PDA

View Full Version : +1 ability modifiers: why not?



Stegyre
2011-02-01, 02:10 PM
Why not have +1 ability modifiers, whether racial modifiers or as item enhancement bonuses? Sure, a +2 equalizes the effect, regardless of the character, but odd ability modifiers should serve to increase the value of odd ability scores, which are now so plainly the unloved stepsisters.

Discuss, please. :smallsmile:
FWIW, I'm personally most interested in having +1 racial modifiers; why not make elves +1 int, +1 dex, -2 con; dwarves +1 str, +1 con, -2 cha; etc.

Scarlet-Devil
2011-02-01, 02:16 PM
Well, there are a few cases of odd ability modifiers, but I can't think of any +1s. The only objection I can come up with to giving bonuses like that is that it takes away the ability to be all awesome with your Dexterity/Constitution of 20 at first level.

Keld Denar
2011-02-01, 02:29 PM
Wish (and the books derived from Wish), are the only odd stat boosts I can think of, given that they grant inherant bonuses which range from 1 to 5.

I'm pro odd bonuses, btw. Its not hard to interpolate the formula for odd stat enhancement boost gear as well. +1 would be 1000g, +2 would be 4000g as it is, +3 would be 9000g, +4 would be 16000g as it is, and +5 would be 25000g before +6 caps at 36000g. Its simply 1000g * (bonus)^2.

Ionizer
2011-02-01, 02:30 PM
As far as I know, other than inherent bonuses from Wish and the Tomes/Manuals (and some random temporary boosts, like the Strength Domain Power if your cleric level is odd), you can't get odd boosts to abilities.

However, the only thing that I know that rewards odd ability scores are feat prerequisites (entry level ones usually need 13+, then 15+ and so on) and maybe those random things that needs the full score (like holding your breath uses the full Con score, not the mod).

Flickerdart
2011-02-01, 02:30 PM
Odd modifiers are cheap. Instead of an 18, you could have two 17s and bump both up to 18 with twice as little money as it would take to get that second 18 from a 16. There would basically be no reason to have even ability score modifiers (just like there's no reason to have odd modifiers now).

2xMachina
2011-02-01, 02:39 PM
For dump stats maybe.

But for stats you want... A 17 vs a 18 is still 1 lower, every time. When you do get your +6, you're 23, 1 short.

Yeah, there are the boosts every 4 lvls thing, but that's countered by tome/wish for an even +10. You're still losing out.

term1nally s1ck
2011-02-01, 02:42 PM
Well, since you cap out at +6 items pre-epic prices, you'd still want an 18 in your primary stat to max it out. If you're reliant on multiple stats, then taking 17s or 15s in them is now more viable, and it's better at lower levels.

Personally, I allow odd modifier items, and any other items that use the DMG pricings provided you can find an example that works the same.

So, if you find an item that casts X spell 3/day, I'll allow you to make or have made an item that casts it any number of times a day, using the pricing formula.

However, you can't jump from X/day to continuous, from continuous to use activated, or between types of modifiers. There's a few other rules, but they're more specific. (Continuous unslotted items must be ioun stones, or must be held, for example.)

FMArthur
2011-02-01, 03:33 PM
You're forgetting bonuses and penalties from age categories, which are odd 2/3 of the time:
Odd middle age physical and mental (-1, +1)
Odd old age physical, even mental (-3, +2)
Even venerable age physical, odd mental (-6, +3)

Stegyre
2011-02-01, 03:53 PM
You're forgetting bonuses and penalties from age categories, which are odd 2/3 of the time:
That's fine. I'm not by any means trying to argue that odd bonuses don't exist anywhere. To my mind, the fact that they exist in this and other contexts (inherent bonuses from wishes and tomes) only makes the game design decision not to allow them generally all the more . . . insupportable.

(I have a vague recollection that one of the books, probably DMG or DMG II, specifically states that races with odd bonuses or items granting odd enhancement bonuses should not be used, but I may be fantasizing that.)

Person_Man
2011-02-01, 03:54 PM
I've always thought that the way D&D handles attributes is just plain stupid and anti-common sense. Why should an attribute of 18 add +4 to something? Why not just have a attribute of 4? It's a sad relic of the 3d6 generation method, which no one uses.

term1nally s1ck
2011-02-01, 03:58 PM
Because for newer players, having negative and 0 attributes makes them feel weaker. It exaggerates the value of the stats to make them feel better about playing.

senrath
2011-02-01, 03:59 PM
I've always thought that the way D&D handles attributes is just plain stupid and anti-common sense. Why should an attribute of 18 add +4 to something? Why not just have a attribute of 4? It's a sad relic of the 3d6 generation method, which no one uses.

Eh, I wouldn't say no one uses the 3d6 generation method (as I know a couple that prefer it). Just not many people.

