I remember 2nd ed quite clearly, and I remember the table being similar. I also remember being really happy that 3e freed attributes from those tables and give them some serious impact in the game.
The other thing about 2nd ed is the tables went absolutely berserk once you crossed past 18, so if you got into the superhuman stats club, you were in the money and it felt like you really crossed a threshold. The chart we've got here mixes the latter day even progression formula to the former day meaningless stat mods before exceptional formula.
Basically I find it really dull. It's not a system that makes me look up and care about what my stats are, and that's the very first thing you do when you make a character. The stats have to hook you in and make you feel like it matters. Further, it makes race selection incredibly dull because your +1 to a stat is totally pointless.
As for splitting the damage up, yeah cool but not every class uses their prime requisite for damage so it creates a huge imbalance among the classes.
As I've said before, the real issue is not with ability mods; it's with the frequency of scores above 15 with starting players. The game, I find, runs more balanced and fairly when characters' highest modifier is +2. Expecting modifiers higher than +3 in more than one score is unreasonable and is the quick path to the Dark Side (i.e., "Pwrgamrz!!!").
Players should recognize that an ability mod spread of +2 +1 +1 for a starting character is respectable and nothing to scoff at.
It might help if the normal range of ability scores is considered to be 6-15 (instead of 3-18), with 15 being exemplary and scores higher than that nearly unheard of.
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.
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
ExpertSet
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 DamageShow
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Since D&D Next will want to appeal to the sacred cows, perhaps find another way to allow for ability modifiers to matter less.
One example, is to work Weapon Proficiency Bonuses a little differently.
Weapon Proficiency (WP) bonus only applies To Hit (based on the weapon it could range from +1 to +3), if you are Proficient in a weapon, then you can use the WP To Hit bonus OR you appropriate ability mod, whichever is higher. Damage would still use your ability mod.
This way, for say a +3 WP weapon, a fighter with an 18 Str gets a +4 to hit and damage while one with a 10 Str gets a +3 to hit and +0 damage. The guy with the 10 Str put his points in other stats, so he has advantage there, while the 18 Str guy has some slight to hit and more damage advantage.
This lets the 18 Str guy wield exotic weapons without being proficient in them as well, he does not get any training bonus to hit (he ignores it anyway, using his natural talent of strength), but he does not care, so he had advantage in being able to use any weapon while the Str 10 guy must restrict himself to those he is proficient in to have a decent to hit. Perhaps some properties of exotic weapons could be restricted to users with Proficiency if this would be too powerful for the 18 Str case, but the basic idea could work.
So the 10 Str guy has to use some feats to gain WP while the 18 Str guy can ignore that and use his feats elsewhere. But the 10 Str guys has higher scores in other stats so he gets advantage there.
If ability scores will be able to increase over levels, you would need to also allow the WP bonus to scale, like they do with Armor in 4E, so this idea keeps pace. It allows you to decide if you will be a Str focused guy or rely on training and just dish out a bit less damage and focus on other areas.
This idea could apply to other classes also, not just weapons. So wizards would get Implement Proficiency bonus (IP) analogous to WP with the same idea in mind. For things that require an attack roll but do not use Weapon or Implement, you could design some other option for them along these same lines, spend a feat (or the class gains it free) to gain "Proficiency/Training" in any class based feature that requires a to hit but does not use a weapon or implement.
This could apply to Skills also, you either use the Training bonus (say +3) for that skill OR your ability bonus for making DC checks. Other aspects of skills may give bonuses based on the ability score mod (like damage for a weapon attack) which would use the ability mod, the Training would only apply to making the DC check.
Again, Training bonus should scale with level if ability scores can increase.
Keep the same mods, but add the stat (not modifier) to damage.
8 = -1 to hit, +8 damage ... 11 = +0 to hit, +11 damage. ... 15 = +2 to hit, +15 damage. 16 = +3 to hit, +16 damage. 17 = +3 to hit, +17 damage.
Obviously everyone will need alot more HP to compinsate.
Or probably better. Drop the mod to hit and only apply it to damage.
