How would the math change if...?

[Daern]

I'm looking for input from the math heads out there.
A while ago there was a thread where @Dragonblade hypothesized that Stat scores might be far more important in the upcoming game, perhaps offering modifiers equal to (Stat - 10).
This would mean that an 11 STR would offer a +1 and an 18 would give you +8.
I've run with this a bit on my houserule and I'm wondering what the ramifications might be to play this way with a basic ruleset*. What would be appropriate Skill Check DCs?
What would attack rolls look like? (assuming DEX bonuses to AC don't stack with Armor)
I'm curious what the statistical ramifications might be.
oh, and I had a thought that it would be best to have a stat generation system, where very high and low scores would be very rare.

*fyi. I'm posting this here because this is where I got this idea, but my houserules are a mod of DCCRPGbeta and C&C type rules, basic d20 stuff.
edit, though I'm wondering now if this shouldn't be played with a d30...

 

[the Jester]

We need lower, not higher, bonuses.

One implication of this is that you suck at stuff if your stats are average compared to someone with good stats. A difference of 5 points is huge; 10 points- say your wizard's Dex of 10 vs. the rogue's Dex of 20- is big enough that it makes you essentially useless against things that challenge the rogue, or it leaves him with an always-win button against things that challenge you.

 

[keterys]

If you don't add ability scores to hitting (blasphemy, I know), would it be all that bad?

Like, let's say the DC was 15, and the 20 Dex Rogue had +10 and the 10 Dex Wizard had +0. So... the wizard needs a 15 and the rogue needs a 5. That's totally dealable.

The other question, of course, is how many other random things you throw into it. But I mocked up a system a while back where you just used your ability score for not-hitting and it mostly worked fine in theory. Course, I also didn't have 3e/4e's ability score range, but a range closer to 6-18 or so? Sure.

 

[Daern]

Yeah, this idea I think really needs to have a "flatter" stat range and I think a simpler system that limits char-op (no feats etc.), but like I said, I came upon the idea in this forum so I thought I'd throw it back this way.

 

[Grazzt]

We need lower, not higher, bonuses.

One implication of this is that you suck at stuff if your stats are average compared to someone with good stats. A difference of 5 points is huge; 10 points- say your wizard's Dex of 10 vs. the rogue's Dex of 20- is big enough that it makes you essentially useless against things that challenge the rogue, or it leaves him with an always-win button against things that challenge you.

Yep. Agree. I don't think we have to worry about the stat bonuses. I believe it was one of the leaked playtest reports (@ 4chan) that mentioned stat bonuses follow the same progression introduced in 3.x

 

[kitsune9]

We need lower, not higher, bonuses.

I agree.

If monsters and challenges are going to have more "staying power", the entire system needs to have lower math. For me, this would mean:

1. Convert all modifiers to penalties or bonuses to the attacker.

2. Lower ability score bonuses. 18 gives you +3....maybe....

3. Lower BAB, saves. A fighter gets a +1 bonus every 3 levels or 4 levels. The other classes go even slower.

4. There are three types of modifiers--situational, magic, and ability. Situational is what happens in combat (you are prone, your opponent is blind, you're flanking, etc.). Magic is from spells and magic items. Ability is your feats and class abilities and stats. Eliminate stacking of the same bonuses. You get one modifier for ability, one for situational, and one from magic--that's it. You choose the best of which applies. If you have a +2 sword and someone casts bless, you don't get it because your magic sword is better than bless. If you're flanking for a +2 bonus, but your opponent falls prone and that grants you a +4 bonus, you get the +4 bonus, not +6. If you take a feat that grants you a +2 bonus to range attacks, but your Dex modifier gives you +3 to hit, your Dex trumps (but the feat is necessary to build for other trees). Some players may think that only the best of one modifier should apply (situational, magic, or ability) or maybe some combination of two.

So the above are just some suggestions as to an approach. It's kind of how I would design a game if I wanted to scale the math down. If the best bonus you can get is just a +4 then that's it and you roll 1d20 and go with it. However, if you get a +2 from your ability score, +3 from your magic doodah, +2 from the bard not shutting up and inspiring you to greatness, +2 because the cleric bolstered you, +2 for flanking, +2 because your opponent is blinded, etc., it can be frustrating for some players who have to keep track of all that and / or the DM's who are supposed to do it for them.

Other posters may have differing ideas and it's all good!

 

[Kingreaper]

(but the feat is necessary to build for other trees).

The rest of your post is an alright idea, but I have to pinpoint this and say

NO!

No more feats that are useless apart from being the prereq for another feat

Make all feats approximately equal. Don't go "Well, this feat is worth two feats, so we'll make another, useless feat, as a pre-requisite"

 

[kitsune9]

The rest of your post is an alright idea, but I have to pinpoint this and say

NO!

No more feats that are useless apart from being the prereq for another feat

Make all feats approximately equal. Don't go "Well, this feat is worth two feats, so we'll make another, useless feat, as a pre-requisite"

I kind of figured I would get at least one protest from writing that. That's okay with me, there's tons of other ways to make the system scale down.

 

[Daern]

I like [MENTION=18507]kitsune9[/MENTION] 's idea for three categories of mods that don't stack. This would really limit feat bloat I think. What category is equipment? In my houserule doc right now I decided that Armor and DEX don't stack. But what about 4e's weapon prof bonuses?

I guess I see the potential for these types of large initial modifiers if the game does have a very flat progression rate. So you start somewhat competent, but don't move through the realms of power too quickly.

The question I was hoping to discuss is more like, if everyone was starting with an average +5 to hit/damage/skill checks, then what would need to change on the DM's side in terms of monster ACs and DCs.
For example I was thinking maybe make the average DCs higher, like 15, 20, 25 or something...

 

[kitsune9]

I like [MENTION=18507]kitsune9[/MENTION] 's idea for three categories of mods that don't stack. This would really limit feat bloat I think. What category is equipment?

I guess equipment can be classified as situational if it applies to combat or ability if it applies to both combat and skill checks that are not necessarily combat related. Or it can be its own category too.

The idea is that if one wanted to, there can be only be one bonus within each category that can stack with the other best bonus in the other categories or you only get the best bonus from any of the categories or some combo in between.