someone else, but I've liked the idea of a random chance to increase scores. It needs fleshing out.

For example:

Roll above current score to increase stat by 1.
You get bonuses to the roll based on Class to Ability Score
(Fighter-Strength/Constitution etc)
If you have a low score it is really easy to increase.
If you have a high score it is harder to push it up to max - you will eventually.
High initial rolls are still good because it is less effort to get to the cap and you get bonuses earlier than someone with low rolls.
Makes the actual ability score have more of a function.

Addition edit: Each tier could have slightly increasing caps. A very high tier could be Hercules level of cap.

 

[DonTadow]

A solution would be to have a maximum that you work towards. This would mean there would be a cap to prevent excessive build up of one score. If you had random generation and came out with lower end scores you could, through levelling, build up to the cap.

* No excessive single scores and disparity.
* Investment in secondary/tertiary scores for more individuality.
* Gradual evening between different characters so that at some point they would be of equal strength so you don't have what you would feel is an underpowered useless character forever.
* Low intial rolls are still rubbish, but less likely to throw characters away unitl you roll loads of 18s because you have an unplayable character. It supports Zero to Hero and grittiness.

I'll leave the exact mechanics to someone else, but I've liked the idea of a random chance to increase scores. It needs fleshing out.

For example:

Roll above current score to increase stat by 1.
You get bonuses to the roll based on Class to Ability Score
(Fighter-Strength/Constitution etc)
If you have a low score it is really easy to increase.
If you have a high score it is harder to push it up to max - you will eventually.
High initial rolls are still good because it is less effort to get to the cap and you get bonuses earlier than someone with low rolls.
Makes the actual ability score have more of a function.

Addition edit: Each tier could have slightly increasing caps. A very high tier could be Hercules level of cap.

It's the euro board gamer in me, but i hate random. It acts against balance. (though i agree with you on everything else). Though there is away to balance rolls. Have an equvalent number generated for every roll. Thus an 18 would produce a 9?8? a 10 produces a 14 or something too.

Or, a system where every player rolls a random ability score, and all players use those rolls.

I'm all for items not being stat driven. Maybe taking a page from gw and making them generate new abilities instead (especially if we use a modular system).

Better yet, if you cap bonuses by level to any ability, and provide bonuses in +2 (and have every modular special ability provide some bonus). It forces players to choose at least a different ability each level. (because you can never get more than your cap in bonuses).

 

[Mercurius]

When a person takes up, say, weight-lifting, does he increase in Strength, or does he instead:

- train his innate capabilities to their utmost (which a D&D character can be assumed to do)

- apply lots of ranks to his 'weight-lifting' skill, and

- gain an equipment bonus (or equivalent) from the steroids he's almost certainly taking?

The answer is almost certainly, "yes, a bit of all of the above". But, given that the game already has so many moving parts, and given that ability modifiers are so fundamental to the underlying math of the system, do we really need to be able to move all of these around?

So, in a sense, you're advocating that the ability scores represent--as [MENTION=22260]TerraDave[/MENTION] put it--raw talent and raw talent alone? I have no problem with that, as long as it is clearly stated.

Afaik, the latest in brain science says that the human brain is fully developed sometime in the early 20s. We could describe this as a point at which the human being is first fully bio-physically mature. Perhaps, then, the ability scores represent talent/potential at this point in development, and anything after that would be trained and thus related to skills and other capacities.

In your example of weight-lifting, obviously someone is stronger after lifting for a few years, but their Strength score wouldn't change because their innate capacity for physical power hasn't changed, but their actual physical power has developed through training.

So again, I think it is simply a matter of clearly stating what an ability score is. If we're talking about "raw talent at bio-physical maturity" then ability scores wouldn't increase. But then we'd also have to more more clearly differentiate the skills and capacities that branch out from ability scores, but it would need be clearly defined that the ability scores are ONLY raw talent/potential and only represent actual capacity to the extent of doing something that one is not trained to do.

 

[Aenghus]

I strongly prefer a default fixed array to random dice rolls for stats. Random rolls can work for disposable PCs, where stats have a constrained set of bonuses, and character generation is super quick, but I generally don't like that style of play.

Ability scores don't exist in isolation, how they are implemented interacts with the rest of the (as yet in development) rules and vice versa.

I could live without stat rises, as classes are likely to have prime stats on which their class abilities depend, making rising those stats a non-choice for most players. In which case the system should be designed without needing maths fixes, with extra damage deriving from class features or equivalent.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Actually, if you roll random stats, you could allow those with low stats increasing their lower stats to acceptable numbers.

Actually we use this in ADnD before 3.0 arrived. The rule was every 5 levels you may increase a stat that gives you a penalty to a score by one point. You may never reach to a bonus to something.

Maybe in a 4e like enviroment I would make the cap at 13. So when you level up, you may increase one stat by one point to a maximum of thirteen. This way you could work towards multiclassing into a different class. (Hey, I am a rogue, my int is only 11, but someday I want to be a wizard: increase int to 13 and take the feat)

Note, that in 5e, it will look different, but I really only want stat increases to cover weaknesses and lower the gap instead of increasing the gap like in current edition.

A different Idea, if you already generate abilitiy scores with point buy, you can give out point buy points to increase the ability scores. So going up to 13 is very cheap, increasing an 18 even more is very expensive.

 

[Almacov]

The game I've been designing doesn't have ability score increases per-say, but then, the game I'm brewing also isn't D&D.

I think I want something different out of D&D. The power climb seems like a strong component of its personality at this point. (Being level-based to begin with sets that tone.)
So, I don't mind if they keep ability score bumps as part of the level-crawling incentives package. I can definitely see the theory behind it, and I remember well the feeling of craving levels that are multiples of four. (Creating ability-score based feat prerequisites was another brilliant layer to this incentive scheme.)

I think it would probably be nice to have the option to take ability scores out of the power-climb equation, and also likely not so hard to do.
I think it might be good to have there by default though. It's a crafty hook.

 

[Delgar]

I'd go to the next level.

Why have ability scores at all?

Why does a 12=+1

Why not just have Int=1 or or Dex=2. Where is the advantage of having to do the small bit of extra math?

What's the difference between a character with Int 12 or Int 13?

I say get rid of ability scores and go straight to ability modifiers.

 

[Hassassin]

Just a thought: how about 0-2 -3, 3-5 -2, 6-8 -1, 9-11 no mod, 12-14 +1, 15-17 +2, 18+ +3 ?

This gets the linearity of the modifiers back. And, in fact, the formula is actually very slightly easier to remember than in 3e/4e: (Score/2)-5 becomes (Score/3)-3.

This is the first alternative ability modifier system I've seen that I think might be better than the 3e/4e one.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I'd go to the next level.

Why have ability scores at all?

Because this is the D&D where sacred cows are allowed to live.

And I like that...

Cheers,