8-9 = +0 to hit, -1 damage 10-11 = +0 to hit, +0 damage 12-13 = +0 to hit, +1 damage ,,, 16-17 = +0 to hit, +3 damage
Now you can reasonably have a 8 Str fighter, or a 8 Int wizard.
How about keeping the same mod and having the damage be would be stat - 10 8 = -1 to hit, -2 damage 9 = -1 to hit, -1 damage 10 = +0 to hit, 0 damage 11 = +0 to hit, 1 damage 12 = +1 to hit, 2 damage
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl
As I've said before, the real issue is not with ability mods; it's with the frequency of scores above 15 with starting players. The game, I find, runs more balanced and fairly when characters' highest modifier is +2. Expecting modifiers higher than +3 in more than one score is unreasonable and is the quick path to the Dark Side (i.e., "Pwrgamrz!!!").
Players should recognize that an ability mod spread of +2 +1 +1 for a starting character is respectable and nothing to scoff at.
It might help if the normal range of ability scores is considered to be 6-15 (instead of 3-18), with 15 being exemplary and scores higher than that nearly unheard of.
How about severe diminishing returns when purchasing abilities? Or just cap it at 15 for character creation. And lets be real about the "normal range" of ability scores. I haven't seen anything under an 8 for a decade.
As I've said before, the real issue is not with ability mods; it's with the frequency of scores above 15 with starting players. The game, I find, runs more balanced and fairly when characters' highest modifier is +2. Expecting modifiers higher than +3 in more than one score is unreasonable and is the quick path to the Dark Side (i.e., "Pwrgamrz!!!").
Players should recognize that an ability mod spread of +2 +1 +1 for a starting character is respectable and nothing to scoff at.
It might help if the normal range of ability scores is considered to be 6-15 (instead of 3-18), with 15 being exemplary and scores higher than that nearly unheard of.
How about severe diminishing returns when purchasing abilities? Or just cap it at 15 for character creation. And lets be real about the "normal range" of ability scores. I haven't seen anything under an 8 for a decade.
And when is the last time you saw a group use 2E Method I for rolling ability scores?
I believe the real problem is the DCs. An actual DC system with a threshold mechanic would be a great addition.
Ability Modifier: (Ability Score-10)/2 Ability Mod Cap: +5
Ability Threshold: Ability Score-5
DCs Trivial- 5 (normal people can't fail under normal circumstances) Easy-7 (Normal people have a good chance at success. Gifted (AS 12) folk don't fail) Moderate-10 Hard-13 Very Hard-16 Formidable -19 (Dumb luck for normies, skilled have good chance) Near Impossible-22 (impossible for normies, dumb luck for gifted) Immortal-25
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
I believe the real problem is the DCs. An actual DC system with a threshold mechanic would be a great addition. Ability Modifier: (Ability Score-10)/2 Ability Mod Cap: +5 Ability Threshold: Ability Score-5 DCs Trivial- 5 (normal people can't fail under normal circumstances) Easy-7 (Normal people have a good chance at success. Gifted (AS 12) folk don't fail) Moderate-10 Hard-13 Very Hard-16 Formidable -19 (Dumb luck for normies, skilled have good chance) Near Impossible-22 (impossible for normies, dumb luck for gifted) Immortal-25
That's a nice range of DCs. I had to read how you determined it a couple of times before I got it 'cause I'm thick that way
I'm still curious to know what you get after the ability mod cap though. Or do you mean what the playtest has anyway with it extending past +5 after 20 and just making that out of reach for PCs without some serious magic?
'Cause my main concern with attributes (and numbers in general) is the reward for somehow getting it higher. My initial reaction to the playtest's cap at 20 was negative but the more I thought about it, the more I realised that I didn't mind the cap, but I did mind that surpassing the cap somehow lead you to a place that was very samey. Like in 2e you started getting stuff like regeneration and your attack/damage mods went through the roof. You had a really good chance of lifting a freaking portcullis. You got spell immunities. Those immortals got all kinds of crazy cool immortal powers, they didn't get a +7 mod.. OK well they did in their own way but given the choice I'll take the crazy cool immortal powers over the stats.
