PDA

View Full Version : Odd ability scores



Macrovore
2007-05-10, 09:40 PM
I've always wondered this: Why does DnD have odd ability scores? Why not, instead of 10/11, 12/13, 14/15, and so on, they just have +0, +1, and +2? It makes, IMO, the game simpler.
and what's the difference between someone with a 10 str and an 11 str? "I'm a little stronger than you, but not strong enough to gain any bonus in combat?" That strength difference can just be roleplayed, and doesn't need a complicated mechanic like odd ability scores. Not that it's not that complicated, it would just be simpler to use straight modifiers, instead of scores.

Caduceus
2007-05-10, 09:43 PM
At any given level by itself, the odd ability scores make no difference. However, having a 16 in Str and a 17 in Con at 3rd level, imagine getting to level four. You get a 1 point boost to any one ability score. Would you rather waste it to get a mechanically pointless boost to Str, or bump up your Con modifier from +3 to +4?

SpatulaOfDoom
2007-05-10, 09:44 PM
I'm not sure why ability scores don't parallel with ability score modifiers but in your example the guy with 11 strength would have a higher carrying capacity, they also made most (all I think) feat pre-reqs with ability score pre-requisites odd numbers.

Sutremaine
2007-05-10, 09:47 PM
Every point is useful once ability penalties and damage enter play.

Turcano
2007-05-10, 09:53 PM
In practical terms, odd ability scores are used mainly to determine spell levels for casters; a caster with a relevant mental score of, say, 13, can cast higher level spells than one with a 12 for the same ability.

Just be glad they changed it from the ability modifiers from 2nd Edition. Those made no sense whatsoever.

Macrovore
2007-05-10, 09:57 PM
what was it like in second edition?

and if there were modifiers, you could easily change the system to say you needed a modifier of at least 1/2 the spell level to cast it, and the feats just had a minimum modifier.

Penguinsushi
2007-05-10, 10:00 PM
Basically, that's just a system mechanic tweak though. I mean, there are 17 different ways you could implement any given mechanic and they game designers had to pick one. They chose to do it this way, probably for a combination of reasons. Whether its better than another way they could have done it is mostly subjective.

If you wanted to use straight mods instead of numbers, i'm sure you could make that work by changing a few things like when you get ability points (mods), things that do ability damage (like Sutremaine mentioned) or similar effects, and a handful of other minor things...

~PS

Merlin the Tuna
2007-05-10, 10:26 PM
It's part of the overall simplification initiative of 3E. Basically, it keeps numbers simple without getting away from the 3d6 roots of D&D. That's not to say it's a great system, but it's a fair compromise between functionality and nostalgia.

That said, 11 Str is better than 10 for carrying capacity, and 11 Con is better than 10 for holding your breath. Odd numbers also help when determining some roll tiebreakers ("We both have a got a 16 for initiative, our modifiers are both +2... but you have 15 Dex and I have 14. You're up.") and quite a few feats require 13 of a given ability. An example is Power Attack -- 12 Str won't cut the mustard, but 13 will.

Turcano
2007-05-10, 10:28 PM
what was it like in second edition?

Each ability score used a different modifier system. Strength scores between 8 and 16 had an attack bonus of +0, and 6-15 had a damage bonus of +0, and a score of 18 could have a percentile exceptional strength (but only for humans, I think). A modifier of +0 was 6-15 for Dex, 7-14 for Con, 8-14 for Wisdom, and 9-13 for Cha. And these are the main modifiers; each ability had other secondary modifiers for other things. Scores over 18 gave you regeneration for Con, Illusion immunity for Int, and other spell immunities for Wis. Scores over 18 were only available to PCs through magic, and the capped out at 25.

Edit: I found a .doc file with the tables here (http://www.geocities.com/goodlyshomepage/Essential_tables.doc).

Theodoxus
2007-05-10, 10:55 PM
FWIW, True20 took out 3d6 stats and went for just modifiers. It looks a lot like WEGs old Star Wars d6 game.. With stats like: Str 3, Dex 2 Con 1 Int 4 Wis -2 Chr 0

I like the premise of using the halfsteps as pre-reqs for feats.

Oh, and the True20 grants an attribute bonus every 5 levels - but since it's equivalent to a +2 bonus in 3.5, that's technically better than one point every 4.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-05-11, 07:17 AM
...a score of 18 could have a percentile exceptional strength (but only for humans, I think).
No, any race could have it. The resctriction was only characters with a Warrior group class (Fighter, Ranger, or Paladin in core). Halflings, being the only race with a Strength penalty, though, were effectively restricted from Exceptional Strength, since they couldn't achieve the necessary 18 Strength.

Jayabalard
2007-05-11, 07:42 AM
Just be glad they changed it from the ability modifiers from 2nd Edition. Those made no sense whatsoever. The modifiers in 1st and 2nd edition made the same amount of sense as the ones in 3rd edition...

% strength was only for fighter and fighter subclasses (and also cavalier and cavalier subclasses in unearthed arcana)

KoDT69
2007-05-11, 11:53 AM
Unearthed Arcana was awesome back in the day!

Fax Celestis
2007-05-11, 12:02 PM
The modifiers in 1st and 2nd edition made the same amount of sense as the ones in 3rd edition...

% strength was only for fighter and fighter subclasses (and also cavalier and cavalier subclasses in unearthed arcana)

I dunno, I vastly prefer a simple mathematical process (($Score - 10)/2 = $Modifier) to a lookup table. I prefer to work without the books as much as possible.

Pink
2007-05-11, 12:48 PM
Edit: I found a .doc file with the tables here (http://www.geocities.com/goodlyshomepage/Essential_tables.doc).

