Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="T. Foster" data-source="post: 3531695" data-attributes="member: 16574">The adjustments in OD&amp;D (except for Charisma) could pretty closely be modeled with 1d6: 1 = 3-6 (major penalty: -20% XP, -1 hp/die), 2 = 7-8 (minor penalty: -10% XP, -1 missiles), 3-4 = 9-12 (no adjustment), 5 = 13-14 (minor bonus: +5% XP, will withstand adversity, +1 missiles), 6 = 15-18 (major bonus: +10% XP, +1 hp/die). The big loss would be point-trading, and the incidental &quot;color&quot; of being able to make finer distinctions (which can affect both player role-playing and ref's ad-hoc judgments). Plus, I get the feeling that the bell-curve distribution of rolling 3d6 feels &quot;less random&quot; to players than rolling 1d6, even though the actual percentages are comparable.Something I've toyed with (and discussed a bit at <a href="http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2830" target="_blank">this thread</a> at the K&amp;K Alehouse) is making ability scores optional -- allowing the player to choose whether they want to roll ability scores for their character, and how many, and which ones, with any score they choose not to roll assumed to be average (9-12). Thus the player is choosing to gamble and take the risk -- is the possibility of getting +1 hp/die worth the risk of getting stuck with -1 hp/die? Is the possibility of +10% XP worth the risk of -20% XP (or, more realistically, having to take a different class)? I like the idea of making this gamble an affirmative choice by the player -- you can play it safe with all average stats or you can press your luck on 1 or more of them -- rather than something purely random.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="T. Foster, post: 3531695, member: 16574"] The adjustments in OD&D (except for Charisma) could pretty closely be modeled with 1d6: 1 = 3-6 (major penalty: -20% XP, -1 hp/die), 2 = 7-8 (minor penalty: -10% XP, -1 missiles), 3-4 = 9-12 (no adjustment), 5 = 13-14 (minor bonus: +5% XP, will withstand adversity, +1 missiles), 6 = 15-18 (major bonus: +10% XP, +1 hp/die). The big loss would be point-trading, and the incidental "color" of being able to make finer distinctions (which can affect both player role-playing and ref's ad-hoc judgments). Plus, I get the feeling that the bell-curve distribution of rolling 3d6 feels "less random" to players than rolling 1d6, even though the actual percentages are comparable. Something I've toyed with (and discussed a bit at [url=http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2830]this thread[/url] at the K&K Alehouse) is making ability scores optional -- allowing the player to choose whether they want to roll ability scores for their character, and how many, and which ones, with any score they choose not to roll assumed to be average (9-12). Thus the player is choosing to gamble and take the risk -- is the possibility of getting +1 hp/die worth the risk of getting stuck with -1 hp/die? Is the possibility of +10% XP worth the risk of -20% XP (or, more realistically, having to take a different class)? I like the idea of making this gamble an affirmative choice by the player -- you can play it safe with all average stats or you can press your luck on 1 or more of them -- rather than something purely random. [/QUOTE]

Verification