Community

 
Dungeons & Dra.. D&D Next General D.. Ability Scores and Modifiers - toning it down a...
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 1 of 11  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Ability Scores and Modifiers - toning it down a bit
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 5:52PM #1
ardisiankhaine
Date Joined: Aug 17, 2007
Posts: 93
I had an idea after looking at bonuses to attacks and damage in earlier editions of d&d.  How about toning down the modifiers for checks, saves, and attacks and keep the modifiers for damage as they are now.

Basically you get this

Ability Score        Check/Save/Atk Modfifier        Damage Modifier
         1                                    -3                                  -5
        2-3                                  -2                                  -4
        4-5                                  -2                                  -3
        6-7                                  -1                                  -2
        8-9                                  -1                                  -1
       10-11                                0                                   0
       12-13                               +1                                 +1
       14-15                               +1                                 +2
       16-17                               +2                                 +3
       18-19                               +2                                 +4
       20-21                               +3                                 +5
       22-23                               +3                                 +6
       24-25                               +4                                 +7
       26-27                               +4                                 +8
       28-29                               +5                                 +9
          30                                 +5                                 +10

This would make magic items that give ability score less damaging to the concept of bounded accuracy and make characters with more moderate ability scores more balanced with characters with really high ability scores.  It would only reduce the checks/attacks/saves for most characters by 1 or 2 points, so I think the math will still work or at least will only need minimal tweeking.  

What do you think?  I am thinking of seeing if I can convince a group to try playtesting this to see how it feels in action.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 6:02PM #2
Tlantl
Date Joined: Feb 10, 2007
Posts: 504
I have to agree with this theory although I'd be happier with half rounded down rathr than rounded up. But it would go a long way toward keeping attack bonus bloat under control.

There's no telling how much push back this will get but a lot of players have been using the same adjustments for attack and damage for a long time and might not want to give up the bonuses. 

I am certain this will help with the armor class problem though. 
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 8:34PM #3
Saelorn
Date Joined: May 27, 2012
Posts: 2,963

Oct 10, 2012 -- 5:52PM, ardisiankhaine wrote:

I had an idea after looking at bonuses to attacks and damage in earlier editions of d&d.  How about toning down the modifiers for checks, saves, and attacks and keep the modifiers for damage as they are now.


I really like the idea, but it still seems a little high for me.  I want players to completely lose this obsession with maximizing their stats, since it detracts from the rest of the game.

What I want is either column A or colum B, and I'm currently undecided:

Ability Score                      Modfiier  A                      Modifier B
        1-2                                  -2                                   -1
        3-5                                  -1                                   -1
        6-14                                ---                                  ---
        16-18                              +1                                  +1
        19+                                 +2                                  +1
       

The metagame is not the game.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 8:48PM #4
Tlantl
Date Joined: Feb 10, 2007
Posts: 504

Oct 10, 2012 -- 8:34PM, Saelorn wrote:

Oct 10, 2012 -- 5:52PM, ardisiankhaine wrote:

I had an idea after looking at bonuses to attacks and damage in earlier editions of d&d.  How about toning down the modifiers for checks, saves, and attacks and keep the modifiers for damage as they are now.


I really like the idea, but it still seems a little high for me.  I want players to completely lose this obsession with maximizing their stats, since it detracts from the rest of the game.

What I want is either column A or colum B, and I'm currently undecided:

Ability Score                      Modfiier  A                      Modifier B
        1-2                                  -2                                   -1
        3-5                                  -1                                   -1
        6-14                                ---                                  ---
        16-18                              +1                                  +1
        19+                                 +2                                  +1
       



As I see it even this wouldn't stop the problem you are looking to put a stop to. Everyone will be looking to get even those paultry bonuses since they are still better than nothing. 

If you really want to stop the desire for greater bomuses then you need to make tose bonuses close to meaningless. That means making every one so good without them that they don't really need them to feel special or powerful or what have you. 

Since you can't really do that then looking for ways to make players not look to power build is a waste of energy. It would be better for you to buils encounters with characters with low scores and marginal attacks hit as hard and as ofter as the min maxed character and make all DCs low enough that even the guy with the ability penalty can do the job.

If your campaign doesn't reward min maxing then your players aren't as likely to do it.  Some of those magic items can do the trick by being only as good as the max strenght guy is to start. Some would say why have them give a static bonus, but this right here is as good a reason as any.

I personally don't much care what the players do with their abilities. I build to the highest common denominaror anyway so a character that has poor numbers is usually retired before they start unless the player has her heart set on being a weak unintelligent uncharismatic slug with two left feet I'll have her reroll her character.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 8:59PM #5
BhaelFire
Date Joined: Jul 2, 2012
Posts: 703

Oct 10, 2012 -- 8:34PM, Saelorn wrote:

I want players to completely lose this obsession with maximizing their stats, since it detracts from the rest of the game.


I completely agree with this.

My tolerance for ability mods is a little higher than yours, but I feel where you're coming from. I think the solution is to regulate player's ability scores more so than the modifiers themselves. I think players have gotten brainwashed and trained into expecting super awesome/epic ability scores to offset the failings of the rest of the system; This seems like really bad design theory to me.

