Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5623895" data-attributes="member: 6679551">Which is exactly how it is implemented in 3.5. From 2 to 10000, every ability score has a +1 higher modifer than the score two points lower.  In other words...it's a linear proposition (with the sole exception of a 1 being -5)   Hey, it's great to try and look at the game and see if it makes sense.  But it's equally important not to try and invent logic to make sense of something that is implemented illogically.  There is no concept of diminishing returns concept in 3.5 as it applies to ability scores.  Ability score tables goes on ad infinitim and increases every two points.  See above.     Ignoring the fact that you may be contradicting yourself, while that theory would explain the rule...it has as much basis in reality as saying, the god Tymor has decided to penalize those with Dex lower than 10 and reward those higher than 11....except that there is nothing the game that would support such a conclusion.  I'm not trying to be snarky, but it's counterproductive to just make stuff up as a raison d'etre.    A better approach is to determine why the rule has been written that way.  What goal were the designers trying to achieve and did they achieve it?  I think we can all agree that no game system is 100% perfect as written.  Is this such a case? Look, I understand what it is you're trying to convey, but one of the problems I think that is tripping you up is the paradigm of "penalty" and "bonus."  These terms, as applied to ability modifiers, are wholly arbitrary because the increases are a linear step function.   The magnitude of the difference between having an 8 Dex and having a 12 Dex is neither greater nor smaller than if you made a Dex of 2 give you a +1 bonus and and increased the bonus from there on out.  A Dex of 8 would give you a "bonus" of +4 and a Dex of 12 would give you a bonus of "+6."  Net difference? +2.  The same as it is now.  In other words, "penalty" and "bonus" are just labels based on a some arbitrary notion of what the average person's Dexerity would be.  It doesn't not change the magnitude of the difference.  If 3.5 decided that a Commoner's Dex is 16, so that anything below 16 is a "penalty" the difference between 8 and 12 would still be +2. What's interesting for me is, again, why did they implement the game this way?   Surely someone at WotC asked why not apply a flat penalty for everyone in a situation where they don't get to avoid an attack?  Why punish someone with a Dex of 20 more than someone with a Dex of 16 and not punish someone with a Dex of 10 at all?  After all, even an armor class of 10 assumes a person is not immobilized.  So shouldn't the average person encounter a penalty if they are unable to avoid an attack or didn't see the attacker?  I'm at a loss.</blockquote>

Verification