Attribute Bonuses in Multiple Tiers

[peterlind]

I am thinking of trying out a system of attribute bonuses that is presented in tiers. Something like this:

1st Tier: Monsters (including giants) do not receive attribute bonuses for above or below average attribute scores. Their attributes are assumed within their respective descriptions.

2nd Tier: Humanoid monsters and most NPC’s will receive bonuses for above or below average attribute scores not exceeding +1 or -1. Humanoid monsters, such as orcs, for example, might generally have above average strength, which gives them a +1 modifier on attack and damage rolls. This will allow for easier tracking of most NPCs.

3rd Tier: PC’s and Exceptional/Elite NPCs will receive bonuses for above average attribute scores not exceeding +2, such as +1 for scores of 13 to 15, and +2 for scores of 16 or above.

4th Tier: PC’s and Exceptional/Elite NPCs may receive a further bonus for an above average attribute score which is also based on a class ability, such as Exceptional Strength or Constitution. In such cases, the attribute bonus may reach up to +3 or +4, depending on the class ability and the character’s attribute score.

What do you think?

[Finarvyn]

Some interesting ideas here, but I'm not sure what the point of the tiers system is -- I either give attributes or I don't. Base monsters and standard NPCs don't get stats, PCs and main NPCs do. What's the advantage of the tiers?

[peterlind]

May 19, 2015 4:24:36 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

What's the advantage of the tiers?

By houserule, I was trying to articulate a consistent way of treating flunkie NPCs and monsters differently from important NPCs and PCs. This would make it easier for me to keep track of Attribute Bonuses (i.e. running on the fly). So I could just say that a typical large orc does +1 damage while a bodyguard or leader might do +2 damage. I could apply the rule similarly to an elf NPC who might have a higher Dex. For PCs (and important NPCs), I am trying to work out a way to smooth out the bonuses at +1 to +2 for most Attributes but still allow for higher bonuses based on class. In a way, I am trying to harmonize some of the approaches I have seen from various sources. For example, in Gamma World and MA, a character gains +1 to damage for every point about 14. I might wire that in for Fighters to go along with the same bonus that applies to AC based on a high Dex from Greyhawk.

[peterlind]

Here is an observation: In Greyhawk, Attribute bonuses above +1 are first introduced. Attribute bonuses above +1 were also introduced in Metamorphosis Alpha and Gamma World. Focusing just on STR, DEX, and CON, here's some of the rules, all coming out in the 70s by TSR:

Strength: In MA and GW, Characters (who could possibly be seen as "fighters") gain +1 to damage in melee attacks per point of STR above 14. [EDIT: Only MA had this rule. In GW, the bonus was for every point of STR over 15]

Constitution: In the AD&D PHB, Fighter-types are given +1 HP per HD per point of CON above 14.

Dexterity: In Greyhawk, Fighters (only) are given +1 AC per point of DEX above 14. [EDIT: Note that in GW, each point of DEX over 15 gives +1 to hit for both melee and missile attacks, but no adj. to AC. However, the mutation "Heightened Dexterity" improved one's AC from 10 to 4] In both MA and GW, higher DEX goes first as per Holmes for purposes of initiative]

So I was thinking of allowing Greyhawk Fighters the benefit of all of the above. However, at the same time, I was thinking of restricting these bonuses for monsters, NPCs, and other classes. . .

[waysoftheearth]

May 25, 2015 22:14:11 GMT -6 peterlind said:

Dexterity: In Greyhawk, Fighters (only) are given +1 AC per point of DEX above 14.

I don't think GH actually adjusts AC; from memory I think GH says high dex will adjusts attack rolls instead and, arguably, only if the fighter employs the option to parry

[peterlind]

You are right. GH states that the fighter, through dodging and parrying, adjusts attack rolls by 5% (-1) per point of DEX above 14. It is not directly stated that the fighter has to use his action to dodge or parry, but it can certainly be interpreted that way. Holmes may or may not support this approach with the parry rule, which gives a flat adjustment of 2 to AC (to my memory).

One possible way to deal with this is to approach it both ways. At first, make the fighter use an action to dodge or parry. With practice and experience, the fighter might gain the benefit of the GH dodge/parry rule without having to spend an action. Another possibility is to allow the GH dodge/parry rule as a Defense Adjustment (i.e. AC bonus) per AD&D PHB but also implement a parry rule as in Holmes (which I prefer to the AD&D parry rule based on STR bonus).

[waysoftheearth]

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think the GH rule might simply extend/be derived from the parry rule appearing in the Man-to-Man rules in Chainmail...

An "oversight" in the translation of many rules from CM to D&D is that each a +1 adjustment on 2d6 (or even on 1d6) appears as a +1 adjustment on a d20. This is straightforward, but Chainmail's -2 parry adjustment on 2d6 would more accurately be represented as a -4 parry adjustment on a d20 in D&D (so double what Holmes prescribes).

With that in mind, the GH rule could be read to imply: a fighter with regular dexterity can parry and impose a -4 adjustment on the attacker. A fighter with 15-18 dexterity could parry and instead impose a -5 to -8 adjustment on the attacker. These kinds of defensive adjustments could make parrying genuinely worth employing occasionally, while a mere -2 rarely seems worthwhile.

[peterlind]

May 26, 2015 22:33:41 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

With that in mind, the GH rule could be read to imply: a fighter with regular dexterity can parry and impose a -4 adjustment on the attacker. A fighter with 15-18 dexterity could parry and instead impose a -5 to -8 adjustment on the attacker. These kinds of defensive adjustments could make parrying genuinely worth employing occasionally, while a mere -2 rarely seems worthwhile.

Good point. Something I did back in the 80s while running AD&D was convert all of the combat matrices into "Fighter Levels." This then allowed parries (and other maneuvers) based on a straight comparison of Fighter Level on a D20 (i.e. same level = 50% chance of success or 11+ on a D20; each +/- 1 level difference becomes a bonus or penalty).