Grognards: Was the Dex Check a Common House Rule Before 1e?

[grodog]

I recall reading about some mechanic about rolling 3d6 or even 4-, 5-, or 6d6 against an ability score, too, to simulate varying levels of difficulty for the check (these model difficulty when rolling under the ability vs. over, of course).

Sep: what got you thinking about, this, out of curiosity?

 

[rgard]

Our OD&D DM used the dex check for those situations back in 1979. She had been playing for a couple of years, but I don't know when she started using the mechanic.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Does the Dex check have a good pedigree?

Don't know about pedigree, but from 1E onwards a Dex check was, IME, very common indeed. It was used in checking to see if you could keep your balance on a log, footing on a slippery surface, getting up from prone, landing on your feet when your horse is killed underneath you, but most commonly of all it got used to determine who was actually IN the area-effect of a spell before saves were even made. Fireballs particularly, just by virtue of being most common.

If your character was kinda half-in/half-out of the area then the DM would frequently give you a simple dex check to see if you were all-in or all-out. That's just how we rolled. YMMV.

I didn't play much OD&D before moving to 1E and the memories of it are conflated with what came later. To the best of my recollection, however, Dex checks, Str checks, etc. were even MORE likely in OD&D because it otherwise just didn't have the rules to cover a myriad of situations. So much was left to the DM's discretion, and the DM's discretion frequently said, "Just give 'em a dex check and they can't blame you for not giving them a decent chance at it."

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

Paul Jaquays' Caverns of Thracia, first published in 1979, specifies that PCs must roll under their Dexterity on a d20 to avoid falling if they engage in combat on the rope bridges.

I don't doubt that this was simply a published example of a prevalent house-rule, as the mighty and wise Kask suggests, but it is an earlier example than the others cited above.

 

[the Jester]

I recall reading about some mechanic about rolling 3d6 or even 4-, 5-, or 6d6 against an ability score, too, to simulate varying levels of difficulty for the check (these model difficulty when rolling under the ability vs. over, of course).

I took this to another level. If you have even a mild understanding of probability, you can tailor the difficulty of an ability check pretty handily by changing the dice rolled on that check.

1d20 is a flat curve with easily-predicted results, i.e. if you need a 10 or less, you'll make it 50% of the time. If you make an ability check on 3d6 instead, you make it much harder on pcs with a low stat in that ability and much easier on pcs with a high stat. You can say, "Make a strength check on 2d12" and have is be possible for almost anyone (in 1/2e) but difficult for almost everyone. You want a really hard strength check for anyone but the very strongest 1/2e pcs? Make it a 6d6 check- the bell curve tops out at 21, so only great strength and good luck combined will get you in the door on that one. And so forth.

I believe that the basics of this system may have been introduced in Skills & Powers. Might've been in an early product, though- maybe Creative Campaigning or something? I can't quite recall.

Sorry for the tangent.

 

[pawsplay]

I can't speak for earlier versions, but in the red box Basic set, rolling a d20, 3d6, or a larger number of d6 is a suggested way to houserule various tests (DMR, p.20). The Mentzer set is cr1983.

 

[Primal]

I play OD&D now but I've been told by those who played it back in the 1970s that the "roll under Ability on a d20" check was one of three ways often used to handle such things (the other two methods were "roll under arbitrary number on d100" and "pure DM fiat").

I remember using D20 under ability score... there might have been penalties, too, such as "due to the floor's slipperiness, you need to roll under your Dex -5". I also remember that changing your action mid-round and aiming spells more accurately (i.e. "Roll under Int -2 and you can catch nine orcs with your fireball instead of seven" -- note that we didn't use minis back then) required an Int check. I don't ever recall using percentile dice for anything other than "there's a 30% chance that somebody in this town sells you that plate mails" and stuff like that.

 

[adwyn]

I can remember several methods of making ability score saves around the time Blackmoor came out but most were rather wonky - much like grodog mentioned. Of course at that time we had just managed to replace chits with dice so d6 based mechanics were still fairly ingrained.

By the time the Kerr article came out we were using the d20 under stat roll in a couple of our groups as I can remember using the article as backup in an arguement with my DM.

 

[Lilaxe]

Although I can't remember which spells they are, there are several in the AD&D Players Handbook in which ability checks are used to avoid or limit the effect of the spell.

I had a list somewhere but can't find it right now.

So it wasn't just a houserule it was a rule, just not a universal one.

 

[jdrakeh]

I don't ever recall using percentile dice for anything other than "there's a 30% chance that somebody in this town sells you that plate mails" and stuff like that.

Well, obviously, you and I never spoken about this before Philotomy (I think), Geebo, and a few other posters here and at another forum mentioned the percentile resolution and the purely fiat resolution when I was working on my own house rules document for OD&D+Chainmail about a year back.