Booooring. I much prefer 17(+3) to +3. Plus, my character is not made up of modifiers. He's made up of abilities that grant modifiers.Instances are so few that we might as well use only modifiers instead and ditch the scores.
that is just habit talking as we are trained to think that because of decades of describing abilities that way.Booooring. I much prefer 17(+3) to +3. Plus, my character is not made up of modifiers. He's made up of abilities that grant modifiers.
I can say that if that had been the case, there's a very high chance that I would never have started playing D&D.maybe we could have rolled for abilities 5d3-10 all these decades for -5 to +5 spread with average of "0".
Or 7d3D2-10 for adventurers/PCs
possibly.I can say that if that had been the case, there's a very high chance that I would never have started playing D&D.
So do all monsters, but I don't think that it is relevant to identifying instances when the score itself is used.Unseen servant has a specific Strength score.
I really liked the range of stats D&D started with. I was able to see the range of human ability in them in a way that -5 to +5 just could never evoke. And don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that's the only range of stats that makes sense to me. I loved the old FASERIP Marvel stats that went from 2-100(5000 really). They set the ranges pretty well.possibly.
but if you didn't know any system before, and then you have:
1. 4d6D1, and then you must look up the table what that means mechanically for d20 rolls or
2. 7d3D1-10 and then it does what you get mechanically for d20 rolls.
Man, I LOVED that game!!!I loved the old FASERIP Marvel stats that went from 2-100(5000 really). They set the ranges pretty well.