Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
OSR Gripes
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7632517" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>Even more so because the nature of OSR rules if they are anything like 1E AD&D is that ability scores are generally more important than level. Without ability scores you can neither achieve the level nor the class you may want to play. And the effectiveness of a character with higher ability scores increases exponentially. A character with 1 18 is generally about twice as effective as a character without an ability modifier. </p><p></p><p>We eventually learned that a character was only going to be playable in the long run if:</p><p></p><p>1) They had at least a 16 in either INT or WIS (and obviously no 5 or less that interfered with class selection), and so could be at least a reasonably effective M-U or Cleric. Even so an 18 was hugely important even in this case for the M-U because without it you were relying on luck of the die roll to learn the spells you needed. Below 16 and it really wasn't viable unless you ignored rules on chance of spell failure or chance to learn a spell.</p><p>2) They had at least a 17 in STR and one other 17 other than Charisma. This suggested multi-classing or dual classing could be viable, or in the event of the STR and CON combination you'd be a reasonably effective fighter.</p><p>3) They had an 18 in STR opening up the all important % strength ranks for a fighter.</p><p>4) They had an 18 in CON and the DM allowed higher than RAW advancement as a fighter for Dwarves (for the 19 CON bonuses), or you had an 18 in CON and qualified as a Barbarian (for the double CON bonuses). In either case, this was viable only if you weren't planning to continue the character into high level play.</p><p>5) They qualified as a Paladin or Cavalier.</p><p>6) They qualified as a Ranger.</p><p>7) They qualified as a Bard.</p><p></p><p>The problem among other things is that if a goodly portion of the party had the above qualities, and you didn't then you'd be entirely outstripped in spotlight. There is only so long that is fun. Even if you are the sort of good sport and creative player that can make it work, the second time it happens its just not fun anymore.</p><p></p><p>Honestly, if I knew then what I knew now I'd have adopted Method III for ability score generation in a heart beat. And I wanted to run a grittier game, then I could scaled back the number of rolls for each attribute to 4 or 5. It's slower but vastly better than 4d6 drop the lowest (Method I) for ensuring everyone has something they'd enjoy playing and no one is completely out classed and feels unnecessary. And I think if I did go that route there would have been less metagaming and less impetus for players to cheat.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7632517, member: 4937"] Even more so because the nature of OSR rules if they are anything like 1E AD&D is that ability scores are generally more important than level. Without ability scores you can neither achieve the level nor the class you may want to play. And the effectiveness of a character with higher ability scores increases exponentially. A character with 1 18 is generally about twice as effective as a character without an ability modifier. We eventually learned that a character was only going to be playable in the long run if: 1) They had at least a 16 in either INT or WIS (and obviously no 5 or less that interfered with class selection), and so could be at least a reasonably effective M-U or Cleric. Even so an 18 was hugely important even in this case for the M-U because without it you were relying on luck of the die roll to learn the spells you needed. Below 16 and it really wasn't viable unless you ignored rules on chance of spell failure or chance to learn a spell. 2) They had at least a 17 in STR and one other 17 other than Charisma. This suggested multi-classing or dual classing could be viable, or in the event of the STR and CON combination you'd be a reasonably effective fighter. 3) They had an 18 in STR opening up the all important % strength ranks for a fighter. 4) They had an 18 in CON and the DM allowed higher than RAW advancement as a fighter for Dwarves (for the 19 CON bonuses), or you had an 18 in CON and qualified as a Barbarian (for the double CON bonuses). In either case, this was viable only if you weren't planning to continue the character into high level play. 5) They qualified as a Paladin or Cavalier. 6) They qualified as a Ranger. 7) They qualified as a Bard. The problem among other things is that if a goodly portion of the party had the above qualities, and you didn't then you'd be entirely outstripped in spotlight. There is only so long that is fun. Even if you are the sort of good sport and creative player that can make it work, the second time it happens its just not fun anymore. Honestly, if I knew then what I knew now I'd have adopted Method III for ability score generation in a heart beat. And I wanted to run a grittier game, then I could scaled back the number of rolls for each attribute to 4 or 5. It's slower but vastly better than 4d6 drop the lowest (Method I) for ensuring everyone has something they'd enjoy playing and no one is completely out classed and feels unnecessary. And I think if I did go that route there would have been less metagaming and less impetus for players to cheat. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
OSR Gripes
Top