Stegyre
2011-02-01, 04:22 PM
I've always thought that the way D&D handles attributes is just plain stupid and anti-common sense. Why should an attribute of 18 add +4 to something? Why not just have a attribute of 4? It's a sad relic of the 3d6 generation method, which no one uses.
A fair criticism, but I can actually think of several reasonable responses. (Although, *ahem* you're derailing my thread. :smallwink:)

First, legacy.
But it's a very wide-spread legacy that goes beyond D&D. A number of other games use an attribute range with 10 being the "average" and at least implicitly based on a 3-18 range or something similar. (Some ready examples include The Fantasy Trip, GURPS (aka SJ's update of TFT), Tunnels & Trolls; Traveller dropped the range slightly to use a 2d6 system, but still attributes range up to 15 and aren't so very foreign to the 2-18 range.)

Advantages of following a legacy include giving everyone common points of reference. If I have an “18” and you have a “10,” I know that this 8 point difference is much more significant than if we were playing in a game with a 100-point range.

Second, granularity.
This is a reason not to have every attribute point make a substantive difference. Of course, you can do a game differently. (GURPS, for example: as all rolls are ultimately based on an ability score, any increase or decreases to the ability is a 1:1 modifier on the chance of success.) Personally, I prefer some granularity, and this is one point on which I favor the D&D approach over GURPS.

Third, avoiding excessive granularity.
The obverse of the second point, and not even something you’re arguing, but one can go too far. Let’s say that modifiers were only every 3 (or more) ability points: the wider you make the span, the less incentive (or interest) players have in improving abilities. Ultimately, you may arrive at a situation where abilities are simply static. “Pure” RPers may not mind that. Me? I like the idea of my character improving, and not just by getting more swag.

Fourth, avoiding negatives.
Simply substituting the ability modifier for the ability score, as you suggest, means that you must allow for negative modifiers to preserve the existing game possibilities: some creatures are so weak, that they have a negative modifier to their melee damage; to preserve the same result, they’d have to have a negative strength. This leads to a number of other problems: it’s hard to base other results off of the ability score (for example, how will you calculate encumbrance from a negative strength?); and you lose the opportunity for “0-effects” – my term for the list of horrible that currently occur when an ability score is reduced to 0.

There are work arounds for these problems, but they tend to lead you back to where we started. For example, -6 constitution now means death. Why? Because that’s the same as 0 con using our original 3d6 range. So why not just use the 3d6 range?

YMMV, of course. This isn't intended to say that the present system is the "only" or even the "best" way to do it, only to say that it is supportable: one of a number of good ways of doing it.

Coidzor
2011-02-01, 04:32 PM
Warbeast has +3 to Strength and Constitution, IIRC, and that's the only odd ability modifier from a template I can think of offhand.

Runestar
2011-02-01, 05:04 PM
My guess is that it would be tricky to price such an item accurately.

A glove of +2str always give +1 to-hit/+1 damage, so its price will always be a fair and accurate indicator of its value to its wearer, regardless of his strength.

Conversely, a glove of +1str will either be just as good as a +2str glove, or have no effect at all (depending on whether your str is odd or even). How will you price it?

If cheaper than 4000gp, then only those with odd str will wear it, representing a discount for what is basically the same benefit. If the same price, then no one will ever use it (why, when you have a better effect for the same price?).

Draz74
2011-02-01, 05:08 PM
My guess is that it would be tricky to price such an item accurately.

A glove of +2str always give +1 to-hit/+1 damage, so its price will always be a fair and accurate indicator of its value to its wearer, regardless of his strength.

Conversely, a glove of +1str will either be just as good as a +2str glove, or have no effect at all (depending on whether your str is odd or even). How will you price it?

If cheaper than 4000gp, then only those with odd str will wear it, representing a discount for what is basically the same benefit. If the same price, then no one will ever use it (why, when you have a better effect for the same price?).

This is a good summary of why they actually stopped building most odd-numbered modifiers into the game.

Stegyre
2011-02-01, 05:16 PM
This is a good summary of why they actually stopped building most odd-numbered modifiers into the game.
And it sounds right. (I mean, I agree this is probably WotC's reasoning.)

My thought is, why not? Why shouldn't one benefit of having an odd ability score be that you can get that extra +1 modifier at a reduced cost?

I don't think anyone's disputed the observation in the OP that, presently, odd scores are not valued nearly as much as even scores. Encouraging or allowing odd racial or enhancement bonuses pushes that balance closer to parity. I don't think one could credibly argue that it pushes the balance past parity to making odd scores more valuable than even scores; they're just more valuable than they are now.

MeeposFire
2011-02-01, 09:33 PM
Bloodlines give several +1 ability mods as you level.