...*whimper* That looks confusing.

Turcano
2007-05-11, 01:35 PM
No, any race could have it. The resctriction was only characters with a Warrior group class (Fighter, Ranger, or Paladin in core). Halflings, being the only race with a Strength penalty, though, were effectively restricted from Exceptional Strength, since they couldn't achieve the necessary 18 Strength.

Yeah, you're right. My only experience with 2nd Edition was a Player's Handbook I found at the local library a couple of years ago (and the online Monster Manual), so some of my recollections were bound to be sketchy. I did remember that there was some arbitrary restriction on exceptional strength, just not what it was exactly. :smallredface:

Starbuck_II
2007-05-11, 02:20 PM
And if your Con was high enough: you could get regeneration back on 2nd. Which is weird and kinda logical at the same time.

AtomicKitKat
2007-05-11, 02:37 PM
And the whole "Con above 16 is useless unless you're a Full BAB class. Then you gain 2 more HP per HD.". Not forgetting all the arbitrary class restrictions/level caps on every race except Humans(obviously, Da {Hu}Man was keeping everyone else down. :smallyuk:). And the frankly bewildering experience tables. I have a copy of the Dark Queen of Krynn manual, and there's 1 table for Neutral Clerics, and another for Good Clerics. Ditto the White and Red Wizards. Then there were the staggered progressions for the 3 ranks of Solamnic Knights.:smalltongue:

Irenaeus
2007-05-12, 10:04 AM
The 3ed system reminds me of Ars Magica, with its ability scores ranging from -5 to +5. Add ability score to skill rank and you know your effective skill. Considering Jonathan Tweet's background, this might not be a coincidence.

Quirinus_Obsidian
2007-05-12, 10:21 AM
...*whimper* That looks confusing.

Thus, d20 3E and 3.5 were born. :smallbiggrin: It was wicked confusing; thankfully I did not have to put up with that for too long.

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-05-12, 05:12 PM
All good points.

Also, remember the other benefits of ability scores?

Feats are tied to odd numbers.
Load and lifting is tied to each unit of STR, not every even unit.
Ageing effects happen in ones.


I guess the biggest point of odd numbers in ability scores (or rather, retaining a character generation system that includes 3d6-based abilities) is the increased versatility over 10 point system.
Also, having abilities that (typically) range from 0 to 20, when the core die mechanic is a d20 plus bonuses - well, it's more elegant.

Lastly - "Intelligence 10" sounds way better than "Intelligence 0".

Matthew
2007-05-27, 07:34 PM
It's worth noting that although (A)D&D had very odd and frankly annoying Attribute Modifier Tables, (O)D&D did not (though those tables also varied by edition). They looked something like this:

Attribute Modifiers
{table=head]Attribute Score|Attribute Modifier

1|-5

2|-4

3|-3

4-5|-3

6-8|-1

9-12|+0

13-15|+1

16-17|+2

18|+3

19|+4

20|+5

21|+6

22|+7

23|+8

24|+9

25|+10
[/table]

I think this is the expanded version. The original only went from 3-18. The other thing to remember is that 'Attribute Checks' were also an accepted mechanism for resolving actions (i.e. roll 1D20+Modifiers, if it's under your Attribute, you succeed).

DSCrankshaw
2007-05-27, 07:55 PM
Well, it should be noted that whenever a feat has an ability pre-req, that pre-req is odd. Power Attack, Two Weapon Fighting, Rapid Shot, and the like, all have odd ability score requirements. So odd ability score numbers aren't entriely useless.

Godhand
2007-05-27, 10:30 PM
I'd point to the strip with the old man going on about non-weapon prof., but the archives are going crazy on me.

1st edition was a blast. Leveling up two character classes at the same time with different exp scales, 1 itty bitty ability point making a massive difference, and less than a dozen main classes.

Be happy the ability system is as easy as it is, the two points for each +/- simplifies and streamlines builds. The scale now is an improvement on the old one, but it still pays homage to the past. Changing from one edition to the next takes time, and players look for things that remain similiar.

TheOOB
2007-05-28, 01:16 AM
The ability scores are mostly a relic of the past. Yes, there are differences between a 10 and an 11 in a stat, but those differences are artifically created to make it look like there are differences.

In green ronins True20, for example, the six ability scores are measured by their modifier. You start with a 0 in all 6 stats and have 6 points to spread around them(you can gain more by reducing a stat), before racial mods you can max at +5, and min at -5, simple.

Matthew
2007-05-28, 05:50 AM
So charisma got the shaft back before 3.x too? After seeing the other high stat bonuses, you'd think they'd at least throw in a few x/day charm persons or something. *grumbles and concocts houserules for bonus feats, saves, skills for which game mechanics exist to actually use, a confidence or luck bonus that applies to everything, etc, for charisma*
Nope, Charisma was the Lord of Attribute Scores. It determined how many Henchman you got and it provided a hefty Reaction Bonus. Of course, if you didn't care about such things, you could say it got the shaft.

Macrovore
2007-05-28, 09:18 PM
but those differences are artifically created to make it look like there are differences.

which is mostly what has been posted here.

and a simple fix for CHA is to use action points, and instead of the PCs having 5+1/2 lvl, make it CHA+1/2 lvl.

Matthew
2007-06-06, 02:22 PM
The ability scores are mostly a relic of the past. Yes, there are differences between a 10 and an 11 in a stat, but those differences are artifically created to make it look like there are differences.
Wait a second, what? Attribute Damage and Attribute Progression make fair use of the way things scale, don't they? We can't use halves, after all, since those are rounded down. I would say they still serve a useful purpose for the moment.