Scores over 15 should be exceedingly rare for starting characters. If they aren't, then the game is going to feel the pangs of imbalance sooner, rather than later.

D&D Next - Basic and Expert Editions Show

I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.

Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.



Here's a mockup of the Basic Set I created.



(CLICK HERE TO VIEW LARGER IMAGE)
  


Basic Set


This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).

The Basic boxed set contains:


Quick Start Rules
A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms.

Player's Handbook
(Softcover, 125 pages)
Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level.

Dungeon Master's Guide

(Softcover, 125 pages)
Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.

Monster Manual
(Softcover, 100 pages)
Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D. 

Introductory Adventure
(Keep on the Borderlands)
An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.

Also includes: 

Character Sheets
Reference Sheets
Set of Dice




Expert Set


A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:


Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.)
Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.)
Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)




Expansions


These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.) 


Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book)
Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book)
Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book)
The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)












A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage Show

A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points


In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...


What are hit points?
The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.


So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then?
It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.


But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target?
Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.


Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact?
Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.


If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent?
Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.


Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack?
It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.


What about poison and other types of non-combat damage?
Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.


If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages?
Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.

What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points?
If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.


Why are monsters killed immediately and not players?
Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.


What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage?
If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).


Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded?
See below.
 


Damage and Dying


Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.


  1. Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly. 

  2. Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.

  3. If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.

  4. Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.



Unharmed: 1 hp or more
Wounded: 0 hp or less
Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level)
Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)


Wounded
When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.


Incapacitated
Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).

If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.


If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.

Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.


Dead
Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 9:14PM #6
lawrencehoy
Date Joined: Oct 11, 2009
Posts: 1,056

Oct 10, 2012 -- 8:59PM, BhaelFire wrote:

Oct 10, 2012 -- 8:34PM, Saelorn wrote:

I want players to completely lose this obsession with maximizing their stats, since it detracts from the rest of the game.


I completely agree with this.

My tolerance for ability mods is a little higher than yours, but I feel where you're coming from. I think the solution is to regulate player's ability scores more so than the modifiers themselves. I think players have gotten brainwashed and trained into expecting super awesome/epic ability scores to offset the failings of the rest of the system; This seems like really bad design theory to me.

Scores over 15 should be exceedingly rare for starting characters. If they aren't, then the game is going to feel the pangs of imbalance sooner, rather than later.



+1

I agree with this concept. I wouldn't even object to the occasional ability score increase (at each tier, perhaps), if the starting scores were kept in check.

I'm a proponent of rolling for ability scores. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 10:43PM #7
beholdergaze
Date Joined: Nov 7, 2005
Posts: 312
I would like to see them widen the scope of ability scores. I think each class should need to juggle 3 to 4 when deciding where to spend points. This could help round out characters a bit.
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 10:55PM #8
kadim
Date Joined: Jun 21, 2012
Posts: 2,766

ugh please no. The numbers are all ready so diminished it's hardly worth the bother and attributes are the one place where we see signficiant growth as we level up. Even then you're looking at a +1 every 8 levels; hardly a cause for a nerf.


Everyone's freaking out over this magic stuff but maybe it's worth giving them the benefit of the doubt and believe the designers when they say that the magic items aren't intended to be part of the game balance? I don't know how they expect that to happen but I'm willing to find out more about it before I go proposing changes on the basis of magic items that aren't supposed to figure into the game balance.



But even if I wasn't in a "wait and see" mode, I'm really resentful of the entire 5e mentality that numbers can't matter. Part of watching your character getting more powerful is watching the numbers get bigger. Part of character creation is feeling like your stat selection matters. If the investment of an 18 only gives me +1 over the investment of a 12 then it's not worth the bother.


Damage modifiers don't cut it with things as they are because that makes physical damagers a lot more bound to their attributes than spell casters. it creates a situation where a wizard with a 12 int is only marginally less powerful than a wizard with an 18 int because most if not all of their spells don't use an attribute modifier for damage.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 11:02PM #9
Qmark
  • vitriol and virtue
Date Joined: May 18, 2002
Posts: 16,536

Oct 10, 2012 -- 8:48PM, Tlantl wrote:

As I see it even this wouldn't stop the problem you are looking to put a stop to. Everyone will be looking to get even those paultry bonuses since they are still better than nothing.


Yup.  Ninteen in something suddenly becomes mandatory.

The huge dead zone in the middle was abandoned for good reason.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 months ago  ::  Oct 10, 2012 - 11:08PM #10
Saelorn
Date Joined: May 27, 2012
Posts: 2,963
Again, it appeals to a specific kind of player.  Some players like to feel smart, for spending their point buy in a way to get the most benefit.  Some players enjoy the versatility of 3d6 in order, in skills and RP and whatnot, but hate feeling hosed when it comes down to the life and death of inevitable combat.
The metagame is not the game.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 11  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Next
Jump Menu:
 
Dungeons & Dra.. D&D Next General D.. Ability Scores and Modifiers - toning it down a...
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing