Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9497350" data-attributes="member: 7026594">&quot;Should&quot; in what sense? You're assuming multiple premises there.It's entirely relative to the result you're trying to achieve.Those editions were deliberately designed for a smoother distribution of bonuses, allowing also for a consistent and predictable effect of bonuses granted by mechanics such as ability-increasing spells and magic items, and level-linked ASIs.Those editions also don't use or assume a bell curve distribution of ability scores, which has been much more the exception than the rule across D&amp;D's lifespan.&nbsp; OE, 2E*, and the Basic/Expert/RC/Etc. side D&amp;D line were the ones to assume it.&nbsp; 1E, 3E and onward assume other ability score generation methods which don't give such a simple bell curve for PCs.If you want the Strength spell, say, to give totally different benefits to one recipient than it does for another with the same roll, sure, the old AD&amp;D bonus structure is a good way to achieve that.&nbsp; OTOH if you want +4 Strength to give relatively consistent benefits to anyone, then the post-2000 bonus structure makes a lot more sense.*(and IME no one used 3d6 down the line in 2E)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 9497350, member: 7026594"] "Should" in what sense? You're assuming multiple premises there. It's entirely relative to the result you're trying to achieve. Those editions were deliberately designed for a smoother distribution of bonuses, allowing also for a consistent and predictable effect of bonuses granted by mechanics such as ability-increasing spells and magic items, and level-linked ASIs. Those editions also don't use or assume a bell curve distribution of ability scores, which has been much more the exception than the rule across D&D's lifespan. OE, 2E*, and the Basic/Expert/RC/Etc. side D&D line were the ones to assume it. 1E, 3E and onward assume other ability score generation methods which don't give such a simple bell curve for PCs. If you want the Strength spell, say, to give totally different benefits to one recipient than it does for another with the same roll, sure, the old AD&D bonus structure is a good way to achieve that. OTOH if you want +4 Strength to give relatively consistent benefits to anyone, then the post-2000 bonus structure makes a lot more sense. *(and IME no one used 3d6 down the line in 2E) [/QUOTE]

Verification