Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 6081697" data-attributes="member: 3400">I'll admit some temptation with this. But I do believe that the attribute modifier has some benefits to it. I think that having the most nimble elf, with the same degree of experience, having only a 25% greater chance to dodge the incoming attack is not necessarily a bad thing. It keeps the stats from being too much of a factor, which I think was an issue with 1e/2e's stat rolls. Same with that 20 Dex elf only failing if we define a 20 as auto-fail (or impose penalties). Success was too easy with a high stat. On the other hand, the whole system was bounded within 20 results and so was pretty easy to predict and you didn't end up with the number inflation and huge disparities (based on level training) in 3e/4e. It's a tough issue, if there were an easy compromise between the two systems, that would probably be quite useful. I think that's kind of their target - using stat modifiers but systematically bounding the range.I also like the idea of 3 offensive/active stats and 3 defensive/passive stats. I think this was the direction 4e got close to but zigged away from but should have zagged toward. 4e gave the player choice of which 3 stats to use as their PC's defenses and then somewhat synergized with the class's powers, but there were too many uneven spots where some builds would depend on only 3 of the stats (rogue - artful dodger) while others were less efficient and needed 4 (rogue - brutal scoundrel) - the whole some builds being more MAD than others again.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 6081697, member: 3400"] I'll admit some temptation with this. But I do believe that the attribute modifier has some benefits to it. I think that having the most nimble elf, with the same degree of experience, having only a 25% greater chance to dodge the incoming attack is not necessarily a bad thing. It keeps the stats from being [b]too much[/b] of a factor, which I think was an issue with 1e/2e's stat rolls. Same with that 20 Dex elf only failing if we define a 20 as auto-fail (or impose penalties). Success was too easy with a high stat. On the other hand, the whole system was bounded within 20 results and so was pretty easy to predict and you didn't end up with the number inflation and huge disparities (based on level training) in 3e/4e. It's a tough issue, if there were an easy compromise between the two systems, that would probably be quite useful. I think that's kind of their target - using stat modifiers but systematically bounding the range. I also like the idea of 3 offensive/active stats and 3 defensive/passive stats. I think this was the direction 4e got close to but zigged away from but should have zagged toward. 4e gave the player choice of which 3 stats to use as their PC's defenses and then somewhat synergized with the class's powers, but there were too many uneven spots where some builds would depend on only 3 of the stats (rogue - artful dodger) while others were less efficient and needed 4 (rogue - brutal scoundrel) - the whole some builds being more MAD than others again. [/QUOTE]

Verification