Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arnwyn" data-source="post: 768619" data-attributes="member: 7701">Actually, I wasn't talking about the "-1" modifier. I was purely talking about ability scores - and yes, 8 is 20% under 10 [P.S. Lord Pendragon, what I think you're referring to is standard deviation. But I disagree about "numbers taking effect when they reach extremes". They take effect starting at 9!] Whatever. And Spatula, you're off in your number above, since you are ignoring minimums, maximums and the baseline average. If 10 (+0) *is* average, and 0 (-5) is the absolute minimum, then a -1 score is also 20% under the average (if you go up, you can obviously go beyond 100%, which makes sense and is what we expect considering there is no maximum number).Can 20% be considered "slightly" or "a little"? Sure it can. However, not everyone will feel that way. The interpretation of the significance of 20% can be debated, and there is no universal answer (nor should there be). Each group will have their own idea of the significance of this 20%.Your opinion, of course, not fact (though I'm sure that's what you meant). You're not going to get a universal truth out of this one, as everyone will interpret ability scores differently. [Uh, I guess this is more appropriate for the other "how low is an 8" thread, isn't it...]In any case, I agree with many others that it should probably go to the rolls to decide. I like Shard's suggestions above. Going it this way will also help avoid any silly interpretation of scores issue and let the dice decide. (And, as another poster noted, it gets the player involved, and see the result of his 8 Cha and lack of ranks in social skills.)Whew! All that to say - make the player roll!</blockquote>

Verification