Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5802508" data-attributes="member: 54877">Set the numbers right, perhaps on a scale that is not linear, and you can also use the ability score to simplify some otherwise fairly complex stacking rules, while keeping it simple at the table.&nbsp; Then you use the mod that results when you want those stacking rules to apply. That is, if it is +1 per 2 points of stat (even if only canceling out a negative), then you don't get this. &nbsp;Personally, I'd like to see them do this while also getting rid of negative mods, so that scores from 1 to around 20 translate into an uneven distribution of mods from +0 to about +5 or so (whatever works out with the game math).&nbsp; Then provide most of the mod benefits towards the lower end of the scale.&nbsp; This means that all you get going from, say 16 to 20, is a single +1 and the better checks based directly on ability score.&nbsp; Not that it is not useful, but it is diminishing in value as it goes up.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5802508, member: 54877"] Set the numbers right, perhaps on a scale that is not linear, and you can also use the ability score to simplify some otherwise fairly complex stacking rules, while keeping it simple at the table. Then you use the mod that results when you want those stacking rules to apply. That is, if it is +1 per 2 points of stat (even if only canceling out a negative), then you don't get this. Personally, I'd like to see them do this while also getting rid of negative mods, so that scores from 1 to around 20 translate into an uneven distribution of mods from +0 to about +5 or so (whatever works out with the game math). Then provide most of the mod benefits towards the lower end of the scale. This means that all you get going from, say 16 to 20, is a single +1 and the better checks based directly on ability score. Not that it is not useful, but it is diminishing in value as it goes up. [/QUOTE]

Verification