Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Melan" data-source="post: 2916766" data-attributes="member: 1713">No argument from me on the topic of high ability scores - in most AD&amp;D games I have known, such attributes were commonplace. In my neck of woods, character generation was usually handled by distributing 80, in some rare cases 90 points among the six abilities (resulting in an average of 13.33 and 15, respectively). I was considered a skinflint for giving 70 points to new characters (avg. 11.66).&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />&nbsp; It is my opinion that Basic D&amp;D handled ability bonuses better in that period:03&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -304-05 -206-08 -109-12 +013-15 +116-17 +218&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +3Straight bell curve, 18 means a lot but not as much as a 18/00 in AD&amp;D; you don't need super-high stats to succeed. Too bad we didn't have BD&amp;D at the time. Note that Castles&amp;Crusades uses this system as well. The 3e method is likewise sensible, although (IMHO) it doesn't &quot;protect&quot; the higher ranges enough. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />On the other hand, I flat out disagree on most of the names (except Faffle, for some reason). They are whimsical, but very cool - they wouldn't look out of place in a Vance novel.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Melan, post: 2916766, member: 1713"] No argument from me on the topic of high ability scores - in most AD&D games I have known, such attributes were commonplace. In my neck of woods, character generation was usually handled by distributing 80, in some rare cases 90 points among the six abilities (resulting in an average of 13.33 and 15, respectively). I was considered a skinflint for giving 70 points to new characters (avg. 11.66). :D It is my opinion that Basic D&D handled ability bonuses better in that period: 03 -3 04-05 -2 06-08 -1 09-12 +0 13-15 +1 16-17 +2 18 +3 Straight bell curve, 18 means a lot but not as much as a 18/00 in AD&D; you don't need super-high stats to succeed. Too bad we didn't have BD&D at the time. Note that Castles&Crusades uses this system as well. The 3e method is likewise sensible, although (IMHO) it doesn't "protect" the higher ranges enough. ;) [B]On the other hand[/B], I flat out disagree on most of the names (except Faffle, for some reason). They are whimsical, but very cool - they wouldn't look out of place in a Vance novel. [/QUOTE]

Verification